EX-POST EVALUATION ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV. 3(1) · 2013-11-06 · Switzerland, decided that an...

International Tropical Timber Organization Yokohama, Japan Special Service Agreement (I) 1 04/04

EX-POST EVALUATION

ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV. 3(1)

CAPACITY BUILDING IN TRAINING IN PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF ITTO TIMBER PRODUCING

MEMBERS

Submitted to:

International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) International Organization Center 5th Floor, Pacifico-Yokohama 1-1-1

Minato-Mirai, Nishi-ku Yokohama 220-0012

Japan

Submitted by:

DR. FLORENTINO O. TESORO

Ex-post Evaluation of PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) ………p. 2

CONTENTS

ITEM Page

ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS USED 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8

A. Background 8

B. Purpose of the Evaluation 10

C. Scope of the Evaluation 10

D. Conclusions 11

E. Recommendations 18

___________________________PART I__________________________

1. PROJECT CONTEXT 20

A. Background and Objectives 20

B. Management and Coordination of the Project 21

C. Activities and Output 22

D. Planned Project Duration and Costs 25

E. Strategies Adopted for the Project 25

F. ITTO/ITTA Context of the Project 27

2. EVALUATION SCOPE AND FOCUS 28

A. Rationale 28

B. Type of Evaluation 28

C. Terms of Reference 29

D. Duration of the Evaluation 30

3. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY 31


A. Review of Project Documents 31

B. Preparations for the Review Visit to Concerned Institutions and Agencies

32

C. Review Visits 32

D. Review of the Logical Framework Matrices 33

4. FINDINGS AND LESSONS LEARNED 36

A. Project’s Contribution to the Development Objective 36

B. Attainment of National Project’s Output and Specific Objectives 41

C. Relevance and Appropriateness of the Activities and Degree of Ownership of the Project by the Participating Countries

44

D. Impact and Relevance of the Project 45

E. Effectiveness of Information Dissemination 48

F. Post-project Situation 49

G. Unexpected Effects/Impacts of the Project 51

H. Effectiveness of the Capacity Building of Training Institutes and of SMEs in the secondary woodworking sectors of individual participating countries

51

I. Implementation Efficiency of the Project 53

___________________________PART II__________________________

1. CONCLUSIONS 58

2. RECOMMENDATIONS 58

REFERENCES/LITERATURE REVIEWED 61

ANNEXES 63

Annex 1 List of Workshops/Trainings Conducted Including Topics 63


Annex 2 Detailed Schedule of Project Visits 68

Annex 3 List of Persons Visited/Interviewed 71

Annex 4a Questionnaire for Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Finland 79

Annex 4b Questionnaire for Finnish Training Partners Int. Inc., Finland

80

Annex 5a Questionnaire for the Furniture Industry Association, Ghana 91

Annex 5b Questionnaire for Firms/ Managers of Members of Clusters, Ghana

94

Annex 5c Questionnaire for Firms that are Non-members of the Cluster, Ghana

99

Annex 5d Questionnaire for Resource Persons, Ghana 101

Annex 5e Questionnaire for Workers of Firms Who are Members of Clusters, Ghana

104

Annex 5f Questionnaire for Forestry Commission, Ghana 107

Annex 5g Questionnaire for the National Project Coordinating Team, Ghana

111

Annex 5h Questionnaire for the Timber Export Development Division, Ghana

115

Annex 5i Questionnaire for WITC Instructors, Ghana 119

Annex 5j Questionnaire for WITC Officials, Ghana 122

Annex 6a Questionnaire for the National Project Coordinating Team, Honduras

130

Annex 6b Questionnaire for the CICAFOR Instructors, Honduras 133

Annex 6c Questionnaire for the CICAFOR Officials, Honduras 135

Annex 7a Questionnaire for Community-based participants, Philippines 144

Annex 7b Questionnaire for Resource persons/instructors who participated in the workshops/trainings, Philippines

145

Annex 7c Questionnaire for TREES Officials, Philippines 149

Annex 8a Questionnaire for National Project Coordinating Team, Peru 156


Annex 8b Questionnaire for Small-scale Furniture Manufacturers Association and Firms at the Industrial Village of Villa El Salvador, Peru

160

Annex 8c Questionnaire for UNALM Instructors and Those Who Have Undergone Training Under the Project, Peru

165

Annex 8d Questionnaire for UNALM Officials, Peru 169

Annex 8e Questionnaire for Other Firms/Agencies Doing Capacity Building for Firms at the Industrial Village of Villa El Salvador, Peru

180

Annex 9 Selected Photographs Taken During the Visits 186

Annex 10 Logical Framework Matrix of the Peru National Project 192

Annex 11 Logical Framework Matrix of the Philippine National Project

193

Annex 12 Logical Framework Matrix of the Ghana National Project 195

Annex 13 Logical Framework Matrix of the Honduras National Project 197

Annex 14. Production, Trade and Consumption of Tropical Timber by Country, 1998-2001 (000 m3)

198

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. General and specific objectives of national projects 23

Table 2 Logical Framework Matrix for PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) 33

Table 3 Selected basic data on the participating countries including forest areas

36

Table 4 Production trade and consumption of forest products, 2000 (000 m3)

38

Table 5 Respondents’ assessment of the extent of attainment of the project’s development objective.

39

Table 6 Specific factors that contributed to the attainment of the project’s specific objectives

41

Table 7 Extent of attainment of the general and specific objectives of the national projects by country

43


Table 8 Number of trainees/participants by country 45

Table 9 Impact of the trainings attended on company performance and efficiency of operations

52

Table 10 Specific recommendations on how the project could be made sustainable

53


ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS USED

CICAFOR Centro Integrado de Capacitacion Forestal

CITE Madera Centro de Innovacion Tecnologica de la Madera

COTRAMASIL Cooperativa de Transformadores de la Madera de Siguatepeque, Limitada

CUPROFOR Centro de Utilizacion y Promocion de Productos Forestales

DOST Department of Science and Technology

ECASUL Ebanistas y Carpinteros de Sula

ESNACIFOR Escuela National de Ciencias Forestales

FAWAG Furniture and Wood Products Association of Ghana

FIC Forest Industry Committee

FORIG Forest Research Institute of Ghana

FPRDI Forest Products Research and Development Institute

FTP Int. Finnish Training Partners International Limited

ITTA International Tropical Timber Agreement

ITTO International Tropical Timber Organization

MFAF Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland

NPCT National Project Coordinating Team

PCM Project Cycle Management

PI Participating Institute

TEDD Timber Export Development Division

TIDD Timber Industry Development Division

TFU Tropical Forest Update

TREES Training Center for Tropical Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability

UNALM Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina

UPLB University of the Philippines at Los Banos

WITC Wood Industries Training Centre

WAG Woodworkers Association of Ghana


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

I. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES OF PROJECT 13/95 Rev. 3 (1)

The Project was a follow up of an earlier project, PD 4/87 Rev.1 (I) “Training in Planning and Management of Forest Industries in Developing Countries” implemented in 1990-94 which provided training on planning and management of appropriate forest industries for the wood industry sector in all ITTO timber producing member countries.

The development objective of PD 13/95 was to contribute to the improvement of the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in the four selected ITTO producer member countries. The specific objectives include:

1. Developing the curricula of four selected training institutes in four ITTO producer member countries for their ongoing training in planning and management of appropriate forest industries;

2. Improving the capacity of resource persons 1 in participating ITTO producer member countries in the planning and management of appropriate forest industries, and in planning and management of training courses on the same subjects;

3. Producing training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on the planning and management of appropriate forest industries.

Ultimately the project hopes that the four training institutes in the participating countries would have allocated funds and human resources essential in carrying out the trainings for planners, managers, and other stakeholders of the forestry industry sector on a more regular and sustainable basis to support the development of the forest industries in the participating countries.

The Project was managed and coordinated by the Finnish Training Partners International Limited (FTP) of Helsinki, Finland. There were four participating institutes namely:

1. Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, Peru 2. Tropical Resources and Ecosystems for Sustainability, University of the

Philippines at Los Banos, Philippines 3. Wood Industry Training Center, Kumasi, Ghana, and 4. Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Forestales, Siguatepeque, Honduras

1 Resource persons include managers of wood industry enterprises and teachers of training institutes.


The total proposed budget was US$ 1,090,000 with the Government of Japan providing US$ 543,869 and the Government of Finland contributing US$ 546,131. However, the total required budget could not be subscribed immediately, thus the project was re-designed to have two phases with Phase I allocated US$ 647,739 and Phase II allocated US$ 469,821 to include the project savings for Phase I. UNALM and TREES implemented component activities under Phase I while WITC and ESNACIFOR implemented activities under Phase II.

An analysis of the objectives and expected output of Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) showed that the project is consistent with the overall mission of ITTO especially with respect to “facilitating the discussion, consultation and international cooperation on issues relating to the international trade and utilization of tropical timber and the sustainable management of its resource base”.

As proposed PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (1) was also consistent with the objectives of Article 1 of the ITTA as follows:

1. Encourage more and further processing of tropical timber in producer countries;

2. Encourage tropical timber reforestation and forest management;

3. Improve marketing and distribution of producer’s exports of tropical timber;

4. Encourage national policies which aim at sustainable use and conservation of tropical forests and their genetic resources and at maintaining the ecological balance in the regions concerned.

A closer look at the objectives and the extent with which these have been attained by the participating institutions indicate that the project was in fact consistent with the following ITTA objectives:

1. To enhance capacity of members to export tropical timber and timber products from sustainably-managed sources;

2. To support capacity enhancement of producing members to attain the ITTO objectives;

3. To promote further processing of tropical timber from sustainably managed sources thereby increasing opportunities for employment and export earnings;

4. To improve marketing and distribution of tropical timber exports from sustainably managed sources;

5. To encourage members to adopt national policies that address sustainable utilization and conservation of timber producing forests and their genetic resources and maintaining ecological balance in the context of tropical timber trade;


II. PURPOSE OF EVALUATION

Recognizing the potential value of the lessons learned from the project, the Forest Industry Committee (FIC) during its 24th Joint Session with the Committee on Economic Information and Market Intelligence in July 2004 in Interlaken, Switzerland, decided that an ex-post evaluation of the Project should be conducted to determine how well the project served its purposes and to draw up lessons and recommendations to improve the implementation of future projects.

An ex-post evaluation of PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) was undertaken from January 2005 to August 2005. This report presents the findings of the evaluation done approximately four (4) years after the completion of Phase I and approximately 1.5 years after the end of Phase II of the Project. The evaluation was done using a combination of personal interviews and exhaustive project document review. Visits to the participating institutions including ITTO and FTP as well as discussions with some of the direct and indirect beneficiaries of the project further enhanced the consultant’s understanding of project details and deepened the analyses/evaluation of the project.

III. SCOPE OF EVALUATION

Following are the specific Terms of Reference (TOR) for the ex-post evaluation that guided the conduct of the study:

1. To assess the project’s contribution to the achievement of the development objective - to contribute to the improvement of economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in the four selected ITTO producer member countries;

2. To assess the achievement of the project’s outputs and specific objectives;

3. To assess the relevance and appropriateness of the activities including an assessment of the degree of ownership of the project by participating countries;

4. To evaluate the impact and relevance of the project. Particular attention should be devoted in assessing the number of wood industry managers and teachers of training institutions trained on the impact of the project on the national wood industry;

5. To determine the effectiveness of information dissemination;

6. To assess the overall post-project situation for the project. Particular attention should be devoted to assessing the willingness and commitment of the training institutions and the wood industry to continue with the training after the project and on assessing measures taken and inputs provided to sustain these activities;


7. To define and assess unexpected effects and impacts, either harmful or beneficial and present the reasons for their occurrences;

8. To analyze and assess implementation efficiency, including the technical, financial and managerial aspects. Particular attention should be devoted to assessing the following aspects: selection of topics in which the trainers and trainees had been trained; the strategies put in place by the Executing Agency (FTP International) in delivering the trainings and in assisting national institutions to design realistic and efficient training programs and implement them; the strategies used to get the support of the industry; the efficient use of project funds; efficiency of communications between the Executing Agency and the national implementing agencies;

9. To recommend follow-up actions in order to improve the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in the four selected ITTO producer member countries.

10. Taking into account the results of the evaluation, make an overall assessment of the project’s relative success or failure to summarize the key lessons learned; and identify any issues or problems that should be taken into account in designing and implementing similar projects in the future;

11. To prepare the evaluation report in accordance with the references for the Project Evaluation Report, as contained in the ITTO Manual for Project Monitoring, Review and Evaluation.

12. To assess the project’s contribution to relevant ITTA objectives (1987, 1994) and relevant ITTO Action Plans; and

13. To prepare an article for possible publication in the ITTO Tropical Forest Update (TFU), in consultation with the editor, containing an overview of the project and of the ex-post evaluation work, including a summary of the lessons learned from the evaluation work. Appropriate photographs should be provided if necessary.

The evaluation included a detailed review of the logical framework matrix of PD13/95 Rev. 3 (I) as a whole as well as the logical framework matrices of the individual national projects. This was done to assess the extent within which the project as a whole and the individual national projects attained the general and specific objectives each has specified at the beginning of project implementation.

IV. CONCLUSIONS

Studies have long recognized the linkages of developing the forestry sector and alleviating poverty especially in developing countries. Except for Peru, a significant proportion of the population of the four ITTO producer member countries


included in the study is rural based with relatively low Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita.

Forest cover has been declining significantly across the four countries although a significant forest cover in Peru (51%) remains. The potential of the forest based industries contributing to the economic growth of the country however, remains. It is practical to assume that as the market and thefore, the consumption of forest based products increase, the number of people benefiting from the industry individually and collectively would also increase. Thus efforts aimed at improving the competitiveness and therefore the profitability of SMEs engaged in forest based industries such as training, consultancy services and technology transfer among others could be seen as enhancing the impact of the industries as far as the economy and the stakeholders are concerned.

However, the scope and duration of PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (1) were quite limited for one to be able to directly attribute increases in the production, trade and competitiveness of forest based industries in the ITTO producer member countries to the project.

A very significant contribution of the project has been the improvement of the technical and managerial capabilities of the participating training institutions in providing trainings and technical assistance to the wood working industries particularly the small and medium enterprises of the wood furniture industries in the four (4) ITTO producer member countries.

The ultimate beneficiaries of the training programs are the owners and workers of small and medium scale furniture industries who have indicated significant improvements in their productivity, product quality, sales in both the local and international markets and their overall competitiveness.

While it may be true that only a few entrepreneurs have directly benefited from the trainings provided through the project in the four selected countries, the capability to sustain the trainings for more beneficiaries and stakeholders is already present in the selected training institutions. This means that if sustained, more stakeholders would be able to access the much needed trainings and technical assistance for the wood working industries in all the participating countries especially with the opening of the global market in recent years.

The overriding reason cited for the success of the project particularly in Ghana is the critical support of the participating institutions, other government agencies engaged with SME development as well as the support of industry itself. The critical role of inter-agency complementation when pursuing human resource capacity building activities for industry was highlighted by this finding.

The support of FTP in terms of monitoring and regularly discussing the project’s progress with the participating institutions was also cited. Unfortunately, it seems this was not successfully done in the Philippines resulting to some confusion and limited impact of the project as perceived by the project implementers themselves.


While there were some qualificatory statements made on the extent with which the overall development objective has been reached all the respondents from the four ITTO producer member countries agreed that the project has been able to fully accomplish the project’s specific objectives.

Except for the Philippines all the key informants were very positive that the national projects were able to fully accomplish both the general and specific objectives. One reason cited is the lack of funding to implement the projects for the communities as proposed. In Peru where accomplishment was qualified as partial only, the reasons cited include limited funding as well as short period for project implementation that prevented the consolidation of all efforts earlier identified by the project implementers.

While the WITC of Ghana and ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR of Honduras do not have sufficient financial resources they are sustaining efforts to provide technical assistance to the beneficiaries of the project. In the case of Ghana, the Ministry of Production has directed the Forestry Commission to expand the concept of clustering to all the regions of Ghana.

The various activities pursued by the Project as a whole and individually at the national level (except the Philippines and Peru) are very relevant as far as meeting the technical and managerial needs of the industry is concerned. The trainings that introduced new products, improved raw material utilization thus reducing wastage and attempted to improve the skills of carpenters, furniture makers and other SME participants were also found to be very relevant, timely and needed by industry.

Prior to the trainings, there was very little industry appreciation of the value of human resource capability building as far as improving their income and general competitiveness is concerned. However, after the trainings there was a marked improvement of the level of awareness and appreciation of the value of trainings in improving the firm’s profitability.

Following are the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in the participating countries:

1. Facilitated the exposure of representatives from the ten (10) pilot sites in the Philippines to alternative livelihood opportunities that are already being undertaken by other communities;

2. In Honduras, the project changed the attitude and improved the appreciation of the participants on the use of properly dried wood using the solar dryer introduced through the project. In addition some of the SMEs have requested for training on optimizing the use of raw materials by using waste materials for handicraft manufacturing;

3. In Peru, the project was able to capacitate the faculty in training industry members who until the project were not very appreciative of the value of the trainings in improving their productivity and competitiveness. Trainings on value added for the products enabled


the trainees to maximize the use of raw materials reducing wastage by as much as 20-25%. Respondents also believe that the trainings provided to the faculty through the project changed the attidue of the instructors on their role in upgrading the capacity of the SMEs who were also changed in terms of their perspective on appropriate production practices;

4. Respondents from Ghana were generally very appreciative of the project and the various activities and trainings introduced. Among the most important impact cited include:

a. Improvement of the capacity of WITC to conduct training for industry;

b. Facilitated the formation of industry clusters that significantly improved efficiency and competitiveness;

c. Institutionalized the capacity building with the Ministry of Lands and Forests already directing the WITC to retrain all master craftsmen in Ghana;

d. Formation of additional industry clusters beyond the one established in Kumasi;

e. Value formation and reorientation especially on the use of chain saw which is already declared illegal in Ghana;

f. Improved income of participants especially as a result of waste minimization, better quality products, value adding to products, and use of other alternative raw materials among others.

However, there were some factors all beyond their and the SMEs control that have prevented the full realization of the potential impact of the various trainings conducted. For example, in the Philippines while the communities (10 pilot sites) were able to undergo trainings on the management of community-based industries, they were still unable to generate the capital needed to establish their own enterprises that would have put the lessons learned from the trainings to appropriate use.

There was also some misunderstanding on the extent of assistance the project could provide to the industry members from Ghana. Some industry members expected that WITC would be able to provide them work contracts that did not fully materialize causing some disappointments on the industry. Some were also expecting that the project through WITC could facilitate the acquisition of some tools and jigs to improve production, which again were not part of the project’s objectives.

In Peru, UNALM instructors believe the project was not able to fully accomplish its objectives because of limited funding available. It was cited that SMEs are not willing to pay for the trainings thus limiting the number of stakeholders reached and benefited by the project which is also operating on very limited resources.


The participating institutions tapped all possible means (meetings, personal contacts, letters, workshops/seminars, etc.) to disseminate information about the project to industry members.

Internalization or sustainability was assessed in terms of the following indicators:

1. Internal funding commitment generated - Among the different training institutions, WITC received the highest internal support with the Forestry Commission allocating specific funds for the continued operation of WITC aimed at enhancing the initiatives pursued earlier by the project. The support includes continued capacity building training for WITC staff and the small and micro enterprises.

2. Outside funding support generated – All the participating institutions prepared proposals for funding either by ITTO and other international funding institutions but the level of success in generating these resources have been limited and varied across countries.

3. Specific strategies/courses of action pursued to sustain activities – Linkages with industry members remained even beyond the project as this is part of the major mandate of all the participating institutions. This is perhaps a major advantage of the project with respect to internalization as the participating institutions were basically established to provide capacity building support for industry directly or indirectly.

4. Industry support generated – CICAFOR/ESNACIFOR sustained the good relationship established with the industry by continuously informing cluster members of key events that may be of interest to the SMEs. For example in May 2005, products of cluster members were displayed at the lobby of the institute for a month. Hopefully a permanent display Center for products of cluster members could be established as a joint effort between the industry and CICAFOR/ESNACIFOR.

The Cooperative and the consolidated industry association are still quite active in Honduras especially with the continued assistance of CICAFOR. However, the two clusters earlier formed in Ghana have yet to fully operate as a cluster as there are still some level of hesitation among members especially with regard to sharing technologies and work contracts.

There were a number of commendable unexpected effects and impacts of the Project especially for the small and medium entrepreneurs of the secondary wood using industries in Ghana and in Honduras:

1. Members of clusters and cooperatives organized through the project are now refusing to buy lumber from illegal sources as this is already perceived as contrary to the precepts of sustainable management of forest resources.


2. Ghana has been captivated by the concept of clustering that it has established two new clusters in municipalities close to Kumasi.

3. Members of ECASUL in San Pedro Sula, Honduras were now using only dried lumber in the manufacture of furniture and cabinets thus quality of the products are higher, production is faster and they get a better price for their products.

4. Members of COTRAMASIL in Siguatepeque, Honduras have already been “deputized” by the police in the apprehension of illegal lumber being sold in the area.

Requests from industry members for additional trainings are continuously being received. Unfortunately, the number of follow up trainings conducted was very limited due to lack of funds. Sporadic trainings were conducted but these are donor driven and not as a conscious or planned training program for industry members thereby reducing the overall impact of the trainings.

The project improved the capacity of the participating institutions to identify, plan, and implement trainings consistent with the requirements of industry. However, a major limitation cited as far as sustaining the efforts are concerned remained is the lack of funds for the conduct of the trainings.

The trainings were identified following the training needs assessment and consultations made with industry. Thus all the topics conducted during the trainings were found to be relevant, effective and realistic in all the participating countries.

There are a number of significant development lessons learned from project implementation that could be shared or considered in future ITTO projects:

1. Project planning – Involving the various stakeholders in poject design and problem analysis proved quite useful as component activities are shared immediately to potential clients while at the same time accommodating their actual needs.

2. Project implementation – Although the project design was completely followed there were still some problems met during implementation due primarily to the lack of funds, difficulty in gathering the type and number of beneficiaries for the training who in one way or another have already become quite doubtful on the benefits they could derive from the various trainings that are being introduced.

3. Financial planning – The project document was not very clear on the proposed contribution of the respective governments thus lobbying for funding locally was not considered an immediate and urgent need. There was therefore, a lot of variation on the extent of government support for project activities mostly ending up as contribution in kind through the services of the project implementers and use of facilities and utilities.


4. Financial management – There was very little changes in fund utilization for all the projects. However, the expected US $ 22,000 support for the Ghana projects from the European Union did not materialize affecting project implementation in Ghana. This resulted to some of the industry expectations not being met thus reducing also the enthusiasm of industry to participate and actively support project activities. There were also operational lessons learned during project implementation that could be considered in efforts to improve similar project activities in the future:

1. Project organization and management – With FTP serving as the over all project coordinator as the executing agency for the project, each implementing agency appointed country project leaders or coordinators that took care of the day to day operation and implementation of project activities within the country.

The Project Coordinators cited anumber of challenges met in organizing and managing the project. Among those cited is related to cost efficiency. In the Philippines, the project coordinator had to carefully plan the project visits so that as many of the 10 pilot areas could be visited at one time. Project implementers from Honduras had to overcome initial resistance from target beneficiaries who considered ESNACIFOR as a competitor so that they even refused to sign attendance sheets during the orientation workshop. In Ghana the major challenge is on how the project implementer could overcome the inherent distrust among the SMEs so that they would agree to join the cluster and work together as a team.

While the specific strategies pursued varied in each country the basic principle behind the strategies remained fairly the same – gaining the trust of the SMEs and making them understand that the project’s major objective is to assist the SMEs to become more productive and competitive. The flexibility in implementing project activities like conducting the trainings near the work areas or during periods when work in the factory is off-peak clearly helped in allowing the project implementers to gain the trust and confidence of the SMEs.

2. Project documentation – One of the most critical components of project implementation which unfortunately has generally been less appreciated is the documentation of project activities, impact and perhaps more importantly lessons learned. Many valuable lessons that should have guided future efforts have been lost simply because of the failure of the project to document the procedures and strategies pursued as well as the results of the interventions made. Given the time that has lapsed much of the responses were based on recall that could have been enhanced or validated if more comprehensive and comparative written reports were available.

3. Monitoring and evaluation – At the Project level FTP monitored the individual component projects in each of the participating countries even visiting the countries during the project implementation. However, there was no formal monitoring and evaluation system installed

Funds have been used efficiently and effectively gauging from the financial statements of the project. Due to limited funds available project implementation was


phased but funds have been faithfully utilized according to the approved budget in fact generating savings amounting toUS$13,760.17

As a whole the project’s framework was fairly simple and straightforward. The activities are aimed at capacitating the training institutions in developing and conducting trainings for the industry on a sustained basis. The expectation is that the project would have been internalized by the participating institutions so that activities would be pursued beyond the project life. However, there were some problems met hence national projects in Peru and the Philippines were not implemented at all.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS

Following are some of the more important lessons learned from the implementation and from the outputs and outcomes of the project that must be carefully considered when planning and supporting similar projects in the future:

1. The success of the individual national projects depended largely on the commitment and actual support of the participating institutions. It is therefore, imperative that the nature, scope and/or extent of this commitment are identified and sougth right at the beginning of project implementation to avoid misunderstanding and undue expectations during and after project implementation.

2. Human resource capability building efforts take a long time to take off and provide evidences of effects. Thus it is essential that the duration of projects of this nature must be able to carefully consider the behavioural changes and adjustments necessary and incorporate these in the conceptualization and duration of the project if it is to succeed and attain the objectives and benefits identified.

3. Funding must be assured for the project and while activities can be implemented in phases, all project components must be implemented at the same time to allow for comparison across environments or countries. In the case of the present project Phase I allowed the implementation of projects in only two of the participating institutions thus activities in the two other institutions came much later as Phase II. On the other hand, the Phase II activities for the earlier two institutions were no longer implemented as there were no funds allocated for them. In other words the Phase I-Phase II concept was not adequately covered creating some level of frustrations both on the implementing institutions and the SMEs themselves.

4. Choice of project implementers or cooperators must be assessed not only in terms of the proposals submitted but also on the level of commitment and support that could be provided by the institutions to insure that the project’s objectives are attained even when external funding has not or is yet to come. It seems that while efforts to secure external funding outside of ITTO was sought by the participating institutions, the extent with which these were pursued to attain the objectives of the project was not at a level that could somehow ensure a certain degree of success of project implementation.


5. Regional projects of this nature must be able to select participating institutions that adequately reflect varying environments/structures and economies or levels of development of the target beneficiaries to allow a more comprehensive analysis and comparison of lessons learned that could be adopted in other ITTO member countries. This approach will enable ITTO to develop modules and modalities of human resource capability building that could be tested, verified and further enhanced in other member countries further improving the value and content of the modules.

6. Support activities to complement the trainings conducted must already be identified and funding support provided to immediately demonstrate the value of the trainings to SMEs and further enhance their interest and willingness to participate and pay for future trainings that would be introduced by the participating institutions. As it is the SMEs are still hesitant or unwilling to pay for the trainings offered by the participating institutes because they do not see immediate application in their businesses or they do not have access to equipment and and other facilities that would have allowed them to maximize the benefits from the new skills and technologies they have learned from the trainings.

7. There is a need to incorporate and agree on specific monitoring and evaluation methodologies as well as feedback mechanisms during and after project implementation to ensure adequate documentation of lessons learned, accounting of impact and benefits are made and appropriate feedback given to the implementers to improve efficiency and relevance of project activities. As indicated earlier the value of lessons learned from projects of this nature lies on how well the lessons were documented so that these can be validated or tested and revised in future projects so that pitfalls in project impelementation could be avoided in the future.

8. Coupled with the commitment of the participating institutions is the need to appoint a committed Project Coordinator. In Ghana a National Project Coordinating Team (NPCT) was immediately organized at the inception of the project. In addition, when the Project Coordinatorship was transferred from the Forestry Commission, which was stationed in Accra, to the Wood Industry Training Center which was actually doing the cluster organizing and training of cluster members, a very committed PC was appointed who becoame pivotal in the success of the project. In Honduras, while no NPCT was organized, a committed PC and an equally committed assistant coordinator were designated to oversee the implementation of the project. Their indefatigable efforts in organizing meetings, adjusting schedules so that the members of the cooperative would be able to attend the training eventually gained the trust and confidence of the SMEs.

9. Involve as many stakeholders as possible in the country to ensure that support is provided not only from the ITTO funding but other sources so that efforts and activities are complemented and thus become more successful. The role of private sector led initiatives should be consciously incorporated in project activities as these efforts are responsive to the actual needs of industry and are therefore with a higher chance of sustainability


Ex-Post Evaluation of ITTO Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I)

“Capacity Building in Training in Planning and Management Of ITTO Timber Producing Members”

I. PROJECT CONTEXT

A. Background and Objectives

The Project was a follow up of an earlier project, PD 4/87 Rev.1 (I) “Training in Planning and Management of Forest Industries in Developing Countries” implemented in 1990-94 which provided training on planning and management of appropriate forest industries for the wood industry sector in all ITTO timber producing member countries. PD 4/87 Rev. 1 (I) hoped to develop institutes that would be able to conduct management trainings for the forest industries on a sustainable basis. Unfortunately, given limited time and resources, PD 4/87 barely scratched the surface as far as providing or meeting the training needs of the forest industries. PD 13/95 therefore, was designed to continue the work initiated by PD 4/87 by providing a mechanism to institutionalize the provision of trainings to address the human resource capacity building requirements of the forest based industries.

The development objective of PD 13/95 was to contribute to the improvement of the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in the four selected ITTO producer member countries. The specific objectives include:

1. Developing the curricula of four selected training institutes in four ITTO producer member countries for their ongoing training in planning and management of appropriate forest industries;

2. Improving the capacity of resource persons 2 in participating ITTO producer member countries in the planning and management of appropriate forest industries, and in planning and management of training courses on the same subjects;

3. Producing training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on the planning and management of appropriate forest industries.

Ultimately the project hopes that the four training institutes in the participating countries would have allocated funds and human resources essential in carrying out the trainings for planners, managers, and other stakeholders of the forestry industry

2 Resource persons include managers of wood industry enterprises and teachers of training institutes.


sector on a more regular and sustainable basis to support the development of the forest industries in the participating countries.

B. Management and Coordination of the Project

The Project was managed and coordinated by the Finnish Training Partners International Limited (FTP) of Helsinki, Finland. Its main function was to oversee the implementation of the Project and was in charged of overall planning of project activities, production of training materials, selection of the four participating institutes, and the organization of workshops and teacher training courses. FTP acted as a facilitator and assisted the participating institutes (PIs) in the preparation of national project plans and designs, conduct of training courses, installation of monitoring and evaluation systems and preparation of technical and financial reports.

B.1. Selection of Participating Institutes

Because of limited funding, the Project was implemented in two phases. Originally the project hoped to select four PIs and conduct training workshops in cooperation with the PIs while Phase II will focus on the implementation of individual national projects. At the beginning of Phase I, invitations were sent to all the ITTO producer member countries to participate in the project. Seventeen (17) countries responded to the invitation. As part of the selection process the responding institutes were requested to prepare an analysis of their institutions and conduct training needs assessment of the forestry industries.

There were two orientation workshops organized - one for Spanish speaking countries and another for English speaking countries. The workshop for Spanish speaking countries was held in Honduras with participants from Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Honduras, Colombia and Panama. The second workshop was held in Malaysia with participants from Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Fiji, Ghana, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand.

During the workshop, trainings on project cycle management (PCM) and management of forest industries with emphasis on small-scale enterprise development were conducted. After this, the participants prepared their own project proposal on how they could organize and develop further trainings for the forest industries in their respective countries.

On the basis of the capacity of the institutes to undertake further trainings for the forest-based industries and the project proposals prepared, four participating institutes were selected namely:

1. Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, Peru 2. Tropical Resources and Ecosystems for Sustainability, University of the

Philippines at Los Banos, Philippines 3. Wood Industry Training Center, Kumasi, Ghana, and 4. Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Forestales, Siguatepeque, Honduras


National projects for Peru and Philippines were implemented immediately during Phase I, but the projects for Ghana and Honduras were deferred until additional funds were made available.

B.2. General and Specific Objectives of the National Projects

Table 1 presents the general and specific objectives of each of the national projects.

C. Activities and Outputs

The project is quite complicated. There were four (4) implementing agencies in four (4) different countries with their own program of activities that are not necessarily the same with each other and implemented in pursuit of their general and specific objectives. Although all these are being coordinated by an executing agency, the FTP International, it also has its own set of activities aimed at initiating, enhancing and facilitating the implementation of the project. A total of 21 national and regional trainings/workshops (Please refer to Annex 1 for the details of the workshops) were completed for the duration of the project.

A Manual for SME Development was prepared for both Latin-American (Gestion de PYMES) and English (SME Management) speaking member countries as a result of two regional workshops. 3 In the Philippines, the national workshop for trainers on “Development of SMEs in the Wood Industry Sector” was conducted by TREES in Los Banos, Laguna on 25-29 October 1999 using the “Guide for Trainers” in the planning and management of training courses developed during the national trainers training courses participated in by UNALM and TREES.

In Peru, UNALM conducted a series of trainings for small scale furniture makers from Villa El Salvador, and Huancayo and trainings for small and micro entrepreneurs in the manufacturing sector between March and April 2000.

In Ghana, two pilot clusters of up to seven (7) SMEs per cluster for the furniture sector in Kumasi were established. In fact as a result of working closely together, three micro and small-scale furniture associations eventually decided to merge into one united association. At present there are only two (2) woodworking associations in Ghana, one representing large and medium enterprises (FAWAG) and the other representing small and medium enterprises (WAG). WITC thru the project was also able to develop and implement a training curriculum with 14 courses for the woodworking sector. Training courses on management techniques and furniture manufacturing were also provided to 42 managers of cluster-member enterprises and other woodworking companies.

3 Regional workshops on the “Development of SMEs” were held – one for Latin America on January 19-29, 1999 held in UNALM and the other on April 5-16, 1999 for English speaking countries held in TREES, Laguna, Philippines.


Table 1. General and specific objectives of national projects.

COUNTRY/TITLE OBJECTIVES

GENERAL SPECIFIC

Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, Lima, Peru

Capacitacion de Recuros Humanos en Planificacion y Gerencia de Industrias Forestales en el Peru

To achieve a major development of the SMEs in the secondary wood using industry of Peru

To increase the demand for products, productivity and competitiveness of SMEs in Peru

Training Center for Tropical Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines

Enhancing Training Capabilities for Planning and Management of Community-Based Forest Industries in the Philippines

To uplift the socio-economic well being of selected forest-based communities through the establishment of small and medium scale forest-based enterprises in selected sites in the Philippines

1. To enable the communities to realize the business ideas developed by their representatives to the FTP/ITTO pilot training facilitating community business planning;

2. To assist the communities in gaining access to sources of capital needed for their enterprise;

3. To assist the communities in the construction and installation of facilities and in the actual operation of a community-based enterprise;

4. To provide exposure to and training opportunities on processing and to put in place enabling mechanisms to improve entrepreneurial/managerial skills; and


5. To assist in product promotion and market development.

Escuela National de Ciencias Forestales, Siguatepeque, Honduras

Formacion de los Recursos Humanos en Planificacion y Gerencia de las Industrias Forestales de Honduras

To strengthen the organization and entrepreneurial skills of the wood industry sector of Siguatepeque and San Pedro Sula

To organize and consolidate ten (10) enterprises of the wood- industry and make them function efficiently

Wood Industries Training Centre, Kumasi, Ghana

Wood Village for Small-scale Furniture Makers in Kumasi, Ghana

To increase productivity, income and employment levels of small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana

To improve the managerial and technical skills of the personnel of SMEs in the furniture manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana and enhance their operations through cluster formation


In Honduras, the Cooperative of Wood Manufacturers of Siguatepeque Limited was organized. Two studies of the wood working industry were also conducted - one to analyze the market and the other to establish production flows. A solar lumber dryer for ECASUL in San Pedro Sula was constructed and training in the construction and operation of the same was provided to members of the organization.

D. Planned project duration and costs

The total proposed budget for Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) was US$ 1,090,000 with the Government of Japan providing US$ 543,869 while the Government of Finland contributed US$ 546,131. However, the total required budget could not be subscribed immediately, thus the project was re-designed to have two phases with Phase I allocated US$ 647,739 and Phase II allocated US$ 469,821. 4 UNALM and TREES implemented component activities under Phase I while WITC and ESNACIFOR implemented activities under Phase II.

Phase I started on 2 February 1998 with duration of 22 months thus ending on 31 December 1999. Phase II on the other hand, started on 1 August 2000 and was supposed to have ended on 30 September 2001 or duration of 14 months. However, there was a delay in the implementation of Phase II thus the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland and ITTO approved the request for extension in early 2003. Phase II implementation was therefore extended to 31 December 2003 or a duration of 21 months.

Only Ghana was able to provide financial contributions amounting to US$ 29,532 to implement national projects. Honduras provided office supplies in addition to the time and effort of CICAFOR staff in implementing the national project. ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR of Honduras also conducted additional trainings for SMEs in the woodworking sector on 13-17 October 2003; 3-8 November 2003; and on 24-28 November 2003. Unfortunately, Peru and the Philippines were not able to implement national projects under Phase II. The Philippines was in fact advised to seek funding support for the National Project from other sources with Phase II paying closer attention to the financial issues and need to further develop the communities in the training courses introduced.

E. Strategies adopted for the Project

The specific strategies adopted by participating institutions emanated from the overall objectives of the Project and from the objectives of the individual projects at the national level. As a whole the following strategies were pursued:

E.1. Overall strategy

a. Selection of four (4) participating/implementing institutions through two workshops - one for Spanish speaking countries and another for

4 Originally, the proposed budget was US$ 442,261 for Phase II but this was revised to US $ 469,821 to include the unexpended balance for Phase I amounting to US$ 27,560.


English speaking countries. Implementing institutions were selected based on their capability to undertake the envisioned capacity-building trainings.

b. Capacity building for the four (4) institutions focused on training of their human resources.

c. Close monitoring of the progress of activities in the implementing institutions.

E.2. Specific strategies

a. Peru - Under Phase I, the project 5 was organized through personal contacts with members of the secondary wood working industries particularly the furniture sector in the Industrial Park of Villa El Salvador. Meetings and trainings were held in Villa El Salvador which is more than 25 km away from UNALM to facilitate the attendance of the entrepreneurs.

b. Philippines - The Philippines wanted to enhance the capability of communities to establish forest-based enterprises. An Advisory Team was created to facilitate the smooth implementation of the project. The Team was composed of representatives from both the government and private sector who have interest in the development of the forest resource based enterprises in the country. The Team provided inputs in the identification of the criteria for the selection of ten (10) pilot communities; identification of local consultants and resource persons; determination of the appropriate business enterprises to be established; and the selection of case writers. A workshop on capacity building of community representatives was held and a project proposal for the purpose of establishing forest-based enterprises was formulated.

c. Ghana – A National Project Coordinating Team was organized to provide overall supervision and management of the project. A Project Coordinator (PC) was appointed to manage the day to day operation of the project. Initially the PC was based at the Forestry Commission located in Accra but the project was in Kumasi, which is more than 200 km away. Later, the PC was designated from the Wood Industry Training Center located in Kumasi to address this problem.

The main part of the strategy of WITC in implementing the project was the organization of two clusters of seven (7) enterprises each from among the secondary wood working industries in Kumasi, one for the small enterprises and another for the micro enterprises. Constant personal contacts and dialogues were conducted with industry members. The clusters were also assisted in establishing their own sets of officers, have their own offices and a cluster secretariat.

d. Honduras - Although a national project coordinating team was not organized, ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR appointed a Project Coordinator and an assistant

5 It was quite unfortunate that the Consultant was not able to secure any copy of the final/accomplishment report for the Peru study from FTP Inc. nor from UNALM itself thus preventing a more thorough discussion on the strategies pursued.


to take care of the day-to-day activities of the project. They were responsible for organizing and looking after the logistics for workshops and trainings. The main strategy of ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR was to organize micro wood processing enterprises into a cooperative called COTRAMASIL (which at present has more than 20 members) and to provide the needed technical and managerial trainings of the members and other concerned stakeholders. Where necessary, training hours were adjusted to allow the entrepreneurs to attend the trainings. Constant personal contact was a key element in sustaining the interest of the entrepreneurs.

In the case of the wood working enterprises in San Pedro Sula, a city which is more than 100 km away from Siguatepeque, where ESNACIFOR is located, the entrepreneurs who are members of ECASUL made clear at the beginning of the project that they do not need additional trainings since they get their trainings from CUPROFOR, a private foundation providing managerial and technical trainings to small and medium enterprises. However, they needed a solar lumber dryer and thus would need assistance in the construction and operation of the dryer. ESNACIFOR through the Project assisted ECASUL members to construct the dryer and trained them to operate it. While it is quite difficult to maintain communication with ECASUL members because of the distance, ESNACIFOR has managed to maintain good relationships with organization members continuously visiting them whenever they have the opportunity.

F. ITTO/ITTA Context of the Project

An analysis of the objectives and expected output of Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) showed that the project is consistent with the overall mission of ITTO especially with respect to “facilitating the discussion, consultation and international cooperation on issues relating to the international trade and utilization of tropical timber and the sustainable management of its resource base”.

As proposed PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (1) was consistent with the objectives of Article 1 of the ITTA as follows:

1. Encourage more and further processing of tropical timber in producer countries;

2. Encourage tropical timber reforestation and forest management;

3. Improve marketing and distribution of producer’s exports of tropical timber;

4. Encourage national policies which aim at sustainable use and conservation of tropical forests and their genetic resources and at maintaining the ecological balance in the regions concerned.

A closer look at the objectives and the extent with which these have been attained by the participating institutions indicate that the project was in fact consistent with the following ITTA objectives:


1. To enhance capacity of members to export tropical timber and timber products from sustainably-managed sources;

2. To support capacity enhancement of producing members to attain the ITTO objectives;

3. To promote further processing of tropical timber from sustainably managed sources thereby increasing opportunities for employment and export earnings;

4. To improve marketing and distribution of tropical timber exports from sustainably managed sources;

5. To encourage members to adopt national policies that address sustainable utilization and conservation of timber producing forests and their genetic resources and maintaining ecological balance in the context of tropical timber trade;

II. EVALUATION SCOPE AND FOCUS

A. Rationale

Recognizing the potential value of the lessons learned from the project, the Forest Industry Committee (FIC) during its 24th Joint Session with the Committee on Economic Information and Market Intelligence in July 2004 in Interlaken, Switzerland, decided that an ex-post evaluation of the Project should be conducted to determine how well the project served its purposes and to draw up lessons and recommendations to improve the implementation of future projects.

B. Type of Evaluation

An ex-post evaluation of PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) was undertaken from January 2005 to August 2005. This report presents the findings of the evaluation done approximately four (4) years after the completion of Phase I and approximately 1.5 years after the end of Phase II of the Project. While it was not easy to trace the direct impact of the project as a whole after the period that has lapsed, the evaluation was greatly facilitated by the guidelines presented in the ITTO Manual for Project Monitoring, Review, and Evaluation6. The evaluation was done using a combination of personal interviews and exhaustive project document review. Visits to the participating institutions including ITTO and FTP as well as discussions with some of the direct and indirect beneficiaries of the project further enhanced the consultant’s understanding of project details and deepened the analyses/evaluation of the project.

6 ITTO (International Tropical Timber Organization), 1999. ITTO Manual for Project Monitoring, Review and Evaluation. Second Ed. Pub. by ITTO, Pacifico-Yokohama, Japan. May. 34 pp.


C. Terms of Reference

Following are the specific Terms of Reference (TOR) for the ex-post evaluation that guided the conduct of the study:

1. To assess the project’s contribution to the achievement of the development objective - to contribute to the improvement of economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in the four selected ITTO producer member countries;

2. To assess the achievement of the project’s outputs and specific objectives;

3. To assess the relevance and appropriateness of the activities including an assessment of the degree of ownership of the project by participating countries;

4. To evaluate the impact and relevance of the project. Particular attention should be devoted in assessing the number of wood industry managers and teachers of training institutions trained on the impact of the project on the national wood industry;

5. To determine the effectiveness of information dissemination;

6. To assess the overall post-project situation for the project. Particular attention should be devoted to assessing the willingness and commitment of the training institutions and the wood industry to continue with the training after the project and on assessing measures taken and inputs provided to sustain these activities;

7. To define and assess unexpected effects and impacts, either harmful or beneficial and present the reasons for their occurrences;

8. To analyze and assess implementation efficiency, including the technical, financial and managerial aspects. Particular attention should be devoted to assessing the following aspects: selection of topics in which the trainers and trainees had been trained; the strategies put in place by the Executing Agency (FTP International) in delivering the trainings and in assisting national institutions to design realistic and efficient training programs and implement them; the strategies used to get the support of the industry; the efficient use of project funds; efficiency of communications between the Executing Agency and the national implementing agencies;

9. To recommend follow-up actions in order to improve the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in the four selected ITTO producer member countries.


10. Taking into account the results of the evaluation, make an overall assessment of the project’s relative success or failure to summarize the key lessons learned; and identify any issues or problems that should be taken into account in designing and implementing similar projects in the future;

11. To prepare the evaluation report in accordance with the references for the Project Evaluation Report, as contained in the ITTO Manual for Project Monitoring, Review and Evaluation.

12. To assess the project’s contribution to relevant ITTA objectives (1987, 1994) and relevant ITTO Action Plans; and

13. To prepare an article for possible publication in the ITTO Tropical Forest Update (TFU), in consultation with the editor, containing an overview of the project and of the ex-post evaluation work, including a summary of the lessons learned from the evaluation work. Appropriate photographs should be provided if necessary.

D. Duration of the Evaluation

Project visits were conducted from February to April 2005. Annex 2 shows the detailed schedule of the visits while Annex 3 lists down the various officials, staff and trainers of the PIs as well as some selected key informants interviewed for the evaluation. Following is the summary of the various activities pursued to complete the work: January – February 12, 2005 Organizing the visit, contacting responsible persons

in the various national projects including the Executing Agency, review of project documents, preparation of questionnaires, preparation of schedules of visits,

February 14-15, 2005 Briefing at the ITTO Headquarters in Yokohama,

Japan February 18-21, 2005 Meeting with officials of FTP International Ltd,

Helsinki, Finland; briefing about project coordination and management; and meeting with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland concerning the project,

February 23-27, 2005 Meeting with officials of WITC, the implementing

institution of the Ghana National Project, final arrangements on the conduct of the evaluation work, visits to stakeholders who participated in the project, discussions with project beneficiaries and cooperators and other relevant parties,


March 4-8, 2005 Meeting with officials of the Universidad Nacional

Agraria la Molina, Peru, the implementing institution of the Peru National Project, final arrangements on the conduct of the evaluation work, visits/discussions with relevant stakeholders and beneficiaries of the project,

March 10-16, 2005 Meeting with officials of Escuela Nacional de

Ciencias Forestales of Honduras, the implementing institution of the Honduras National Project, final arrangements on the conduct of the evaluation work, visits/discussions with relevant stakeholders and beneficiaries of the project,

March 28- April 15, 2005 Meeting with officials of the UPLB College of

Forestry and Natural Resources’ TREES, the implementing institution of the Philippine National Project, final arrangements on the conduct of evaluation work, visits/discussions with relevant beneficiaries and stakeholders of the project.

March 26- August 31, 2005 Review and processing of the information/data

gathered, analysis of the results. Identification of lessons learned and formulation of conclusions and recommendations, Writing, finalization and submission of draft report to ITTO for comments and recommendations.

III. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

A. Review of Project Documents

In preparation for the visits and interviews needed to complete the ex-post evaluation of PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (1), a thorough review of all relevant documents provided by ITTO and FTP International Ltd was made. In addition other ITTO documents were obtained from the Forest Products Research and Development Institute (FPRDI) of the Philippines which has implemented several ITTO supported projects.

A comparison of the figures and information collected was also made to ensure objectivity in the analyses critical for the ex-post evaluation. The information materials, references and project documents reviewed and cited are indicated in the list of references. Secondary data (industry profile, exports and import data among others) for all countries involved with the project were also collected and relevant information organized to trace the impact of the project and clarify certain assumptions made in the analyses.


B. Preparations for the Review Visit to Concerned Institutions and Agencies

Contacts were made with various agencies concerned with the implementation of PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) - the FTP International Ltd., the Wood Industry Training Institute of Ghana, the Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Forestales of Honduras, the Universidad Nacional Agrari La Molina of Peru, and the Tropical Resources and Ecosystems for Sustainability (TREES), Philippines to facilitate the review visits and data collection. The visit started with an orientation meeting at the ITTO Wood Industry Division, Japan on February 14, 2005.

Prior to the visit, structured sets of questionnaires were prepared for FTP and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland (MFAF), persons concerned with the implementation of the Ghana National Project, the Peru National Project, the Honduras National Project and Philippines National Project to serve as guide for the interviews. The questionnaires were prepared to assess the status of implementation and extent of accomplishments of the indicators of performance indicated in the logical framework for the project and the individual country projects. A copy of the questionnaires used is shown in Annexes 4-8. While some questions were relatively the same regardless of the country and the role of the key informant in project implementation, some specific questions were identified to extract from the stakeholders key information deemed critical in establishing the efficiency and effectiveness of the project and thus provide some valuable lessons for ITTO to consider when planning similar projects in the future. Unfortunately, many of the respondents were unable to provide answers to a number of questions raised due to the time that has lapsed and the unavailability of organized data or reports from where the information could be obtained.

This in fact is the major limitation of the analyses. As a whole however, sufficient critical data and information were obtained to facilitate a comprehensive evaluation of the project as indicated in the TOR of the consultant.

C. Review Visits

The visit to the FTP International Ltd. focused on verifying the activities and outputs of the project, get their perspective on how the project was implemented, and the various lessons learned during implementation. In the case of the MFAF the visit attempted to determine how the project performed from the perspective of a funding institution, and whether it would be possible for them to consider funding similar projects in the future.

For the four (4) participating institutions, the visits attempted to determine the activities done in carrying out the project, current activities being pursued as a follow-up of previous activities or as a result of the project and lessons learned from the project that could assist them in implementing similar projects in the future. It was also an opportune time to interview various participants of the project particularly the identified beneficiaries to determine the effectiveness of the project and its impacts on


the individual firms as well as the industry as a whole. Other stakeholders that may not have directly participated in the project but are playing crucial roles as far as the wood based industries in the respective countrues are concerned were also interviewed to assess whether the project has indeed promoted the development of institutions that could provide the needed trainings.

Annex 9 shows some photographs taken during the visits and meetings with stakeholders from Finland, Ghana, Peru, Honduras and the Philippines.

D. Review of the Logical Framework Matrices

The evaluation included a detailed review of the logical framework matrix of PD13/95 Rev. 3 (I) as a whole (Table 2) as well as the logical framework matrices of the individual national projects (Annexes 10-13). This was done to assess the extent within which the project as a whole and the individual national projects attained the general and specific objectives each has specified at the beginning of project implementation. Following are the various matrices and means of verification that the consultant came across in the course of the evaluation.

Table 2 Logical Framework Matrix for PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I), Capacity Building in Training in Planning and Management of Forest Industries in ITTO Producer Member Countries

Project Elements Objectively Verifiable Indicators

Means of Verification

Important Assumptions

As verified

Development Objective: To contribute to the improvement of economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in the four selected ITTO producer member countries

Improved performance of wood industry enterprises. Improved position of local communities and improved state of ecological environment affected by the industries.

Company records, trade and labor statistics, environmental auditing reports: [assessment of individual enterprise owner of the impact of the project on productive, income, and employment]

It is recognized that considering the scope and duration of the project, it may not have very direct impact on the performance of the industry itself but the performance of the industry coulde be indirectly explained by the capacity building efforts pursued by the country itself.

Reports 1-11; Project completion

report Interviews

FTP FC, WITC UNALM ESNACIFOR TREES Industry members

Specific Objective 1:

To develop the curricula of the four

Curricula of four (4) training institutes for management

Training plans and programs developed by the institutes.

Willingness and commitment of training institutes for

Specific training courses offered by

the training institutions and


(4) training institutes in the ITTO producer member countries for ongoing training in planning and management of appropriate forest industries

training completed.

long term cooperation.

some selected data on participants and

evaluation of the trainings whenever

available

Output 1.1. Detailed analysis on selected training institutes including training needs assessment of potential client enterprises, preliminary curriculum and training needs assessment of the teachers in the institutes

Analysis of the training needs done by the institutes

Report submitted to participating institutes and ITTO by FTP

Selection of 4 training institutes

Output 1.2.

Completed curricula and annual course work program for the participating counterpart training institutes

Curricula, programs, and plans developed for 4 training institutes

Documents available in the institutes

Ghana Training Curriculum

ESNACIFOR/ CICAFOR Training Curriculum

Specific Objective 2. To improve the capacity of resource persons in the ITTO producer member countries in the planning and management of appropriate forest industries, and in planning and management of training courses on the same subject. The resource persons include managers of wood industry enterprises and management of appropriate forest industries.

80 persons from ITTO producer member countries trained in planning and management of forest industries.

40 persons trained in planning and management of training courses.

Workshop and course reports.

Continued support of cooperating organizations for recruitment and training of resource persons.

List of tutors and resource persons trained in WITC, UNALM, ESNACIFOR/ CICAFOR and TREES

Output 2.1. 80 resource persons

Four regional workshops

Workshop records Successful List of training

participants


trained in planning and management of appropriate forest industries

implemented cooperation with participating organizations in recruitment of resource persons and in organizing workshops

Output 2.2. Four workshop training materials and workshop report

Four workshop reports including the training materials used

Reports submitted to participants.

Training

materials in CD and hard copies

Output 2.3.

40 teachers trained in planning and implementation of training courses

Two regional teacher training courses implemented

Course records

Successful participation with participating organizations in recruitment of resource persons and in organizing workshops

List of training participants

Output 2.4. Course training materials and course reports

Two course reports including the materials used

Reports submitted to participants

Training materials, and presentation materials in power point

Specific Objective 3.

To produce training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on the planning and management of appropriate forest industries.

Training materials produced.

Training materials on all relevant subjects including lecture presentations.

Output 3.1. Guidelines for planning and management of training courses

A handbook produced by end of year 2

Handbook supplied to the participants

Trainer’s Guide

Output 3.2 Training package by subject to be used for implementation of training courses

Training package completed by end year 2

Training package supplied to the institute and trained resource persons.

Training packages developed


IV. FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS

The review and visits to the participating institutes as well as FTP International and ITTO provided a balanced and comprehensive review of the direct and indirect impact of the project on the development of the forest based industries in four ITTO producer member countries. Hopefully the analyses and the recommendations made could provide inputs to ITTO on how future activities of a similar nature could be assisted in the future. It should be noted right at the outset however, that the evaluation was conducted not so much to point out what went wrong but to see how and where improvements could have been or could be made to ensure that investments in similar undertakings in the future would result to the highest impact for the target beneficiaries. Although limited, responses of key informants met during the visit and the focus group discussions made with some members of cooperatives/associations and institutions involved with the project directly or indirectly provided very significant insights on how future training activities could be pursued more effectively and efficiently.

To facilitate the discussions the results of the evaluation are presented according to the specific terms of reference specified in the contract:

A. Project’s Contribution to the Development Objective

The development objective of PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) is to contribute to the improvement of the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in the four selected ITTO producer member countries. Studies have long recognized the linkages of developing the forestry sector and alleviating poverty especially in developing countries. Except for Peru, a significant proportion of the population of the four ITTO producer member countries included in the study is rural based with relatively low Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita (Table 3).

Table 3 Selected basic data on the participating countries including forest areas

COUNTRY LAND AREA

(000 ha)

POPULATION GROWTH

RATE 1995-2000

(%)

RURAL POPULA

TION (% of Total)

GDP PER

CAPITA1997

(US $)

FOREST AREA 2000

(000 ha)

Ghana 22,754 2.7 62.2 384 6,335

Honduras 11,189 2.8 53.7 723 5,383

Peru 128,000 1.7 27.6 2,580 65,215

Philippines 29,817 2.1 42.3 1,170 5,789

Source: State of the world’s forests, 2003. FAO, Rome


Forest cover has been declining significantly across the four countries although a significant forest cover in Peru (51%) remains. The potential of the forest based industries contributing to the economic growth of the country however, remains. Table 4 shows the production, trade and consumption of forest products in the four countries in 2000. Annex 14 similarly shows production, trade and consumption data for tropical timber over a period of five years. Local consumption has been increasing steadily over the years as demand for wood based products increase so much so that importation of wood based products has also been increasing significantly over the years. It is practical to assume that as the market and thefore, the consumption of forest based products increase, the number of people benefiting from the industry individually and collectively would also increase. Thus efforts aimed at improving the competitiveness and thus profitability of SMEs engaged in forest based industries such as training, consultancy services and technology transfer among others could be seen as enhancing the impact of the industries as far as the economy and the stakeholders are concerned.

However, the scope and duration of PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (1) were quite limited for one to be able to directly attribute increases in the production, trade and competitiveness of forest based industries in the ITTO producer member countries to the project. Nevertheless, the project as a whole and the individual national projects were able to accomplish a lot of initiatives as far as capacity building is concerned to be able to say that the project has to a large extent contributed to the enhancement of the competitiveness of domestic enterprises both in the local and international markets.

A very significant contribution of the project has been the improvement of the technical and managerial capabilities of the participating training institutions in providing trainings and technical assistance to the wood working industries particularly the small and medium enterprises of the wood furniture industries in the four (4) ITTO producer member countries. The trainings attended by the staff and training coordinators of the four ITTO producer member countries as coordinated by FTP Int. enabled them to be able to develop similar training packages for their respective institutions. WITC in particular has been regularly coordinating and implementing non-degree training programs for those who are interested to join the tertiary wood manufacturing industry.

The ultimate beneficiaries of the training programs are the owners and workers of small and medium scale furniture industries who have indicated significant improvements in their productivity, product quality, sales in both the local and international markets and their overall competitiveness.

While it may be true that only a few entrepreneurs have directly benefited from the trainings provided through the project in the four selected countries, the capability to sustain the trainings for more beneficiaries and stakeholders is already present in the selected training institutions. This means that if sustained, more stakeholders would be able to access the much needed trainings and technical assistance for the wood working industries in all the participating countries especially with the opening of the global market in recent years.


Table 4 Production trade and consumption of forest products, 2000 (000 m3)

FOREST PRODUCTS GHANA HONDURAS PERU PHILIPPINES

Woodfuel

Production 20,678 8,732 7,777 40,950

Imports - 0 0 0

Exports 0 0 0 0

Consumption 20,678 8,732 7,777 40,950

Industrial roundwood

Production 1087 759 927 3,079

Imports 0 0 23 562

Exports 0 40 0 0

Consumption 1087 719 950 3,641

Sawnwood

Production 243 437 623 151

Imports 0 6 7 359

Exports 243 139 82 120

Consumption 0 304 548 390

Wood-based panels

Production 166 7 42 510

Imports 0 9 42 219

Exports 157 6 22 16


Pulp for paper

Production - 7 17 202

Imports 0 1 27 60

Exports 0 0 0 0


Paper & paperboard

Production - 95 63 870

Imports 36 72 173 388

Exports 0 0 24 111


Source: State of the World’s Forests, 2003, FAO.


When asked to assess the extent with which the development objective of the project has been achieved responses in general was positive except those from the Philippines who thought there were a number of delimiting factors to allow the project to achieve the overall development objective. (Table 5).

Table 5 Respondents’ assessment of the extent of attainment of the project’s development objective.

COUNTRY/RESPONDENTS ASSESSMENT REASONS/FACTORS

Ghana

TEDD Yes

1. Commitment of TEDD and WITC;

2. Provision of counterpart funds from Forestry Commission;

3. Involvement of stakeholders particularly the industry

WITC officials Yes

1. Improved capacity of WITC instructors;

2. Commitment of the project team;

3. Support of the SMEs;

4. Support of the Forestry Commission, TEDD and WITC;

5. Meetings with industry and staff of the project;

6. Familiarity with WITC as far as the private sector is concerned;

7. Support of the ITTO through other related projects.

NPCT Yes

1. Zeal of WITC instructors;

2. Support of the SMEs;

3. Funding support of the Forestry Commission;

4. Vital role of the members of the project coordinating team especially during the initial years;

5. Monitoring efforts of FTP.

Honduras

CICAFOR Officials Yes 1. Support of ESNACIFOR;


2. Overseas support through ITTO;

3. Right selection industry cooperators

Peru

UNALM Officials Yes

1. Commitment and support of the industry;

2. Commitment of the UNALM faculty;

3. Sufficient funds available for the project;

4. Constant monitoring of the FTP

Philippines

TREES officials No

1. Unclear roles of participating institutions;

2. Several changes in FTP project staff;

3. Limited support given to the project team;

4. Unavailability of ITTO project document;

5. No follow up activities after the trainings

Resource Persons Yes (but only to a limited

extent)

1. Support of other institutions;

2. Applicability of the knowledge gained from the training to the industry;

3. Support of other projects (Forest Resources Management Project);

4. Comprehensiveness of the topics covered

The overriding reason cited for the success of the project however, is the critical support of the participating institutions, other government agencies engaged with SME development as well as the support of industry itself. The critical role of inter-agency complementation when pursuing human resource capacity building activities for industry was highlighted by this finding.

The support of FTP in terms of monitoring and regularly discussing the project’s progress with the participating institutions was also cited as a mjor reason for the success of the project. Unfortunately, it seems this was not successfully done in the Philippines resulting to some confusion and limited impact of the project as perceived by the project implementers themselves.


While there were some qualificatory statements made on the extent with which the overall development objective has been reached all the respondents from the four ITTO producer member countries agreed that the project has been able to fully accomplish the project’s specific objectives. Several reasons were also cited to be the major factors that contributed to the attainment of these objectives (Table 6).

Table 6 Specific factors that contributed to the attainment of the project’s specific objectives.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE FACTORS

Develop curricula of selected training institutes in ITTO producer member countries

2. Long history of designing and implementing training projects;

3. Workshops on curriculum development;

4. Highly experienced and multi-disciplinary resource persons;

5. Existence of other training courses from other training institutes;

6. Prompt release of funds from FTP;

7. Commitment of the instructors and resource persons involved with the project;

8. Collaboration with other training centers/academe e.g. Teacher Training College in Ghana;

9. Inputs from the industry itself;

Improve the capacity of resource persons in planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses

2. Resource persons are already well versed in their respective fields;

3. Sharing of the participants in planning and management of forest industries;

4. Presentation of cases of forest industries;

5. Direct involvement of the resource persons;

6. Applicability of the training modules and content to real situations especially among SMEs;

7. Additional training provided to the resource persons especially on project planning and implementation;

Produce the needed training materials

1. Availability of reference materials and actual experience of the resource persons;

2. Work groups that facilitated preparation of training materials;

3. Experience and skills of the participants;

4. Commitment of the instructors;

5. Localization of the training materials

B. Attainment of National Project’s Output and Specific Objectives

While it may be quite difficult to directly attribute improvements in the performance of the forest based industry sectors in the participating countries to the project itself it may be possible to consider the following:


1. Members of organized clusters in Kumasi, Ghana, the Woodworkers Association of Ghana (WAG) and the Federation of Woodworkers Associations of Ghana (FAWAG) claim that they no longer buy lumber from illegal sources after the orientation and trainings they have undergone at the WITC.

2. Similarly, the cooperative of furniture manufacturers in Siguatepeque, the COTRAMASIL and the cooperative ECASUL of San Pedro Sula, Honduras have also ceased to buy illegal lumber. They only buy from legitimate sources after being taught that illegal sources defeat the idea of sustainable forest management. Furthermore, members of COTRAMASIL have been assisting the police in the apprehension of illegal lumber. Again, while it is true that there are only a few of these organized entrepreneurs (14 in Ghana and 10 in Honduras) this could already be considered a major stride in efforts towards sustainable management of forest resources.

3. Members of ECASUL (a cooperative of furniture manufacturers in San Pedro Sula, Honduras) now only use dry lumber as raw materials. They cited that doing so results in higher quality products that command higher prices. The members have in fact petitioned the participating training institution, ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR to assist them in constructing a solar lumber dryer.

4. The two cooperatives in Honduras have also requested ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR to train them on the use of waste materials such as edgings and trimmings in the manufacture of furniture to further improve utilization of raw materials. Members of organized clusters in Kumasi, Ghana have also started to utilize manufacturing wastes in the production of doors by introducing new designs that will allow them to do so.

While the WITC of Ghana and ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR of Honduras do not have sufficient financial resources they are sustaining efforts to provide technical assistance to the beneficiaries of the project. In the case of Ghana, the Ministry of Production has directed the Forestry Commission to expand the concept of clustering to all the regions of Ghana. In fact two clusters in municipalities close to Kumasi, Mampong and Kononggo have already been organized by the Forestry Commission. The Ministry of Production has further directed the Forestry Commission to provide training to all master craftsmen in the secondary wood working industries in its bid to improve the quality of products for possible export initially to neighboring countries and later to other parts of the world.

To be able to assess the attainment of the project’s output specifically at the national level, a number of key stakeholders in each country were interviewed. Due to the absence of material time to conduct an exhaustive interview of all industry members, a focus group discussion with only a few but critical/major players of industry was done for each country.


The general and specific objectives of the national projects were indicated earlier in Table 1 thus would no longer be enumerated in this section. Instead the perception of various key informants on whether these objectives were attained in each country and the reasons why or why not are presented in Table 7. Except for the Philippines all the key informants were very positive that the national projects were able to fully accomplish both the general and specific objectives. One reason cited is the lack of funding to implement the projects for the communities as proposed. In Peru where accomplishment was qualified as partial only the reasons cited include limited funding as well as short period for project implementation that prevented the consolidation of all efforts earlier identified by the project implementers.

Table 7 Extent of attainment of the general and specific objectives of the national projects by country and factors why these were or were not attained

COUNTRY ASSESSMENT REASONS/FACTORS

GHANA

General Yes

1. The companies understood the purposes of the project and cooperated willingly;

2. Track record of WITC as a training institution;

3. Good working relationship with the SMEs;

4. Earlier ITTO project PD 12/98 Rev.1 (I), Manpower Development for the Ghana Wood Industries that paved the way for the training of WITC instructors abroad (UK, Malaysia, Holland, PNG) as well as brought in foreign consultants on furniture;

5. Commitment of instructors at WITC and the project team;

6. Commitment of FC and FTP in providing funds

Specific Yes

1. The sharing of contracts, equipment, personnel and expertise was fully implemented by cluster members;

2. Good working relationship with the SMEs;

3. Topics covered by the trainings are very practical and needed by industry;

4. Commitment of the WITC staff and the interest of industry.

HONDURAS

General Yes

1. Highly motivated SMEs;

2. Persistence of CICAFOR;

3. Belief in what the project and the training program can do for the SMEs


4. Need for the training making the project implementation timely

Specific Yes 1. Support of CICAFOR

PERU

General Yes *

1. Interest of enterprises to learn about wood.

2. Commitment of owners who sent workers to be trained

3. Commitment of faculty to transfer knowledge for the benefit of the community

4. Too many trainees at one time thus difficulty of supervising them

5. Too many types of furniture where training is being introduced

6. Project was not implemented because there were no funds released by ITTO

Specific Yes * 1. The project was not implemented because there

were no funds

PHILIPPINES

General No

1. Communities were not able to establish their own enterprises

2. Component project in the Philippines not given resources to monitor progress made by the communities

Specific No 1. Too many communities were targeted with very

limited funding support

* Partial accomplishment only

C. Relevance and Appropriateness of the Activities and Degree of Ownership of the Project by the Participating Countries

All the respondents agree that the various activities pursued by the Project as a whole and individually at the national level are very relevant as far as meeting the technical and managerial needs of the industry is concerned. With the growing market for wood based products both locally and globally, both the SMEs and the project implementers, officials and trainers believe that human resource capability building is critical if only to improve the efficiency and thus the competitiveness of industry. The trainings that introduced new products, improved raw material utilization thus reducing wastage and attempted to improve the skills of carpenters, furniture makers and other SME participants were also found to be very relevant, timely and needed by industry.


It may be worth pointing out however, that prior to the trainings respondents indicated that there was very little appreciation on the part of industry on the value of human resource capability building as far as improving their income and general competitiveness is concerned. However, after the trainings there was a marked improvement of the level of awareness and appreciation of the value of trainings in improving the firm’s profitability.

As training institutions the participating agencies are very much aware of the potential impact of their efforts and do looked forward to having the activities introduced/initiated by the project sustained. This becomes even more critical since there are only a limited number of institutions in the participating countries who are actively involved in technology transfer for the wood/furniture industry. In more recent years however, some private sector led organizations/foundations are already doing technology transfer and training work as far as the wood industry is concerned.7

D. Impact and Relevance of the Project

As indicated earlier, available funds were limited and project duration quite short to allow the training of a substantial number of industry practitioners and teachers during the duration of the project itself (Table 8). This was also expressed by the trainers, SMEs and officials of the participating training institutions. Nevertheless even with these limitations the respondents all agreed that the project has sustained the intrest of the SMEs to access information and trainings from the participating training institutions that could be followed up as basis for future interventions to the industry as well as capacitated instructors who could provide the necessary trainings to industries.

Table 8 Number of trainees/participants by country

COUNTRY TRAINING CONDUCTED NUMBER OF

PARTICIPANTS

Ghana Training in Management and Marketing Skills for Cluster Owners/Managers

14

Training in Technical Skills to Cluster Member Companies

11

Training in Management and Marketing Skills for WITC Instructors

12

7 In Honduras, the Centro de Utilizacion y Promocion de Productos Forestales (CUPROFOR) is currently providing training for the industry that includes the wood working industry. In Peru, the Centro Technico de Madera (CITE de Madera) is now very active in providing trainings for SMEs situated in the Industrial Park in Villa El Salvador. CITE de Madera however, was not yet operational at the time of the project.


Training in Business Plan Preparation for WITC Instructors

12

Preparation of Business Plan for Cluster Members

14

Training in Technical Skills for WITC Instructors

8

Honduras Reunión PyMEs de la Madera (Siguatepeque/San Pedro Sula Clusters)

19

Reunión Taller de Planificación y Capacitación de Instructores

9

Taller Acabados en Madera 20

Taller de Evaluación (Siguatepeque/San Pedro Sula Clusters)

27

Peru Taller Sobre el Desarollo de las Pymes en la Industria Madera en America Latina

5

Taller para los Capacitadores sobre Planificacion, Implementacion y Evaluacion de Capacitacion

5

Taller sobre la Planificacion y Control Tecnico-Economico de la Produccion

5

Taller Sobre el Desarollo del Sector PYME (Pequena y Mediana Empresa)

5

Capacitacion en Industrias de Transformacion Secundaria de la Madera

39

Philippines Workshop on Planning, Implementation and Evaluation of Training

16

Workshop for Trainers; Enhancing Training Capabilities for Planning and Management of Community-based Forest Industries in the Philippines

16

Pilot Course for Community Representatives: Enhancing Training Capabilities for Planning and Management of Community-based Forest Industries in the Philippines

12

When asked, the respondents considered the following as the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in the participating countries:


1. Facilitated the exposure of representatives from the ten (10) pilot sites in the Philippines to alternative livelihood opportunities that are already being undertaken by other communities;

2. In Honduras, the project changed the attitude and improved the appreciation of the participants on the use of properly dried wood using the solar dryer introduced through the project. In addition some of the SMEs have requested for training on optimizing the use of raw materials by using waste materials for handicraft manufacturing;

3. In Peru, the project was able to capacitate the faculty in training industry members who until the project were not very appreciative of the value of the trainings in improving their productivity and competitiveness. Trainings on value added for the products enabled the trainees to maximize the use of raw materials reducing wastage by as much as 20-25%. Respondents also believe that the trainings provided to the faculty through the project changed the attidue of the instructors on their role in upgrading the capacity of the SMEs who were also changed in terms of their perspective on appropriate production practices;

4. Respondents from Ghana were generally very appreciative of the project and the various activities and trainings introduced. Among the most important impact cited include:

a. Improvement of the capacity of WITC to conduct training for industry;

b. Facilitated the formation of industry clusters that significantly improved efficiency and competitiveness;

c. Institutionalized the capacity building with the Ministry of Lands and Forests already directing the WITC to retrain all master craftsmen in Ghana;

d. Formation of additional industry clusters beyond the one established in Kumasi;

e. Value formation and reorientation especially on the use of chain saw which is already declared illegal in Ghana;

f. Improved income of participants especially as a result of waste minimization, better quality products, value adding to products, and use of other alternative raw materials among others.

However, the key informants are also fully aware that there were some factors all beyond their and the SMEs control that have prevented the full realization of the potential impact of the various trainings conducted. For example, in the Philippines while the communities (10 pilot sites) were able to undergo trainings on the management of community-based industries, they were still unable to generate the


capital needed to establish their own enterprises that would have put the lessons learned from the trainings to appropriate use.

There was also some misunderstanding on the extent of assistance the project could provide to the industry members from Ghana. Some industry members expected that WITC would be able to provide them work contracts that did not fully materialize causing some disappointments on the industry. Some were also expecting that the project through WITC could facilitate the acquisition of some tools and jigs to improve production, which again were not part of the project’s objectives.

In Peru, UNALM instructors believe the project was not able to fully accomplish its objectives because of limited funding available. It was cited that SMEs are not willing to pay for the trainings thus limiting the number of stakeholders reached and benefited by the project which is also operating on very limited resources. They also pointed the fact that UNALM is quite inaccessible to industry unlike CITE Madera which is located right in Villa El Salvador. Fortunately, even if CITE Madera also taps foreign consultants they also tap UNALM faculty and staff regularly for the various trainings they are conducting.

E. Effectiveness of Information Dissemination

The participating institutions tapped all possible means (meetings, personal contacts, letters, workshops/seminars, etc.) to disseminate information about the project to industry members. In Ghana, the Forestry Commission even financed the installation of internet facilities to enhance the capability of WITC to effectively disseminate information and reach out to as many stakeholders as possible.

Newsletters were also prepared in Ghana but these were largely perceived as ineffective as far as information dissemination is concerned due largely to the limitations of the private sector themselves. Proper representation of the private sector/cluster members in the workshops and trainings conducted was also viewed as an effective means for facilitating an understanding of the project’s objectives and activities and how these could assist industry members. The Project provided 20 mobile phones which were distributed by WITC to cluster members and officers (19) and one retained at WITC that greatly facilitated communication among the stakeholders.

In the Philippines, a directory of training participants was also prepared and disseminated to them to allow communication and exchange of ideas among the participants even after the project or completion of the specific training attended by the participants. An Advisory Group composed of representatives from the private sector, the academe (TREES) and other government agencies involved in assisting the wood based industry also provided significant feedback and communication among the stakeholders essential to addressing the SMEs needs.

Exchange of communication between FTP and the training institutes was also fairly efficient. The use of internet facilities has been cited but ESNACIFOR officials specifically cited that FTP is already familiar with ESNACIFOR and its activities


even before the project thus communication was never a problem. However, they emphasized that communication among the participants and other stakeholders should be maintained even long after the project to be able to fully address the requirements of the SMEs and sustain the interests started through the project.

Firm level visits similarly increased the private sector’s confidence on the sincerity of ESNACIFOR officials and instructors who were earlier viewed by industry as competitors not only producing and selling competing products such as furniture but also as using industry to get support for projects from international funding institutions. This was further enhanced when ESNACIFOR scheduled trainings to still accommodate activities of the firms and not hamper their operations during the trainings.

The briefings and orientation conducted by UNALM with potential instructors and industry members also facilitated a clearer understanding of the project especially the expectations from the trained instructors vis-à-vis the need to return to UNALM and to share what they have learned from the trainings to members of industry.

F. Post-project Situation

To a large extent an important measure of the sustainability of project initiatives is the follow up activity pursued after project implementation. The logistic, financial, and institutional support provided to the training institutes after the project varied across countries. Efforts of the training institutes and the internalization of these efforts also varied significantly but it was clear that there was an over-riding desire among the project implementers to sustain project activities. Admittedly the limitations on the financial and organizational support provided also delimited the possibilities among the different participating institutions.

Internalization or sustainability was thus assessed in terms of the following indicators:

1. Internal funding commitment generated - Among the different training institutions, WITC received the highest internal support with the Forestry Commission allocating specific funds for the continued operation of WITC aimed at enhancing the initiatives pursued earlier by the project. The support includes continued capacity building training for WITC staff and the small and micro enterprises. However, the lack of sufficient training rooms large enough to accommodate more trainees has been cited as limiting to a large extent the number of trainees and therefore, income 8 for the Center.

8 It was reported by one of the respondents that close to half a billion cedis was lost because of lack of rooms large enough to accommodate more trainees from the private sector.


FC support for the trainings comes in the form of training subsidies. The private sector covers only 25% of the total training cost 9 with the FC covering the rest. Support from other institutions like the Forest Research Institute of Ghana (FORIG), the College of Renewable Resources, other industry partners in terms of lecturers are also regularly obtained. One major limitation cited however, is the unwillingness/inability of the trainees to cover the full cost of training.

2. Outside funding support generated – All the participating institutions prepared proposals for funding either by ITTO and other international funding institutions but the level of success in generating these resources have been limited and varied across countries. In Ghana, the WITC instructors were even sent abroad for further training through another ITTO project. In the Philippines, several proposals have been prepared but there has been very limited success in generating funds to continue the project itself. However, since the basic objectives of the project are consistent with TREES and thus UP College of Forestry’s mandates, capacity building activities are still being pursued although perhaps not in the magnitude earlier targeted by the project.

3. Specific strategies/courses of action pursued to sustain activities – Linkages with industry members remained even beyond the project as this is part of the major mandate of all the participating institutions. This is perhaps a major advantage of the project with respect to internalization as the participating institutions were basically established to provide capacity building support for industry directly or indirectly.

CICAFOR invested a lot of time and effort discussing with industry members and other stakeholders the benefits of forming cooperatives and industry associations. They also linked with other organizations involved with training SMEs to get their support in advocating for cooperative activities and the benefits for doing so.

In Ghana the meetings, direct interactions and sensitization activities with industry members helped in further promoting/advocating for the sustained implementation of the project initiatives. WITC even coordinated with a local contractor (Archisyntesis) that provides all the furniture for the Forestry Commission Head Office so that these furniture could be manufactured by the cluster particularly the frames and doors. This implies that training on new designs for the doors would have to be provided by WITC to the cluster members.

4. Industry support generated – CICAFOR/ESNACIFOR sustained the good relationship established with the industry by continuously informing cluster members of key events that may be of interest to the SMEs. For example in May 2005, products of cluster members were displayed at the lobby of the institute for a month. Hopefully a permanent display Center for products of cluster members could be established as a joint effort between the industry and CICAFOR/ESNACIFOR.

9 During the time of the interview this could be as high as c 120,000 (US $ 1.00 = c 9,000) for a short term course.


The Cooperative and the consolidated industry association are still quite active in Honduras especially with the continued assistance of CICAFOR. However, the two clusters earlier formed in Ghana have yet to fully operate as a cluster as there are still some level of hesitation among members especially with regard to sharing technologies and work contracts. 10

G. Unexpected Effects/Impacts of the Project

There are a number of commendable unexpected effects and impacts of the Project especially for the small and medium entrepreneurs of the secondary wood using industries in Ghana and in Honduras:

1. Members of clusters and cooperatives organized through the project are now refusing to buy lumber from illegal sources as this is already perceived as contrary to the precepts of sustainable management of forest resources. This gives an insight on the depth with which they have been sensitized by the participating institutions. If these efforts can be sustained, it would go a long way in promoting sustainable forest management in Honduras and Ghana at the very least.

2. Ghana has been captivated by the concept of clustering 11 that it has established two new clusters in municipalities close to Kumasi. Furthermore, the government has directed proper authorities to expand clustering to all the regions of Ghana. All master craftsmen are now being re-trained in woodworking and furniture manufacturing by the WITC.

3. Members of ECASUL in San Pedro Sula, Honduras now only use dried lumber in the manufacture of furniture and cabinets thus quality of the products are higher, production is faster and they get a better price for their products.

4. Members of COTRAMASIL in Siguatepeque, Honduras have already been “deputized” by the police in the apprehension of illegal lumber being sold in the area.

H. Effectiveness of the Capacity Building of Training Institutes and of SMEs in the secondary woodworking sectors of individual participating countries

Respondents reported that they continue to receive requests from industry members for additional trainings. Unfortunately, the number of follow up trainings conducted was very limited due to lack of funds. Sporadic trainings were conducted

10 Recently, the clusters through WITC completed 2-3 contracts to fabricate school furniture. WITC hopes that this could serve as an advertisement for the clusters vis-à-vis the quality of their work to encourage other future contracts.

11 Members of a cluster produce parts of furniture where it has the greatest expertise or the type of machines needed to do so while other members produce other parts to improve productivity and product quality.


but these are donor driven and not as a conscious or planned training program for industry members thereby reducing the overall impact of the trainings.

This is really quite unfortunate as both the representatives of the private companies and members and staff of the training institutions agreed that to a large extent the participants apply what they have learned from the trainings in the performance of their tasks in the companies. Table 9 summarizes the response of the respondents from both industry and members/officials of the training institutions on the impact of the trainings on company performance and overall efficiency. It was quite difficult to obtain actual figures on the absolute changes in income and employment of the company among others thus only descriptive changes were obtained. Time limitations further prevented the consultant from going deeper into the actual impact of the trainings as this requires a more intensive methodology and data collection and analysis not immediately or easily feasible for the consultant’s current engagement.

Table 9 Impact of the trainings attended on company performance and efficiency of operations

ITEM GHANA HONDURAS PERU PHILIPPINES

Increase in income Yes Yes Yes Not sure

Increase in employment Not sure Probably No NA

Increase in productivity Yes No Not sure NA

SME respondents from Ghana were very positive of the effectiveness of the capacity building activities of WITC on various aspects of furniture production. This may be because of the actual production contracts that the cluster members were able to get during and immediately after the project. There were very definite skills and production techniques transferred during the trainings, which the participants find very relevant and directly and immediately implementable/adoptable in their firms that probably was the main reason for this. The product exhibition (GIFEX) further enhanced the SMEs appreciation of the trainings as the GIFEX provided some of the participants an avenue for calling the attention of buyers on their (SMEs) ability to supply the product. Unfortunately, there has been no follow up as yet on the GIFEX but the Forestry Commission very recently supported the conduct of an Industrial Technology Fair in Ghana where the various members of industry also participated.

Specific trainings conducted are presented in another section. Several training curricula were developed by the participating institutions to cater to the management and market requirements of industry. Some of the major topics covered included:

1. Business management 2. Quality assurance 3. Plant lay out 4. Materials handling


5. Tool maintenance 6. Design and graphic communication

Everyone agreed that the project improved the capacity of the participating institutions to identify, plan, and implement trainings consistent with the requirements of industry. However, a major limitation cited as far as sustaining the efforts are concerned remained is the lack of funds for the conduct of the trainings.

I. Implementation Efficiency of the Project

The trainings were identified following the training needs assessment and consultations made with industry. Thus all the topics conducted during the trainings were found to be relevant, effective and realistic in all the participating countries. FTP also guided the initial attempts to identify training topics even sharing their own experiences in terms of cluster development that somehow guided the efforts in Ghana. Considering the positive benefits of the project in providing long term human capacity building trainings for various stakeholders of the forest based industries it is critical that specific strategies are pursued to sustain the various efforts and initiatives introduced through the project.

The key informants provided a number of suggestions that are worth looking into as the suggestions were made based on their experiences during project implementation and the expectations of the industry they have been assisting for quite some time already. Table 10 summarizes the suggestions elicited from the key informants on how the project could be made sustainable:

Table 10 Specific recommendations on how the project could be made sustainable

COUNTRY RECOMMENDATIONS

Ghana There should be specific strategies to continuously upgrade the internal capabilities of the institutions to develop and conduct trainings both in terms of human, physical and financial resources. Opportunities to obtain trainings abroad not only for the instructors but the industry members themselves should be part of the overall strategy for human resource capability building. Clustering as a concept could be more efficient but there should be efforts to introduce new technologies regularly to fast track the capacity building of the clusters. While it is desirable to have more clusters established there should also be depth in the quality of the clusters that would be established to ensure sustainability and concomitant changes in the attitude of the individual members on the need for trainings.


Advocacy should be pursued so that industry should be willing and able to pay for the trainings as subsidizing the trainings could not be sustained over time. If internal funding support is to be sought there should be clear refocusing of the proposed activities so that these could be aligned with the mandates and objectives of the target financing institutions.

Honduras Install appropriate monitoring systems for the project to be able to determine the extent with which project plans and objectives are being attained. There should also be a conscious effort to clearly explain to industry what the project intends to do to avoid undue expectations particularly with respect to provision of equipment, tools, jigs and fixtures that in the end affected the private sector’s willingness to cooperate. However, it is imperative that project implementers should have the commitment to continue assisting the SMEs until they are mature enough to stand by themselves which could mean assistance being provided even beyond the project duration. The trainings should also be able to assist SMEs generate more income from production so they would be able to cover the cost of trainings and not just rely on subsidies and worse completely free trainings that could not be sustained over time.

Peru There is a need to also identify specific measures or strategies that would sufficiently equip the training institutions to enable them to more effectively address the training requirements of industry. The project should also include greater advocacy work beyond orientation on the project to change the attitude of the SMEs on the value of trainings. There should therefore, be more quantifiable indicators shared on the impact of trainings on income and production rather than pure theoretical discussions on the value of trainings for industry. In consultation with industry prepare an appropriate training curriculum that directly addresses industry needs and consider timing or availability for the trainings and more actively pursue efforts to look for funding for the conduct of these trainings. Other local and international funding sources should be tapped to ensure that the planned trainings are conducted to establish track record and greater confidence on the ability of the training institutions to deliver the traning requirements of industry on a more sustained basis.

Philippines Efforts must be made to level off expectations on the project requirements right at the beginning of the project


to avoid misunderstanding and undue expectations that could cause some frustrations later. The line of communication between and among project stakeholders must be clarified right at the start of the project also to ensure that there is an appropriate transfer of information and action on project policies are made more efficiently.

In addition to the suggestions cited above there are a number of significant development lessons learned from project implementation that could be shared or considered in future ITTO projects:

1. Project planning – Involving the various stakeholders in poject design and problem analysis proved quite useful as component activities are shared immediately to potential clients while at the same time accommodating their actual needs. A more balanced perspective on the various aspects of the project is also obtained when more stakeholders are involved. This means the inclusion of not only the project implementers and the SMEs in project planning but also the other agencies, organizations and interest groups whose efforts could be tied up or tapped during project implementation to avoid unnecessary duplication of efforts.

2. Project implementation – Although the project design was completely followed there were still some problems met during implementation due primarily to the lack of funds, difficulty in gathering the type and number of beneficiaries for the training who in one way or another have already become quite doubtful on the benefits they could derive from the various trainings that are being introduced.

3. Financial planning – The participating institutions proposed a budget breakdown which were then submitted to FTP. There were very minor changes but as a whole FTP was the one making the final decisions on fundin requirement and allocations. Funds were sent directly by FTP to the respective bank accounts of the implementing agencies. The project document was not very clear on the proposed contribution of the respective governments thus lobbying for funding locally was not considered an immediate and urgent need. There was therefore, a lot of variation on the extent of government support for project activities mostly ending up as contribution in kind through the services of the project implementers and use of facilities and utilities except for Ghana where the government through the FC allocated US $ 29,532 plus some office supplies for the implementation of the project.

4. Financial management – There was very little changes in fund utilization for all the projects. However, the expected US $ 22,000 support for the Ghana projects from the European Union did not materialize affecting project implementation in Ghana. This resulted to some of the industry expectations not being met thus reuding also the enthusiasm of industry to participate and actively support project activities. There were also operational lessons learned during project implementation that could be considered in efforts to improve similar project activities in the future:


1. Project organization and management – With FTP serving as the over all project coordinator as the executing agency for the project, each implementing agency appointed country project leaders or coordinators that took care of the day to day operation and implementation of project activities within the country. In the Philippines the Director of TREES himself acted as the Project Leader assisted by a staff hired specifically for the project. The Advisory Group composed of representatives from the industry, academe, line agencies and other government institutions involved with assisting the forest based industries provided valuable inputs developing the criteria for site selection, involvement of trainers/consultants and other policies affecting project implementation.

In Honduras, the director of ESNACIFOR served as the project coordinator and was directly dealing with FTP until project coordination was transferred to CICAFOR and another project coordinator was appointed. 12 This proved valuable since the Coordinator was directly involved with project implementation details and is able to provide the needed directions and commitment essential for the success of the project.

The project coordinator appointed for the Peru project was in charged of all the activities – events, logistics requirements, meeting coordination especially with carpenters from Villa El Salvador even in receiving and entertaining visitors particularly from FTP.

A Project Coordinating Team was established to take care of the activities of the project in Ghana. In addition to the Team a project coordinator was also appointed and stationed in Kumasi where the initial clusters were established. The set up is similar to that in Honduras since project coordination was also transferred from TEDD (now TIDD) initially to WITC later. The project coordinator simply prepares the quarterly activities that are submitted for approval of the NPCT. Once approved the project coordinator manages the implementation of the activities.

The Project Coordinators cited anumber of challenges met in organizing and managing the project. Among those cited is related to cost efficiency. In the Philippines, the project coordinator had to carefully plan the project visits so that as many of the 10 pilot areas could be visited at one time. Project implementers from Honduras had to overcome initial resistance from target beneficiaries who considered ESNACIFOR as a competitor so that they even refused to sign attendance sheets during the orientation workshop. In Ghana the major challenge is on how the project implementer could overcome the inherent distrust among the SMEs so that they would agree to join the cluster and work together as a team. With the persistence of the project team and constant dialogue with the industry this initial barrier was overtaken and while operation of the clusters remained quite limited there were new clusters formed outside of Kumasi reflecting the general acceptability of the idea among the industry players.

12 Two project coordinators were appointed for the duration of the project after this was transferred to CICAFOR.


While the specific strategies pursued varied in each country the basic principle behind the strategies remained fairly the same – gaining the trust of the SMEs and making them understand that the project’s major objective is to assist the SMEs to become more productive and competitive. The flexibility in implementing project activities like conducting the trainings near the work areas or during periods when work in the factory is off-peak clearly helped in allowing the project implementers to gain the trust and confidence of the SMEs.

There were changes in project management but these were generally perceived as improving project implementation since the changes provided more focus to the implementing unit’s role in the day to day operations of the project.

2. Project documentation – One of the most critical components of project implementation which unfortunately has generally been less appreciated is the documentation of project activities, impact and perhaps more importantly lessons learned. Many valuable lessons that should have guided future efforts have been lost simply because of the failure of the project to document the procedures and strategies pursued as well as the results of the interventions made. Unfortunately the same seems to be the experience in this otherwise very valuable project. Respondents indicated that there was no agreed schedule on project reporting thus the number and types of reports submitted varied. This was in fact the major difficulty encountered in assessing the project as there were no comprehensive reports available to synthesize the experiences in the four countries and drawing lessons from the varied economic, cultural and industry environment in the four participating countries. Given the time that has lapsed much of the responses were based on recall that could have been enhanced or validated if more comprehensive and comparative written reports were available.

There was even no agreed upon project reporting format despite the existing guidelines made by ITTO regarding projects supported by ITTO.

3. Monitoring and evaluation – At the Project level FTP monitored the individual component projects in each of the participating countries even visiting the countries during the project implementation. There was no formal monitoring and evaluation system installed but in Honduras the project coordinator regularly visited the SMEs. Occasionally, CICAFOR sent experts to visit the SMEs to address/discuss specific problems with the enterprise and/or requested some experts who are on official travel to San Pedro Sula to visit ECASUL and learn about the status of the enterprises. In Peru no formal monitoring system was established because Phase II was not actually implemented. In Ghana a monitoring team composed of local experts was formed who conducted regular monitoring of project activities.

Funds have been used efficiently and effectively gauging from the financial statements of the project. Due to limited funds available project implementation was phased but funds have been faithfully utilized according to the approved budget in fact generating savings amounting toUS$13,760.17


Fund disbursements were handled directly by FTP. While there was no serious complaints about this, respondents especially those from Ghana would have preferred if the funds were managed by Ghana itself.

As a whole the project’s framework was fairly simple and straightforward. The activities are aimed at capacitating the training institutions in developing and conducting trainings for the industry on a sustained basis. The expectation is that the project would have been internalized by the participating institutions so that activities would be pursued beyond the project life. In fact in Phase I, the skills and knowledge of potential resource persons and trainers from the participating institutions were enhanced through workshops and trainings in various expertise that they would need in capacitating the members of the wood working industries.

However, there were some problems met in Phase II. Individual participating institutions were supposed to have implemented their national projects but there had been delays and projects in Peru and the Philippines were not implemented at all.

The Ghana and Honduras national projects successfully completed their targeted activities with excellent results, although delayed for 16 months.

PART II CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Following are some of the more important lessons learned from the implementation and from the outputs and outcomes of the project that must be carefully considered when planning and supporting similar projects in the future:

1. The success of the individual national projects depended largely on the commitment and actual support of the participating institutions. It is therefore, imperative that the nature, scope and/or extent of this commitment are identified and sougth right at the beginning of project implementation to avoid misunderstanding and undue expectations during and after project implementation.

In the case of Ghana the project has the support of the Forestry Commission which provided some funds to carry out important activities during the sensitive stages of organizing the clusters, curriculum development and training of the members of the clusters. In the case of ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR, although no funds were contributed, the sustained meetings and close personal contacts were necessary to convince the members of the wood working industry that the project was being implemented for them therefore dispelling any form of mistrusts they may have over the project implementers.

2. Human resource capability building efforts take a long time to take off and provide evidences of effects. Thus it is essential that the duration of projects of this nature must be able to carefully consider the behavioural changes and adjustments necessary and incorporate these in the conceptualization and duration of the project if it is to succeed and attain the objectives and benefits identified.


3. Funding must be assured for the project and while activities can be implemented in phases, all project components must be implemented at the same time to allow for comparison across environments or countries. In the case of the present project Phase I allowed the implementation of projects in only two of the participating institutions thus activities in the two other institutions came much later as Phase II. On the other hand, the Phase II activities for the earlier two institutions were no longer implemented as there were no funds allocated for them. In other words the Phase I-Phase II concept was not adequately covered creating some level of frustrations both on the implementing institutions and the SMEs themselves.

4. Choice of project implementers or cooperators must be assessed not only in terms of the proposals submitted but also on the level of commitment and support that could be provided by the institutions to insure that the project’s objectives are attained even when external funding has not or is yet to come. It seems that while efforts to secure external funding outside of ITTO was sought by the participating institutions, the extent with which these were pursued to attain the objectives of the project was not at a level that could somehow ensure a certain degree of success of project implementation.

5. Regional projects of this nature must be able to select participating institutions that adequately reflect varying environments/structures and economies or levels of development of the target beneficiaries to allow a more comprehensive analysis and comparison of lessons learned that could be adopted in other ITTO member countries. This approach will enable ITTO to develop modules and modalities of human resource capability building that could be tested, verified and further enhanced in other member countries further improving the value and content of the modules.

6. Support activities to complement the trainings conducted must already be identified and funding support provided to immediately demonstrate the value of the trainings to SMEs and further enhance their interest and willingness to participate and pay for future trainings that would be introduced by the participating institutions. As it is the SMEs are still hesitant or unwilling to pay for the trainings offered by the participating institutes because they do not see immediate application in their businesses or they do not have access to equipment and and other facilities that would have allowed them to maximize the benefits from the new skills and technologies they have learned from the trainings.

7. There is a need to incorporate and agree on specific monitoring and evaluation methodologies as well as feedback mechanisms during and after project implementation to ensure adequate documentation of lessons learned, accounting of impact and benefits are made and appropriate feedback given to the implementers to improve efficiency and relevance of project activities. As indicated earlier the value of lessons learned from projects of this nature lies on how well the lessons were documented so that these can be validated or tested and revised in future projects so that pitfalls in project impelementation could be avoided in the future.


8. Coupled with the commitment of the participating institutions is the need to appoint a committed Project Coordinator. In Ghana a National Project Coordinating Team (NPCT) was immediately organized at the inception of the project. In addition, when the Project Coordinatorship was transferred from the Forestry Commission, which was stationed in Accra, to the Wood Industry Training Center which was actually doing the cluster organizing and training of cluster members, a very committed PC was appointed who becoame pivotal in the success of the project. In Honduras, while no NPCT was organized, a committed PC and an equally committed assistant coordinator were designated to oversee the implementation of the project. Their indefatigable efforts in organizing meetings, adjusting schedules so that the members of the cooperative would be able to attend the training eventually gained the trust and confidence of the SMEs.

9. Involve as many stakeholders as possible in the country to ensure that support is provided not only from the ITTO funding but other sources so that efforts and activities are complemented and thus become more successful. The role of private sector led initiatives should be consciously incorporated in project activities as these efforts are responsive to the actual needs of industry and are therefore with a higher chance of sustainability.


REFERENCES/LITERATURE REVIEWED

Acts of the Steering Committee

Committee Meeting on September 9, 1998

Committee Meeting on September 29, 1999

Committee Meeting on July 12, 2000

An Overview of Forest Products Statistics in South and Southeast Asia, December 2002, EC-FAO Patnership Programme (2000-2002), FAO

Annual Review and Assessment of the World Timber Situation, 2002. ITTO

Capacity Building in Training in Planning and Management of Forest Industries in ITTO Producer Member Countries, PD 13/95 Rev.3 (I), FTP International Ltd. Helsinki, Finland.

Project Agreement (Contract)

Progress Report No. 1, February 2, 1998 to March 31, 1998

Progress Report No. 2, April 1, 1998 to August 31, 1998

Progress Report No. 3, September 1, 1998 to February 28, 1999

Progress Report No. 4, March 1, 1999 to July 31, 1999

Progress Report No. 5, August 1, 1999 to December 31, 1999

Progress Report No. 7, August 1, 2000 to January 31, 2001

Progress Report No. 8, February 1, 2001 to July 31, 2001

Progress Report No. 9, August 1, 2001 to January 31, 2002

Progress Report No. 11, June 1, 2003 to August 31, 2003

Progress Report No. 12, Project Completion Report, June 1, 2003 to December 31, 2003

Fact-finding Mission Report

Report of Fact-Finding and Identification Mission, July 24 to August 3, 2000. FTP, International Ltd. August 6, 2000.

Financial Statements


Report of Independent Auditors for period up to December 31, 1999



Report of Independent Auditors for period 2003 to March 10, 2004

ITTO Manual for Project Monitoring, Review and Evaluation, May 1999, 2nd Edition, International Tropical Timber Organization

ITTA 1994

ITTO Yokohama Action Plan 2002 – 2006, ITTO Policy Development Series No. 11, January 2002

Project Final Reports

Project Final Report, Ghana, 2003

Project Final Report, Honduras, 2003

Project Accomplishment Report, Philippines, July 1999 to May 2000

Project Documents of Ghana, Honduras, Peru and the Philippines

Fortalecimiento al Desarrollo de la Pequena y Mediana Industria en Transformacion de la Madera en Las Zonas de Siguatepeque y San Pedro Sula Como Proyecto Piloto en Honduras, Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Forestales (ESNACIFOR), Noviembre 11, 2000

Project outputs such as the Guide for Trainers and SME Manual in CD

State of the World’s Forests, 2003. FAO, Rome 2003


Annex 1 List of Workshops/Trainings Conducted Including Topics Covered

DATE TITLE OF

WORKSHOP/TRAINING VENUE DETAILS TOPICS COVERED

June 15-24, 1998 Orientation Workshop 13 ESNACIFOR, Honduras

Attended by participants from 10 institutions from six Latin-American countries (Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Honduras, Colombia and Panama).

Management and administration of training institutions in general, the importance of management training in forest industries, and project cycle management

September 15-24, 1998

Orientation Workshop 14 Kuching, Malaysia

Attended by participants from 8 institutions from 7 English speaking countries (Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Fiji, Ghana, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand) .

Same topics covered as in the June orientation workshop

January 18-29, 1999 Development of SMEs in Forest Industries in Latin America

UNALM, Lima, Peru

Attended by one institute per country (Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Honduras, Colombia and Panama) that attended the earlier workshop

Organization and management of SMEs, markets and designs, planning and control of inventories and production, total quality and planning of capacity building

February 1-5, 1999 Trainers Training Course for Peruvian Staff

UNALM, Lima, Peru Attended by local Apprenticeship in the process of

13 Selected two countries (Ghana and Honduras).

14 Selected Philippines and Peru as participating countries.


stakeholders teaching, methods of teaching, audiovisual aids, illustrations, teaching of work, planning of capacity building and individual exercises in teaching

April 5-16, 1999 Development of SMEs in the Wood Industries Sector in Asia

TREES, Los Banos, Philippines

Attended by participants from 6 countries (Philippines, Fiji, Ghana, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand)

Organization and management of SMEs, markets and designs, planning and control of inventories and production, financial management and economics of production, total quality and planning of capacity building

April 17-22, 1999 Workshop on Planning, Implementation and Evaluation of Training for Local Instructors


Participated in by 16 local instructors

May 17-22, 1999 Workshop on Planning and Economic and Technical Control of Production

UNALM, Lima, Peru

Participated in by 19 potential instructors; Workshop was preceded by a 1-week study of two (2) carpentry shops in the industrial park of Villa el Salvador de Surco in Lima.

Analysis of production of two carpentry shops in Lima, institutional analysis, control of inventory, organization and planning of production, production for orders and stock in the store, calculation of cost of production and prices of products, accounting and control of costs, financing of sales and possibilities for credit

May 28-29, 1999

Pilot Course on Planning and Management of Small Scale Wood Working Industry organized by UNALM for Villa El Salvador

VES, Lima, Peru

Two course sessions held at night with 23 participants for the first session and 21 during the 2nd session

Planning and control of production and financial management of SMEs

October 25-29, 1999

National Workshop for Trainers on Development of Small and Medium Enterprises in the Wood Industry Sector


Participated in by 11 potential local instructors

Apprenticeship in the Process of Teaching; Methods of Teaching; Audiovisual Aids; Illustrations; Teaching of Work; Planning of


Capacity Building; Individual Exercises in Teaching

November 2-5, 1999 Pilot Course for Community Representatives and trainees


11 participants from 10 communities attended

Course Overview and Expectation Setting; Clustering; Appraising the Capability of a Village/Community to Develop an Enterprise; Assessment of a Person’s Entrepreneurial Ability; Introduction to Business Plan/Business Idea; Forest Products Utilization Technologies/How to Access Technology; Financing Institutions and how to Access their Funds; Markets and Marketing; Identification of Business Projects; Case Studies of Two Community-based Enterprises

October 2-20, 2000 Capacity Building for Small Scale Furniture Manufacturers in Ghana

WITC, Kumasi, Ghana

Institutional and Financial Support to the SME Sector in Ghana; Clustering of Enterprises; SWOT Analysis of the Wood SME Sector; Other ITTO Projects in the Woodworking Sector; Problems of the Organization of the SME Sector; Strategies for the Development of SMEs; Mills visits to SME woodworking shops in Kumasi and the Kumasi Wood Village; Analysis of the woodworking shops by Tutors of WITC; Availability of funds for training and development of the SME sector; Cooperation between training institutes and industry; Objectives and work methods of PCM Concept; Sustainability of the Project; Project Cycle Management;


Planning and preparation of the Ghana National Project

November 13-24, 2000

Workshop on the Development of the SME Sector in the Wood Industry in Honduras

ESNACIFOR, Siguatepeque, Honduras

Organization of Clusters for SMEs in the Wood Industry Sector; Strategies for Development of the SMEs in the Wood Industry Sector; Design, Quality and Uniformity of Products in the Carpentry Sector; Economics of Production; Introduction to Total Quality; Project Cycle in Planning and Management; Planning of the National Projects with respect to ITTO PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I)

May 17-18, 2001 Workshop on Capacity building of the WITC Tutors and Resource Persons

WITC, Kumasi, Ghana

Involved local trainers and resource persons on SME development in the woodworking sector

Revision of the key concepts of project cycle and project management; Overview and introduction to the Ghana National Project; Concepts of project monitoring: Efficiency and Effectiveness; Introduction to Clustering; Means, methods and possibilities for planning, formulation and establishment of the enterprise clusters; Need and type of training in the development and establishment of the enterprise clusters; Curriculum Development; Preparation of a Training Curriculum for the Ghana National Project

September 22- October 3, 2003

Workshop on SME Development ESNACIFOR, Siguatepeque, Honduras

Monitoring progress of project activities in Siguatepeque and Pedro Sula

Planning future cooperation with selected entrepreneurs


October 13-17, 2003 Training for SMEs in the Wood Sector in Siguatepeque

ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR, Siguatepeque, Honduras

Provided initial training on administration

Accounting/bookkeeping; Cost Estimates and Sales Prices; Markets; and Forms of Organizations

November 3-8, 2003 Training for SMEs in the Wood Sector in Siguatepeque


Covered trainings on designs

Modular Designs; Measurements and Standards; Types of Assembly; Structural Designs; Artisans


Workshop on Project Monitoring and Evaluation

WITC, Kumasi, Ghana

Monitoring the progress of the project activities in Kumasi; Interviewing entrepreneurs involved in project activities; Planning future cooperation with the entrepreneurs


Training for SMEs in the Wood Sector in Siguatepeque


Covered trainings on finishing

Finishing technologies for polyesters, resins and types and techniques of finishing

September 29, 2003 Training for SMEs in the Wood Sector in San Pedro Sula


Wood drying

December 4-5, 2003

Workshop on Project Evaluation of Capacity Building of Human Resources in Planning and Management of Forest Industries Development for SMEs in Siguatepeque


December 8-9, 2003

Workshop on Project Evaluation of Capacity Building of Human Resources in Planning and Management of Forest Industries Development for SMEs in San Pedro Sula

ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR, San Pedro Sula, Honduras


Annex 2 Detailed Schedule of Project Visits

DAY DATE TRAVEL

DETAIL/DESTINATION MODE OF

TRANSPORTATION ACTIV ITY

Sunday 13 February Leave for Tokyo Plane

Travel to Yokohama and to temporary residence

Train/taxi

Monday- Tuesday

14 - 15 February Yokohama Taxi

1. Met with Dr. Ok Ma

a. Detailed work plan and schedule of activities;

b. Logistic requirements;

2. Filed visa application for Ghana

Wednesday 16 February Left for Tokyo & Manila Taxi/Bus/Plane 1. Collected data and final meetings; 2. Collected visa from Ghana consulate 3. Left for Tokyo and Manila

Thursday 17 February Left for Helsinki and to temporary residence

Plane/Taxi

Friday 18 February FTP International Ltd. Met with Mr. Peltonen, Ms. Vesterinen and Hari Leppaenen; discuss project implementation and financial matters

Sat-Sunday 19-20 February Helsinki Consolidated data, reviewed questionnaires for Ghana

Monday

21 February Ministry of Foreign Affairs Taxi

Discussed Finland’s project priorities in South and Central America with Amb. Hannele Tikanvaara, Ms. Tellervo Ala-Lehtimake and Ms. Nora Honkaniemi


Tuesday 22 February Left for Accra, Ghana Taxi/Plane Stayed in Accra for the night

Wednesday 23 February Left for Kumasi Official vehicle Met with Mr. Koomson, George Zowonu (Project Coordinator) and other officials of the WITC

Thursday 24 February WITC, Kumasi Official vehicle Met with WITC Instructors and furniture manufacturers

Friday 25 February WITC, Kumasi Official vehicle Met with FAWAG (furniture manufacturers) members

Saturday 26 February WITC, Kumasi Official vehicle

Prepared summaries of meetings, field notes and impressions on project accomplishments and impact. Met with Dr. Rudith King, Monitoring Consultant.

Sunday 27 February Left for Accra Official vehicle Met with Mr. Alex Offei. Prepare summaries of meetings, field notes and impressions on project accomplishments and impact.

Monday-Tuesday

28 February – 2 March Left for Manila via Amsterdam Plane

Met with officials of the Forestry Commission, Accra

Wednesday - Thursday

3 March Left for Lima, Peru Plane

Friday 4 March National Agriculture University La Molina

Taxi Met with Mr. Manuel Chavesta Custodio, Mr. Miguel Melendez Cardenas and staff of the Agriculture University

Saturday 5 -6 March Lima, Peru Reviewed questionnaires, summarized meeting notes

Sunday 7 March Villa el Salvador, Lima Taxi

Met with Messrs. H. Nunez and Raul Farge, furniture manufacturers and Mr. G. Cruz, Director of CITE Madera


Monday- Tuesday

8 March Lima, Peru Taxi Met with faculty members of UNALM

Wednesday 9 March Left for Tegucigalpa, Honduras, to Siguatepeque

Taxi/Plane/Official vehicle

Proceeded to Siguatepeque

Thursday 10 March ESNACIFOR, CICAFOR Met with officials and staff of ESNACIFOR and CICAFOR

Friday 11 March Siguatepeque Official vehicle Meet with members of the Cooperative (COTRAMASIL), visit factories

Saturday-Sunday

12-13 March Siguatepeque Reviewed and cleaned data and field notes

Monday 14 March San Pedro Sula Official vehicle Met with members of ECASUL, visit factories, solar dryer

Tuesday 15 March Siguatepeque Met with Mr. Alvarez, Director of ESNACIFOR

Wednesday 16 March Tegucigalpa – left for LA Official vehicle Left for Los Angeles

Thursday-Saturday

17-19 March Los Angeles Worked on the notes and data collected during the travel

Sunday 20 March Leave for Manila Travel to Manila

Monday - Tuesday

21- 22 March to April UPLB/Manila Own Car Visit TREES, meet Dr. Razal and Dr. Ramirez, meet with instructors and trainees


Annex 3 List of Persons Visited/Interviewed

DATE/VENUE PERSONS MET/INTERVIEWED

February 14, 2005

ITTO Headquarters Yokohama, Japan

Dr. Hwan Ok Ma International Tropical Timber Organization

Yokohama, Japan

February 18, 2005

HCG Headquarters Helsinki, Finland

Jorma Peltonen Project Director Former Project Director PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (1) HCG Environment Oy PO Box 1300 (Kaisanimenkatu 6A) FIN-00101 Helsinki, Finland Tel: +358 9 191 44572 www.hcg.helsinki.fi/hcg [email protected]

Tuija Vesterinen Database Manager Former Administrative Coordinator, PD 13/95 Rev.3 (I)) HCG Environment Oy P O Box 1300 (Kaisanimenkatu 6A) FIN-00101 Helsinki, Finland Tel: +358 9 191 44571 www.hcg.helsinki.fi/hcg [email protected]

Kari Leppaenen Senior Advisor HCG Environment Oy PO Box 1300 (Kaisanimenkatu 6A) FIN-00101 Helsinki, Finland Tel: +358 9 191 44566 www.hcg.helsinki.fi/hcg [email protected]

February 21, 2005

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Helsinki, Finland

Ms. Hannele Tikanvaara Ambassador Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Urugyay and Chile PO Box 176, Laivastokatu 22 Fin-00161 Helsinki, Finland Tel: +358 9 160 55507 Mobile: +358 40 721 2937


[email protected]

Ms. Tellervo Ala-Lehtimaki Programme Officer Unit for Latin America and the Caribbean Ministry of Foreign Affairs PO Box 176, Katajanokanlaituri 3 Fin-00161 Helsinki, Finland Tel: +358 9 160 56403 [email protected]

Ms. Nora Honkaniemi Assistant to 1st Secretary Anu Vuori-kiikeri Ministry of Foreign Affairs PO Box 176, Katajanokanlaituri 3 Fin-00161 Helsinki, Finland

February 23, 2005

WITC Kumasi, Ghana

George Zowonu Public Relations Officer Wood Industry Training Center Akyawkrom Junction, Kumasi-Ghana PO Box KS 6424 Tel: 233 51-21668/21667 Fax: 233 027 871004 Mobile: 233 0244 821211 [email protected]

Mr. A. K. Koomson Training Manager Wood Industry Training Center Akyawkrom Junction, Kumasi-Ghana PO Box KS 6424 Tel: 233 51-21668/21667 Fax: 233 027 871004 Mobile: 233 0244 748929 [email protected]

February 24, 2005

WITC Kumasi, Ghana

Augustine K. Koomsoon Training Manager and Head Training and Consultancy Department Wood Industry Training Center Akyawkrom Junction, Kumasi-Ghana P.O. Box 6424 Tel: 233 51 21668/21667 Fax: 233 027 871004 Mobile: 233 0244 748929 [email protected]


Joseph Oduro Instructor, Furniture Construction WITC PO Box 6424 Kumasi, Ghana [email protected]

Emmanuel Gotah Instructor, Wood drying WITC PO Box 6424 Kumasi, Ghana [email protected]

Sampson Mensah Instructor, Molding and Sawmilling WITC PO Box 6424 Kumasi, Ghana

Samuel K. Aggrey Assistant Finance Manager WITC PO Box 6424 Kumasi, Ghana

Emmanuel Osei-Gorning Principal Sawdoctoring Assistant WITC PO Box 6424 Kumasi, Ghana

Teofilus Kpegah Owner, Interwood Services Kumasi, Ghana

Samuel Kwame Gameli Assistant Manager, New Builders Carpentry Shop Kumasi, Ghana

Emmanuel Sekyere Owner, Sekyere Furniture Factory Kumasi, Ghana

Eric Asente Owner Kumasi, Ghana

George Graham (formerly) Project Coordinator Head of Timber Information Center now Human Resources Manager FC


Forestry Commission Accra, Ghana

February 25, 2005

Kumasi, Ghana

Samuel Yaw Logah Director/Manager Paul Logah and Sons Woodworks PO Box 434 Kumasi, Ghana Tel: 020 812 4943

Thomas Akum-Yong Managing Director (and Chair, FAWAG) Taysteps Limited Asokwa, Kumasi, Ghana

Christopher Dzadzawa Regional Officer of FAWAG and Sec. of the ClusterFAWAG PO Box 5381, Kumasi, Ghana Tel: 051 28749

Reynolds Debrah Managing Director Radebs Enterprises Limited PO Box Ej218 Ejisu, Kumasi, Ghana Tel: 020 5111069/024 407224

February 26, 2005

Kumasi, Ghana

Rudith S. King Development Planner and Gender Analyst (Monitoring and Evaluation Consultant of the Project) Office of Housing and Planning Research Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology No. 5 Asuogya Road, KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana Tel: +233 51 62227 Mobile: +233 244 463333 Email: [email protected]

February 27, 2005

Kumasi, Ghana

Alex Offei Director, WITC PO Box 6424 Akyawkrom-Ejisu, Kumasi, Ghana Tel: +233 51 29540/21668/21667 Fax: +233 51 29541 [email protected]

February 28, 2005 Mr. Dapaah


Accra, Ghana Executive Director Forestry Commission Accra, Ghana

March 4, 2005

UNALM, Peru

Manuel Chavez Custodio Principal Professor Facultad de Ciencias Forestales Departamento Industrias Forestales Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina Lima, Peru

Miguel Melendez Principal Professor Facultad de Ciencias Forestales Departamento Industrias Forestales Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina Lima, Peru

March 7, 2005

Villa El Salvador, Lima Peru

Hector Raul Nunez Vega Administrative Manager Moblados Nacionales S. R. Ltda. Calle los Artesanos Mz. M-1 Lotes 21-22 Villa El Salvador, Lima, Peru

Raul Farge Owner, Farge Peru Muebles S. A. Jr. Solidaridad Mz. J. Lote 28 Parc. 2 PICS Lima 42 – Peru [email protected]

Gustavo Erwin Juarez Cruz Supervisor General CITE Madera Solidaridad cuadra 3 Parcela II Mz. F. Lote 11 A Parque Industrial, Villa El Salvador Lima, Peru [email protected]

March 08, 2005

UNALM, Lima

Milo Bozovich Granados, M Sc. Chief, University Students Welfare and Professor Principal Dept. of Industrial Forestry Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina PO Box 456 La Molina, Lima Peru Tel: +51 1 349 5647/349 5669 Anexo 185 [email protected]


Leonidas Miguel Castro, Mg. Sc. Professor Principal Dept. Industrial Forestry Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina PO Box 456 La Molina, Lima Peru Tel: +51 1 349 5647/349 5669 Anexo 231-227 [email protected]

Florencio Trujillo Cuellar Forest Engineer, MgSc Dept. Industrial Forestry Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina PO Box 456 La Molina, Lima Peru Tel: +51 1 349 5647/349 5669 Anexo 230-227 [email protected]

March 10, 2005

Siguatepeque, Honduras

Ms. Dora Valdivieso Secretary ESNACIFOR Siguatepeque, Honduras

Heidy Emilia Vides Betancourth Training Coordinator CICAFOR ESNACIFOR Apdo. Postal No. 100 Siguatepeque, Comayagua, Honduras

Pablo Dubon Sub-Director ESNACIFOR Apdo. Postal No. 100 Siguatepeque, Comayagua, Honduras

March 11, 2005


Heber Alvarez CICAFOR ESNACIFOR Apdo. Postal No. 100 Siguatepeque, Comayagua, Honduras

Ing. Tomas Sanchez Coordinator CICAFOR ESNACIFOR Apdo. Postal No. 100 Siguatepeque, Comayagua, Honduras

Manuel de Jesus Argueta


Owner, Ebanisteria y Carpenteria Argueta Bo. El Carmen cuadra y media de gasolinera Fernandez, carretera al Batallon Siguatepeque, Honduras Tel: (504) 773 3140

Julio Mendoza Owner, Ebanisteria Mendoza Bo. Saragoza Frente el Campo de Foot Ball Siguatepeque, Honduras Tel: (504) 773 1915

Isaac Sanchez Owner, Taller de Carpenteria Sanchez Bo. Saragoza Siguatepeque, Honduras Tel: (504) 773 5432

Bilmer Lara Owner, Taller de Ebanisteria Ebenezer 12 Ave. 2 Calle Bo. El Carmen ½ cuadra abjo de Farmacia Nahuali Siguatepeque, Honduras Tel: 773 3766

Evan Sanchez Owner of shop (No name yet) Bo. Saragoza Siguatepeque, Honduras

March 14, 2004

San Pedro, Sula

Javier Enrique Medina Co owner Industrias Medina, S. de R. L. Member ECASUL San Pedro Sula Honduras Tel: 554-2263; 554-1141/994-7931

Noman Pacheco Owner Industrias Neptuno Member ECASUL San Pedro Sula Honduras Tel: 554-2472

Antonio Fajardo Owner Carpenteria Fajardo Member ECASUL


San Pedro Sula Honduras Tel: 554-4847

March 15, 2005


Manuel Alvarez Director CICAFOR- ESNACIFOR Siguatepeque, Honduras

March 22, 2005

UPLB, Los Banos Laguna, Philippines

Ramon Razal Dean College of Forestry and Natural Resources (CFNR) University of the Philippines Los Banos Project Coordinator

Roberto Cereno Chief, Botanical Gardens UPLB CFNR Trainor

Domingo Ramirez Director TREES, UPLB CFNR Trainor

March 30, 2005

UPLB, Los Banos Laguna, Philippines

Margaret Calderon Associate Professor UPLB CFNR Trainor

Francisco Lapitan Senior Science Research Specialist Forest Products Research and Development InstituteTrainor

April 5, 2005

DENR, Quezon City

Isabelita Austria Planning Officer Forest Management Bureau, DENR Diliman, Quezon City


Annex 4a MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

FINLAND

EX-POST EVALUATION OF ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV. 3(1) Capacity Building in Training in Planning and Management of Forest Industries in

ITTO Producer Member Countries [Phase II]

ITTO Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3(1) was approved with the overall project development objective

“to contribute to the improvement of the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in four selected ITTO producer member countries”. Specifically the project hoped to a) to develop the curricula of the selected training institutes for on-going training on planning and management of appropriate forest industries, b) to improve the capacity of resource persons in the planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses, and c) to produce training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on planning and management of appropriate forest industries.

FTP International Ltd. Of Finland was the Executing Agency of the project, which was implemented by four (4) agencies namely: the Universidad Nacional Agraria la Molina, in Lima, Peru; the Training Center for Tropical Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability (TREES,) in Los Banos, Philippines; the Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Forestales (ESNACIFOR) in Tegucigalpa, Honduras; and the Wood Industries Training Center (WITC) in Accra, Ghana. The project was implemented in two phases with the first phase done in Peru and the Philippines, and the second phase in Ghana and Honduras.

The questions below were developed to gather data from various stakeholders and participants of the project to monitor and assess the impact of the project vis-a-vis its various objectives and purposes. The Terms of Reference of the Consultant and ITTO’s Project Evaluation Guides (May 1999) guided the following questions.

NAME OF RESPONDENT: ____________________________________________________________________

POSITION: _________________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: ________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________

1. In your perspective, were the objectives, (to contribute to the improvement of economic,

social and ecological impacts of forest industries in the four selected ITTO producer member countries) of the project achieved? _____YES _____ NO; if not why not? ___________________________________________________________________________

2. Were the funds efficiently and effectively utilized?

a. Effectively used _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? ______________________ b. Efficiently utilized _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not?

____________________________________________________________________

3. What convinced MFA to extend the implementation of the project for six months in 2003?

4. Would MFA consider funding follow-up or similar projects on training in planning and management of forest industries? _____ YES _____NO; if not why not?


Annex 4b FTP INTERNATIONAL INC.

FINLAND

EX-POST EVALUATION OF ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV. 3(1)

Capacity Building in Training in Planning and Management of Forest Industries in ITTO Producer Member Countries [Phase II]

1. Was the ITTO project considered a success from the perspective of FTP International Ltd. in terms of?

Achieving development/specific objectives

Objective Ghana Honduras

Remarks Yes No Yes No

1. Development objective –

Contribute to the improvement of economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in participating countries

2 Specific objectives

Develop curricula of training institutes

Improve capacity of resource persons

Produce training materials needed to implement training courses

Objective Peru Philippines Remarks

Yes No Yes No

1. Development objective –

Contribute to the improvement of economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in participating countries

2 Specific objectives

Develop curricula of training institutes


Improve capacity of resource persons

Produce training materials needed to implement training courses

o Factors that contributed to the attainment of the objectives

Objectives Ghana Honduras Remarks

1. Development objective

2. Specific objectives

a. Develop curricula of training institutes

b. Improve capacity of resource persons

c. Produce training materials needed to implement training

courses

Objectives Peru Philippines Remarks






courses

o Factors/shortcomings that contributed to the non-attainment of the objectives

Objectives Ghana Honduras Remarks


1.

2.

3.


4.



1.

2.

3.

4.


1.

2

3.

4.


courses

1.

2.

3.

4.

Objectives Peru Philippines Remarks


1.

2.

3.



1.

2.

3.


1.

2

3.


courses

1.

2.

3.

2. Was the project considered a success from the perspective or FTP International with respect to achieving the objectives of the National Projects of implementing countries?

Country/Objectives Yes No Remarks/Reasons

1. GHANA


General Objective - increase productivity, income and employment levels of small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana.

Specific Objectives –

1. Improve managerial and technical skills of the personnel of SMEs in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana;

2. Enhance their operations through cluster formation.

2. HONDURAS

General Objective - strengthen the organization and entrepreneurial skills of the wood industry sector of Siguatepeque and San Pedro Sula

Specific Objectives – Ten enterprises of the wood industry are organized and consolidated and function efficiently

3. PERU

General Objective -

Specific Objective –

4. PHILIPPINES

General Objective -


3. What were the factors that contributed to the attainment/non-attainment of the objectives of the National Projects?

Country/Objectives Attainment Non-attainment

1. GHANA

General Objective - increase productivity, income and employment levels of small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana.

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

Specific Objectives –

1. Improve managerial and technical skills of the personnel of SMEs in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana;

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

2. Enhance their operations through cluster formation.

1. 1.

2. 2.


3. 3.

2. HONDURAS

General Objective - strengthen the organization and entrepreneurial skills of the wood industry sector of Siguatepeque and San Pedro Sula

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

Specific Objectives – Ten enterprises of the wood industry are organized and consolidated and function efficiently

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

3. PERU

General Objective -

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.


1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

4. PHILIPPINES

General Objective -

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.


1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

4. What development lessons were learned from this project?

o ITTO Project planning

a. Project design and problem analysis during the formulation phase of the project

Country/Stakeholders Involvement None

1. GHANA

a.

b.

2. HONDURAS

a.

b.


3. PERU

a.

b.

4. PHILIPPINES

a.

b.

b. Project design and problem validation with implementing agencies

Country/Item Validated Not validated

1. GHANA

Project design

Identified problems (Please specify)

2. HONDURAS

Project design


3. PERU

Project design


4. PHILIPPINES

Project design


o Project implementation

1. Was the ITTO project design followed within the context of the National Project?

Country Yes No

1. Ghana

2. Honduras

3. Peru

4. Philippines

2. What were the deviations if any?

Country/Deviations Causes of deviations Corrective measures Were consultations made


undertaken Yes No

1. Ghana

2. Honduras

3. Peru

4. Philippines

Financial Planning

Country Who were involved in financial

planning Involvement

1. Ghana

2. Honduras

3. Peru

4. Philippines

Financial implementation

Changes in financial aspects of project

Where changes occurred Causes of changes Effect of changes on project

1. Ghana

2. Honduras

3. Peru

4. Philippines

5. What operational lessons were learned from this project?

Project organization and management – Please provide organizational chart

Challenges in organizing and managing project by country

Country Challenges Solutions adopted

1. Ghana

2. Honduras

3. Peru

4. Philippines

Did the changes in Project Manager at the Executing Agency affect the implementation of the project? ___ Yes _____ No; if yes in what way? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Project documentation

Country Remarks/Comments


1. GHANA

a. According to schedule Yes No

b. Content according to agreement (format) Yes No

c. Strategy pursued by EA to make implementing agency conform with reporting standards

d. Was strategy effective Yes No

2. HONDURAS





3. PERU





4. PHILIPPINES





Monitoring and evaluation


1. GHANA

a. Monitoring system in place Yes No

b. Was system agreed upon among stakeholders Yes No

c. Was project monitored according to system Yes No

d. Strategy of EA to make implementing agency conform to monitoring system

e. Was strategy effective Yes No

2, HONDURAS







3. PERU






4. PHILIPPINES






Communication among project participants


1. GHANA

a. Was communication smooth & regular Yes No

b. If not, causes of failure in communication

c. Strategy of EA to improve communication

d. Was the strategy effective Yes No

2. HONDURAS





3. PERU






4. PHILIPPINES





6. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in the implementing countries?

Countries Most significant achievements towards sustainable development

Ghana

Honduras

Peru

Philippines

7. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in the implementing countries?

Countries Least satisfactory outcomes towards sustainable development

Ghana

Honduras

Peru

Philippines

8. What was the strategy adopted by FTP International Ltd. in delivering training and in assisting national institutions design efficient and realistic training programs? ____________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

9. Was this strategy effective? _____ YES _____NO; if not why not? ____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

Was this strategy efficient? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? ______________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

10. What was the strategy adopted by FTP International Ltd to get the industries to support the project? ____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

11. Was the strategy efficient? ____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? _______________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

12. Was the strategy effective? _____YES _____ NO; if not why not? ______________________________


____________________________________________________________________________________

13. As Executing Agency, what changes would you institute in undertaking future projects like this? ____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

14. What actions did the Executing Agency take to ensure sustainability of the ITTO project? ____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

15. What actions did the Executing Agency take to ensure sustainability of individual national projects?

Countries How to make national projects sustainable

Ghana

Honduras

Peru

Philippines

16. What were the most challenging aspects in managing the funds of the project in:

a. Ghana ________________________________________________________________________

b. Honduras ______________________________________________________________________

c. Peru __________________________________________________________________________

d. Philippines ____________________________________________________________________

17. What was the strategy adopted by FTP International Ltd. to efficiently use project funds? ____________________________________________________________________________________

Was it effective? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? ______________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

18. Were the funds utilized as planned? _____YES _____ NO; if not why not? _______________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

19. What changes would you recommend in the management of funds at your level and at the implementing agency level to improve the flow and utilization of funds? ____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

20. How can sufficiency of funds in projects like this be guaranteed? _______________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________ 21. Financial contributions

Contributions (USD) Ghana Honduras Peru Philippines

Planned

Actual


Annex 5a FURNITURE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS

GHANA

EX-POST EVALUATION OF ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV.3 (1) Capacity Building in Training in Planning and Management of Forest Industries

in ITTO Producer Member Countries [Phase II]



The general objective of the Ghana National Project was to increase productivity, income and employment levels of small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana. The project purpose was to improve managerial and technical skills of the personnel of SMEs in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana, and enhance their operations through cluster formation.

FTP International Ltd. of Finland was the Executing Agency of the project, which was implemented by four (4) agencies namely: the Universidad Nacional Agraria la Molina, in Lima, Peru; the Training Center for Tropical Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability (TREES,) in Los Banos, Philippines; the Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Forestales (ESNACIFOR) in Tegucigalpa, Honduras; and the Wood Industries Training Center (WITC) in Accra, Ghana. The project was implemented in two phases with the first phase done in Peru and the Philippines, and the second phase in Ghana and Honduras.



POSITION: _________________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: ________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________

1. What were the expectations of the industry from the project? __________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

2. Were these expectations realized? _____ YES _____ NO


3. How was the information about the project disseminated to the industry? ________________

___________________________________________________________________________

4. Was the information strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO

5. Did you fully understand the project and its objectives? _____ YES _____ NO

6. Why or why not? ___________________________________________________________

7. Did you understand the importance of cluster formation? ____ YES _____ NO

8. Did you express your concern about cluster formation to WITC? _____ YES _____ NO

9. What was the action of WITC? _________________________________________________

10. What was the strategy of WITC in getting support from the industry? ___________________

___________________________________________________________________________

11. Was it effective? _____ YES _____ NO

12. Why or why not? _____________________________________________________________

13. What was the strategy of WITC in establishing communication between industry and the Center? ____________________________________________________________________


15. Why or why not? _____________________________________________________________

16. What were the effects of the project on the industry associations? ______________________

___________________________________________________________________________

17. What were the effects of the project on?

Productivity of the firms ______________________________________________

Income of firms _____________________________________________________

Employment of firms _________________________________________________

Other effects on the firms _____________________________________________

Other effects on the industry as a whole __________________________________

18. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in your country? ___________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

19. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in your country? ___________________________________

20. Do you think the government and the industry should continue to hold the Mini-Gifex? _____ YES _____ NO

21. Why or why not? ____________________________________________________________

22. What is the importance of the mini-Gifex to the individual firms? ______________________

___________________________________________________________________________


23. To the industry as a whole? ____________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

24. How could the capability-building project of WITC be sustained? ______________________

___________________________________________________________________________

25. In what way can the industry associations make the project sustainable? _________________

___________________________________________________________________________

26. Are the associations willing to pay for the training at WITC? _____ YES _____ NO

27. Please provide a list of the following: (Please use additional sheets if necessary)

Curriculum you participated in developing during project

Curriculum you participated in developing after project

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

Training courses you participated in developing during the project

Training courses you participated in developing after the project

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

Training courses participated in during the project Training courses you participated in after the

project

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.


Annex 5b FIRMS/ MANAGERS OF MEMBERS OF CLUSTERS

GHANA

EX-POST EVALUATION OF ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV. 3(1) Capacity Building in Training in Planning and Management of Forest Industries







NAME OF RESPONDENT: __________________________________________

POSITION: ________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: _______________________________________________

1. Would you consider the Ghana National Project a success in terms of achieving the general development objective of increasing productivity, income and employment levels of the small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana?

_____ YES _____ NO


2. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the general objective of the project? __________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the general objectives? _____________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Would you consider the Ghana National Project a success in terms achieving the purpose of improving managerial and technical skills of the personnel in the SMEs in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana and enhancing their operations through cluster formation?

_____ YES _____ NO

5. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the project purpose? _______________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

6. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the project purpose? _______________________________

_______________________________________________________________

7. What were your expectations from the training program? ________________

_______________________________________________________________

8. Were these expectations realized? _____ YES _____ NO

9. If yes how? ____________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

10. If no, why not? _________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

11. How was the information about the project disseminated to the industry? _______________________________________________________________

12. Was it effective? _____YES _____NO

13. Did you fully understand the project and its objectives? _____ YES _____ NO

14. What was the strategy of WITC in getting support from the industry? ______

_______________________________________________________________


16. If yes why? ____________________________________________________


17. If no why not? __________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

18. What was the strategy of WITC in establishing communication between the industry and the Center? ___________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________


20. If yes why? ____________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

21. If no why not? __________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

22. How were the topics in which the instructors and the trainees from industry were trained selected? ____________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

23. Did the trainees (both instructors and from industry) participate in the selection of the topics? _____ YES _____ NO

24. If yes how? ____________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

25. If no why not? __________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

26. Were the topics?

a. Relevant? _____ YES _____ NO

b. Appropriate? _____ YES _____ NO

c. Realistic? _____ YES _____ NO


28. If yes why? ____________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

29. If no why not? __________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

30. Why did you participate in cluster formation? _________________________

______________________________________________________________

31. How did the project affect your firm?


Improved productivity? _____ YES _____ NO By how much? _________________________

Increased income? _____ YES _____ NO By how much? _________________________

Increased employment? _____ YES _____ NO By how many? ____________________________________________

Other impact of the project in your firm? __________________________

Other impacts of the project on the industry as a whole? ______________

___________________________________________________________

In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in your country? _______________________________________________________________

33. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in your country? _______________________________________________________________

34. Did you participate in the Mini-Gifex conducted in Kumasi?

_____ YES _____ NO

35. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

36. Was there other mini-Gifex held after that? _____ YES _____ NO

37. Did you participate? _____ YES _____ NO

38. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

39. What other activities have the cluster conducted after the end of the project? _______________________________________________________________

40. Did you participate in these activities? _____ YES _____ NO

41. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

42. Were there other trainings conducted by the WITC after the end of the project? _____ YES _____ NO

43. Did you participate? _____ YES _____ NO

44. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

45. Are you willing to send your workers to further training at the WITC?

_____ YES _____ NO


46. If yes, under what conditions, if any? _______________________________

47. If no, why not? __________________________________________________

48. Are you willing to pay for your or your employees’ further training at the WITC? _____ YES _____ NO

49. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

50. How could the training program initiated under the project be made sustainable? ____________________________________________________

51. In what way can industry owners help make the training program sustainable? _______________________________________________________________

52. Please provide a list of the following:

Curriculum you participated in developing during the project

Curriculum you participated in developing after the project

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.



1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

Training courses participated in during the project

Training courses you participated in after the project

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.


Annex 5c FIRMS THAT ARE NON-CLUSTER MEMBERS

GHANA









POSITION: ________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: _______________________________________________

1. Were you aware of the ITTO project at WITC designed to train small-scale furniture/wood-based enterprises? _____ YES _____ NO

2. If yes, from where did you get information about the project? _____________

3. Would you have wanted to be part of the project? _____ YES _____ NO

4. Why or why not? ________________________________________________


5. Do you think the project was good for the enterprises that participated?

_____ YES _____ NO

6. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

7. Do you think the project was good for the furniture/wood-based industry as a whole? _____ YES _____ NO

8. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

9. If asked to participate in similar projects, would you participate?

_____ YES _____ NO

10. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

11. Should WITC continue to implement similar projects for the industry?

_____ YES _____ NO

12. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

13. Did you participate in the mini-Gifex? _____ YES _____ NO

14. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

15. Should the government and industry continue to hold such mini-Gifex?

_____ YES _____ NO

16. Why or why not? ________________________________________________

17. What is the effect of the mini-Gifex or similar trade fairs to the firms that participated? _____________________________________________ ______

18. What is the effect of the mini-Gifex or similar trade fairs to the wood industry as a whole? _____________________________________________________

19. What training would you have wanted to participate in?

1. _____________________________________________________________

2. _____________________________________________________________

20. Would you be willing to pay for the training? _____YES _____NO

21. Why or why not? ________________________________________________


Annex 5d RESOURCE PERSONS

GHANA









POSITION: ________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: _______________________________________________

1. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the general development objective of the Ghana National Project namely to increase productivity, income and employment levels of small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana? _____ YES _____ NO



_______________________________________________________________


_______________________________________________________________

4. Would you consider the project a success in terms achieving the purpose of the Ghana National Project of improving managerial and technical skills of personnel in the SMEs in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana and enhancing their operations through cluster formation?

_____ YES _____ NO

5. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the project purpose? _______________________________________________________


_______________________________________________________________

7. Please list the curricula designed for the capacity building of WITC and industry firm owners and workers developed under your guidance. _________

_______________________________________________________________

8. Did the WITC instructors/personnel and those from the industry participate in the development of the curricula? _____ YES _____ NO

9. What was their participation? _______________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

10. Were the curricula validated with those who assisted in their development?

_____ YES _____ NO

11. If yes, how? ____________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

12. If no, why not? _________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

13. Are the curricula developed being used/implemented by WITC? _____ YES _____ NO

14. If yes, please list the curricula developed.


List of curricula developed List of curricula being implemented

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

15. If no, why not? __________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

16. Did the WITC instructors/personnel and those from the industry participate in the development of the training courses? _____ YES _____ NO

17. If yes, what was their participation? __________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

18. If no, why not? __________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

19. Are the training courses being used by WITC in its training program?

_____ YES _____ NO

If yes, please list the training programs where the training courses are being used.

List of training courses developed List of training courses being implemented

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

21. If not, why not? _________________________________________________


Annex 5e WORKERS OF FIRMS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF CLUSTERS

GHANA









POSITION: ________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: _______________________________________________

1. In your perception, was the training a success? _____ YES _____ NO

2. If yes, in what way? ___________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

3. If no, why not? _______________________________________________________________________

4. What were your expectations from the training program? ______________________________________


5. Were you able to realize these expectations? _____ YES _____ NO

6. Why or why not? _____________________________________________________________________

7. How was the information about the project disseminated to industry? ____________________________________________________________________________________

8. Did you fully understand the Ghana National Project and its objectives? _____ YES _____ NO

9. How were the topics in which the instructors and the trainees from industry were trained selected? ____________________________________________________________________________________

10. Did you participate in the selection of the topics? _____ YES _____ NO

11. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________________

12. Were the topics?

Relevant _____ YES _____ NO

Appropriate _____ YES _____ NO

Realistic _____ YES _____ NO

13. Did you participate in the design of the training courses developed by WITC?

_____ YES _____ NO

14. Are you now applying in your work the knowledge that you learned from the training? _____ YES _____ NO

15. If not, why not? ______________________________________________________________________

16. Did your knowledge improve the productivity of your firm? _____ YES _____ NO

17. Was your firm able to employ more workers after the training? _____ YES _____ NO

18. Did you participate in any training conducted by WITC after the project? _____ YES _____ NO

19. If yes, in what trainings? _______________________________________________________________

20. If not why not? _______________________________________________________________________

21. Are you willing to undertake additional training if WITC or your employer offers one and allows you to participate? _____ YES _____ NO

22. If not, why not? ______________________________________________________________________

23. How could the training be sustained? ______________________________________________________

24. In what way can WITC make the training program sustainable? ____________________________________________________________________________________

25. In what way can your firm make the training program sustainable? ____________________________________________________________________________________


27. If not, which portion did you fail to understand? ____________________________________________

28. Did you express your concerns regarding cluster formation to WITC? ______YES ______ NO

29. What specific actions did WITC take to address your concerns? ________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

30. Are you now fully convinced of the importance of cluster formation? ______YES ______ NO


31. If not, why not? ______________________________________________________________________




1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.



1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

Training courses participated in during the project Training courses you participated in after the

project

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.


Annex 5f FORESTRY COMMISSION

GHANA









POSITION: _______________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS:_______________________________________________

Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the overall development objectives of the project namely contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in Ghana? _____ YES _____ NO

If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project? ______________________________


3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? ________________________

Would you consider the project a success in terms achieving the overall specific objectives of:

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE YES NO

1. Develop curricula of selected training institutes in ITTO producer member countries for ongoing training in planning and management of appropriate forest industries

2. Improve the capacity of resource persons in participating ITTO producer member countries in planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses

3. Produce training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on the planning and management of appropriate forest industries

5. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the specific objectives of the project?

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE FAVORABLE FACTORS

Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3

6. If not, what were the shortcomings and the factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the specific objectives?

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE NEGATIVE FACTORS

Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3


7. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the general development objective of the Ghana National Project namely to increase the productivity, income and employment levels of small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana? _____ YES _____ NO



10. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the purpose of the Ghana National Project of improving managerial and technical skills of personnel in the SMEs in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana and enhancing their operations through cluster formation?

_____ YES _____ NO

11. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the project purpose? ______________________________________________________

12. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the project purpose? ______________________________


Item Development Lessons

Project planning

Project implementation

Financial planning


14. What operational lessons were learned from this project with respect to?

Item Operational Lessons

Project organization and management


Project monitoring & evaluation

Communication among participants

15. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? ____________________________________________________________


In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? ____________________________________________________________

17. What was the strategy adopted by the Forestry Commission (FC) to encourage the industries to support the project? ________________________

18. Was it effective? ____ YES ____ NO

19. Was it efficient? ____ YES ____ NO

20. What changes would you institute in undertaking future projects like this? _______________________________________________________________

21. How can this project be made sustainable? _______________________________________________________________

22. What actions did the FC take to ensure sustainability of the project? _______________________________________________________________

23. Did the government re-organization of the forestry sector (creation of the FC) affect the implementation and therefore, the outputs of the project? ____ YES _____ NO

24. If yes in what way? _______________________________________________

25. What agencies of FC is doing technology transfer to the wood industry and in particular the furniture industry of Ghana? ____________________________

26. Did the FC approve and provide support for the inclusion of similar projects in the business plan of WITC for 2004? _____ YES _____ NO

27. If not, why not? _________________________________________________

28. Did it approve and support similar projects in 2005? ____ YES _____ NO

29. If not, why not? _________________________________________________

30. Did the WITC get more instructors in 2004? _____ YES _____ NO

31. If not, why not? _________________________________________________

32. Did they get more training budget in 2004? _____ YES _____ NO

33. If not, why not? _________________________________________________

34. Did they get more training budget in 2005? _____ YES _____ NO

35. If not, why not? _________________________________________________

36. What were the most significant lessons learned from this project in coordinating national projects? _____________________________________


Annex 5g NATIONAL PROJECT COORDINATING TEAM (NPCT)

GHANA








NAME OF RESPONDENT: ___________________________________________________________

POSITION: ________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________

1. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the overall development objectives of the project namely contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in Ghana? _____ YES _____ NO


2. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project? _______________________________

3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? _________________________

4. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the overall specific objectives of:







Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3


SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE

NEGATIVE FACTORS

Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3




9. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to the non-attainment of the general objectives? __________________________

10. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the purpose of the Ghana National Project of improving managerial and technical skills of personnel in the SMEs in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana and enhancing their operations through cluster formation? _____ YES _____ NO


12. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to the non-attainment of the project purpose? ____________________________

What development lessons were learned from this project?


Project planning


Financial planning




Project organization & management


Project monitoring & evaluation


15. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? _______________________________________________________________

16. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? _______________________________________________________________



18. Did they fully understand the project and its objectives?

____ YES _____ NO


20. How can this project be made sustainable? ___________________________

21. What actions did NPCT take to ensure sustainability of the project? _______________________________________________________________

22. Did the government re-organization of the forestry sector (creation of the FC) affect the implementation and therefore the outputs of the project? ____ YES _____ NO

23. If yes in what way? ______________________________________________

24. If no, why not? __________________________________________________

25. What were the most significant lessons learned from this project in coordinating national projects? _____________________________________

_______________________________________________________________


Annex 5h TIMBER EXPORT DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

GHANA








NAME OF RESPONDENT:_____________________________________________________________________

POSITION:__________________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: _________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________





4. Would you consider the project a success in terms achieving the overall specific objectives of:






SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE

FAVORABLE FACTORS

Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3


SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE

NEGATIVE FACTORS

Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3

7. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the general objective of the Ghana National Project namely to increase productivity, income


and employment levels of small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana? _____ YES _____ NO



10. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the purpose of the Ghana National Project of improving managerial and technical skills of personnel in the SMEs in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana and enhancing their operations through cluster formation? _____ YES _____ NO





Project planning


Financial planning


14. What operational lessons were learned from this project with respect to:


Project organization and management


Monitoring and evaluation


15. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? ___________

16. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project toward sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? _______________________________________________________________

17. What was the strategy adopted by your agency to encourage the industries to support the project? ______________________________________________


18. Was it effective? ____ YES ____ NO

19. If not, why not? _________________________________________________

20. Was it efficient? ____ YES _____ NO

21. If not, why not? _________________________________________________

22. How was the information about the project disseminated to the industry? ____________________________________________________________

23. Did they fully understand the project and its objectives?

____ YES _____ NO

24. What strategy was adapted to effect efficient communication between WITC and your agency? ________________________________________________


26. How can this project be made sustainable? ____________________________

27. What actions did your agency take to ensure sustainability of the project? _______________________________________________________________

28. Did the government re-organization of the forestry sector (creation of the FC) affect the implementation and therefore the outputs of the project? ____ YES _____ NO

29. In what way? ___________________________________________________

30. What were the most significant lessons learned from this project in coordinating national projects? _________________________________


Annex 5i WITC INSTRUCTORS

GHANA








NAME OF RESPONDENT: ___________________________________________________________________

POSITION: ________________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: _______________________________________________________________________

1. What was the training you participated in under the project? _______________________________________________________________

2. What was the training you participated in after the end of the project? _______________________________________________________________

3. Have you applied what you have learned from the training?

____ YES ____ NO


If yes, in what way? ______________________________________________

If not, why not? _________________________________________________

4. How were the topics for the trainings selected? _______________________________________________________________

5. Did the trainees (both instructors and from industry) participate in the selection of the topics?_____ YES _____ NO

6. If not, why not? _________________________________________________

7. Were the topics?

Relevant _____ YES _____ NO

Appropriate _____ YES _____ NO

Realistic _____ YES _____ NO

8. Have you been or are you currently involved in the development of the following at WITC?

a. Training curricula for the furniture/wood industry? ____ YES ___ NO

b. New training courses? _____ YES _____ NO

9. Have you conducted additional training after the project?

a. Members of the clusters? _____ YES _____ NO

b. Non-cluster members of the industry? _____ YES _____ NO

10. Did the project improve your capability to plan and implement training programs for small-scale enterprises? ____ YES _____ NO

11. If not, why not? _________________________________________________

12. Did the project improve the capability of WITC to plan and implement training programs for small-scale enterprises? _____ YES _____ NO

13. How can the project be made sustainable? _____________________________

14. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? _______________________________________________________________

15. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? _______________________________________________________________





1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

4. 4.



1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

4. 4.

Training courses you participated in implementing during project

Training courses you participated in implementing after project

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

4. 4.


Annex 5j WITC OFFICIALS

GHANA









POSITION: _________________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: ________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________


2. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project? ____________________________________________________________________________


3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? _______________________________________________________________

2. Would you consider the project a success in terms achieving the overall specific objectives of:







Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3



Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3


8. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the general objective of the project? ____________________________________________________________________________________


9. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the general objectives? ___________________________________________________________________

10. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the project purpose of the Ghana National Project of improving managerial and technical skills of personnel in the SMEs in the furniture-manufacturing sector in Kumasi, Ghana and enhancing their operations through cluster formation? _____ YES _____ NO

11. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the project purpose? ____________________________________________________________________________________

12. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the project purpose? ____________________________________________________________________________


a. Project planning –

a.1. Were the various stakeholders involved in the project design and problem analysis during the formulation phase of the project?

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT HOW WERE THEY INVOLVED?

a.2. Were the design of the project and problems identified validated with the various stakeholders?

ITEM VALIDATED NOT VALIDATED

Project design


1.

2.

b. Project implementation

b.1. Was the project design followed? _____ YES ______ NO b.2. What were the deviations if any?

DEVIATIONS CAUSES OF DEVIATIONS

CORRECTIVE MEASURES CONSULTATIONS ON CHANGES

c. Financial planning

c.1. How were financial aspects of the project planned? __________________________________

c.2. What was the involvement of the implementing institution in financial planning of the project? ____________________________________________________________________________

c.3 How much was proposed contribution of the Ghana Government to the project? ____________________________________________________________________________


c.4. Was this proposed contribution met? _____ YES _____ NO

c.5. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________

d. Financial implementation

d.1. Were there changes in the financial aspects of the project? ____ YES _____ NO

d.2. Where did the changes occur? ____Executing Agency level _____Implementing institution’s level

d.3. What were the causes of the changes in financial aspects of the project? ____________________________________________________________________________

d.4. Did they affect outcomes of the project? _____ YES _____ NO

d.5. If yes, in what way? ___________________________________________________________

d.6. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________

d.7 How much was the actual contribution of Ghana Government to the project? ____________________________________________________________________________


a. Project organization and management

a.1. How was the project organized at the level of the Implementing Agency? ____________________________________________________________________________

a.2. What challenges were met in organizing and managing the project? ____________________________________________________________________________

a.3. How were these challenges met/resolved? _________________________________________

a.4. Were there changes in Project Management? ____ YES _____ NO

a.5. If yes, did it affect the implementation of the project? ____ YES _____NO

a.6. If yes in what way? ___________________________________________________________

a.7. If not, why not? ______________________________________________________________

b. Project documentation

b.1. Was project reporting according to agreed schedule? ___ YES ___ NO

b.2. What were the causes of delay or non-reporting of stakeholders/participants? ____________________________________________________________________________

b.3. Were the content of reports according to agreement? _____ YES _____NO

b.4. How did the your agency meet challenges in project documentation?_______________________________________________________________

b.5. Was the strategy effective? ____ YES ____ NO

b.6. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________

c. Monitoring and evaluation

c.1. How was the project monitored?__________________________________________________

c.2. Was there a monitoring system agreed upon among various participants? _____YES _____ NO

c.3. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________

c.4. Was there a feedback mechanism installed in the system? _____ YES _____ NO


c.5. If none, why? ________________________________________________________________

c.6. Was the monitoring of the project done according to schedule? _____ YES _____ NO

c.7. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________

c.8. How did your Agency meet challenges in monitoring and evaluation?___________________________________________________________________

c.9. Was the strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO

c.10. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________

c.11. Did the monitoring improve the implementation of the project? ______YES ______ NO

c.12. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________

d. Communication among project participants

d.1. What were the challenges in establishing smooth communication among stakeholders? ____________________________________________________________________________

d.2. How did the WITC improve communication with the Executing Agency? ____________________________________________________________________________

d.3. Was the strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO

d.4. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________

d.5. What was the strategy of WITC in establishing communication between the industry and the Center? _____________________________________________________________________

d.6. Was the strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO

d.7. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________

15. How was the information about the project disseminated to the industry? ____________________________________________________________________________________

16. Did they fully understand the project and its objectives? ____ YES _____ NO

17. Did the project improve the capability of WITC to plan and implement training programs for small and medium enterprises? ____ YES ____ NO

18. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________________

19. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? _________________________________________________

20. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Ghana? ____________________________________________________________

21. How were the topics of the trainings selected? ______________________________________________

22. Did the trainees (both instructors and those from industry) participate in the selection of the topics? _____ YES _____ NO

23. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________________

24. Were the topics of the trainings?

a. Relevant _____ YES _____ NO

b. Appropriate _____ YES _____ NO

c. Realistic _____ YES _____ NO


25. In what way did FTP International Ltd. help in the selection of the topics? ____________________________________________________________________________________

26. Were there additional trainings of WITC instructors after the project? _____ YES ______ NO

27. If none, why? ______________________________________________________________________

28. Were there additional trainings of WITC cluster members after the project? _____ YES ______ NO

29. If none, why? ________________________________________________________________________

30. Did the industry understand the importance of cluster formation? _____YES _____ NO

31. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________________

32. Did they eventually and willingly participate in cluster formation?

____ YES _____ NO

33. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________________

34. What was the strategy adopted by WITC to get support from the industry in cluster formation? ____________________________________________________________________________________

29. Were the funds of the project utilized?

Efficiently _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? ____________________________________________________________________________

Effectively _____ YES _____ NO; if not, why not? ____________________________________________________________________________

30. How can this project be made sustainable? _________________________________________________

31. Was WITC able to implement its 2004 business plans regarding PD 13/95 Project activities? _____ YES ______ NO

32. Which particular activities were implemented?

ACTIVITIES YES NO WHY

1. Curricular development for training the furniture industry sector, in particular the members of the clusters.

- Who developed the curricula?

- Who trained instructors of WITC with the industry?

2. Development of training courses?

- How many

- Which are these?

- Who developed training courses

- Who trained instructors of WITC with the industry?

3. Training of WITC instructors

- How many?


- What training was conducted

4. Training of industry/cluster members

- How many?


5. Were new training materials produced?

- How many

6. Revision of old training materials?

- How many

- What are these materials?

7. Further development activities for the cluster members other than training?

33. Are the project activities still included in the 2005 business plan of WITC? ______ YES ______ NO

34. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________________

35. Is the business plan of 2005 supported by the FC? _____ YES _____ NO

36. If not why not? _______________________________________________________________________

37. Were there requests for further training?

From cluster members? _____YES _____ NO

From non-cluster members? _____ YES _____ NO

38. Did the trained cluster members apply their gained knowledge in the performance of their tasks? _____ YES _____ NO

39. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________________

40. Did the training of cluster member firms result

In increased income? _____ YES _____ NO

Increase in employment? _____ YES _____ NO

Increase in productivity? _____ YES _____ NO

41. Are the two clusters still functioning as clusters? _____ YES _____ NO

42. If not, why not? _______________________________________________________________________

43. What new activities have they done together as clusters? ______________________________________

44. Was there a subsequent holding of a Mini-Gifex? _____ YES _____ NO

45. Did the members of the clusters participate in the Mini-Gifex

_____ YES _____ NO

46. Have you been able to generate outside funding and support for the continuance of the training activities initiated under the project?

_____ YES _____ NO

Sources of funds/support ___________________________________________________________


47. Please supply a list of the following:

Curriculum developed during project Curriculum developed after project

1. 1.

2. 2.

Training courses developed during the project Training courses developed after the project

1. 1.

2. 2.

Training courses implemented during the project Training courses implemented after the project

1. 1.

2. 2.

44. Please provide the following:

Training curricula developed Implemented

No.of trainees Yes No

1. Business management

2. Quality assurance

3. Plant layout

4. Material handling

5. Maintenance

6. Furniture design

Training implemented Number of trainees

Gov’t sector Private sector

1.

2.


Annex 6a NATIONAL PROJECT COORDINATING TEAM

HONDURAS



ITTO Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3(1) was approved with the overall project development objective “to contribute to the improvement of the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in four selected ITTO producer member countries”. Specifically the project hoped to a) to develop the curricula of the selected training institutes for on-going training on planning and management of appropriate forest industries, b) to improve the capacity of resource persons in the planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses, and c) to produce training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on planning and management of appropriate forest industries.

The general objective of the Honduras National Project was to strengthen the organization and entrepreneurial skills of the wood industry sector of Siguatepeque and San Pedro Sula. The specific objective was that ten enterprises of the wood industry are organized and consolidated and function efficiently.




POSITION: _________________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: ________________________________________________________________________

1. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the overall development objective namely contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in Honduras? _____ YES _____ NO

2. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project? _______________________________________________________________

3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? ____________________________________________________

4. Would you consider the project a success in terms achieving the overall specific objectives of?








Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3



Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3

7. Would you consider the Honduras National Project a success in terms of achieving the objective of strengthening the organization and entrepreneurial skills of the wood industry sector of Siguatepeque and San Pedro Sula?

_____ Y ES _______ NO

8. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project? _______________________________________________________________



10. Would you consider the Honduras National Project a success in terms of achieving the specific project objective of organizing and consolidating ten enterprises of the wood industry and enabling them to function efficiently? ______ YES ______ NO

11. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? __________________________________________

12. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to the non-attainment of the objective? _________________________________


a. Project planning _____________________________________________________

b. Project implementation_ _______________________________________________

c. Financial planning ____________________________________________________

d. Financial implementation _____________________________________


a. Project organization and management ________________________

b. Project documentation ____________________________________

c. Monitoring and evaluation _________________________________

d. Communication among project participants ___________________

15. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Honduras National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Honduras? ______________________

16. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Honduras? ______________________________________

17. What were the most significant lessons learned from this project in coordinating national projects? ____________________________________________________________________

18. How can this project be made sustainable? _________________________________________


Annex 6b CICAFOR INSTRUCTORS

HONDURAS



ITTO Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3(1) was approved by with the overall project development objective “to contribute to the improvement of the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in four selected ITTO producer member countries”. Specifically the project hoped to a) to develop the curricula of the selected training institutes for on-going training on planning and management of appropriate forest industries, b) to improve the capacity of resource persons in the planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses, and c) to produce training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on planning and management of appropriate forest industries.




NAME OF RESPONDENT: __________________________________________________________

POSITION: _______________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: ______________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________

1. What were the trainings you participated in under the project? ___________________________________________________________________________

2. What were the trainings you participated in after the end of the project? ___________________________________________________________________________

3. Have you applied what you have learned from the training? ____ YES ____ NO

4. If yes in what way? ___________________________________________________________

5. If not, why not? ______________________________________________________________


6. How were the topics for the trainings selected? _____________________________________

7. Did the trainees (both instructors and from industry) participate in the selection of the topics?

_____ YES _____ NO

8. If not, why not? ______________________________________________________________

9. Were the topics?

Relevant _____ YES _____ NO; if not, why not? ___________________________________

Appropriate _____ YES _____ NO; if not, why not? ________________________________

Realistic _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? ___________________________________

10. Have you been or are you currently involved in the development of the following at CICAFOR?

a. Training curricula for the furniture/wood industry? _____ YES _____ NO

b. New training courses? _____ YES _____ NO

11. Have you conducted additional training after the project?

a. Members of the cooperative/association? ____ YES ____ NO; if not why not? ____

____________________________________________________________________

b. Non-members of the cooperative/association? ___ YES ___ NO; if not why not? ___

12. Did the project improve your capability to plan and implement training programs for small-scale enterprises? ____ YES ____ NO. If not why not? ______________________________

13. Did the project improve the capability of CICAFOR to plan and implement training programs for small-scale enterprises? ___YES __ NO. If not, why not? __________________________

14. How can the project be made sustainable? _________________________________________

15. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Honduras National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Honduras? ______________________

16. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Honduras? ______________________________________




1. 1.

Training courses you participated in developing

During the project After the project

1.

Training courses you participated in conducting

During the project After the project

1.


Annex 6c CICAFOR OFFICIALS

HONDURAS









POSITION: _________________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: ________________________________________________________________________

1. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the overall development objectives of the project namely contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in Honduras? _____ YES _____ NO



3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? ________________________

4. Would you consider the project a success in terms achieving the overall specific objectives of?







Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3



Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3


7. Would you consider the Honduras National Project was a success in terms of achieving the objective of strengthening the organization and entrepreneurial skills of the wood industry sector of Siguatepeque and San Pedro Sula? _____ YES _____ NO

8. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? __________________________________________


10. Would you consider the Honduras National Project was a success in terms of achieving the specific objective of organizing and consolidating ten (10) wood industry enterprises and functioning efficiently? ________________________


Project planning

a.1. Were the various stakeholders involved in the project design and problem analysis




Project design


1.

2.


b.1. Was the project design followed? _____ YES ______ NO

b.2. What were the deviations if any?


CORRECTIVE MEASURES CONSULTATIONS ON CHANGES



c.1. How were the financial aspects of the project planned? ______

c.2. What was the involvement of the CICAFOR in financial planning of the project? _______________________________

c.3 How much was proposed as contribution of the Honduras Government to the project? ____________________________


d.1. Were there changes in the financial aspects of the project?

____ YES _____ NO

d.2. Where did the changes occur?

____Executing Agency level _____Implementing institution’s level

d.3. What were the causes of the changes in financial aspects of the project? ____________________________________________

d.4. Did they affect outcomes of the project? ____ YES _____ NO

d.5. If yes, in what way? __________________________________

d.6. If not, why not? _____________________________________

d.7 How much was the actual contribution of Honduras Government to the project? ____________________________



a.1. How was the project organized at the level of CICAFOR? ___________________________________________________

a.2. What challenges were met in organizing and managing the project? ___________________________________________

a.3. How were these challenges met/resolved? ________________

a.4. Were there changes in Project Management? ___ YES ___ NO

a.5. What were the changes? _______________________________

a.6 If yes, did it affect the implementation of the project? ____ YES _____NO

a.7. If yes in what way? __________________________________

a.8. If not, why not? _____________________________________


b.1. Was project reporting according to agreed schedule?


___ YES ___ NO; if not, why not? ______________________

b.2. What were the causes of delay or non-reporting of CICAFOR, if any, to the Executing Agency? ______________________

b.3. Were the content of reports according to agreement? ____ YES _____NO; if not why not? ________________________

b.4. How did the CICAFOR meet challenges in project documentation?______________________________________

b.5. Was the strategy effective? ____ YES ____ NO

b.6. If not why not? ______________________________________


c.1. How was the project monitored?_________________________

c.2. Was there a monitoring system agreed upon among various participants? _____YES _____ NO; if none, why? __________

c.3. Was there a feedback mechanism installed in the system?

_____ YES _____ NO; If none why? ____________________

c.4. Was the monitoring of the project done according to schedule?

_____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? ___________________

c.5. How did CICAFOR meet challenges in monitoring and evaluation?__________________________________________

c.6. Was the strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not?_______________________________________________

c.7. Did the monitoring improve the implementation of the project? ______YES ______ NO; if not why not? _________________


d.1. What were the challenges in establishing smooth communication among stakeholders? ____________________

d.2. How did CICAFOR improve communication with the Executing Agency? __________________________________

d.3. Was the strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO; if not, why not? _______________________________________________

d4. What was the strategy of CICAFOR in establishing communication between the industry and the Center ___________________________________________________

d.5. Was the strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? _______________________________________________


13. Did the project improve the capability of CICAFOR to plan and implement training programs for small and medium enterprises? ____YES ____ NO; if not why not? ____________________________________________________

14. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Honduras National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Honduras? ______________________________________________________

15. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the Honduras National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Honduras?______________________________________________________


17. Did they fully understand the project and its objectives?___ YES ___NO; if not why not? ____________________________________________________

18. What was the strategy of CICAFOR in getting support from the industry? _______________________________________________________________

19. Was it effective?_____ YES _____ NO; if not why not _______________________________________________________________

20. What was the strategy of CICAFOR in establishing communication between industry and the Center? __________________________________________

21. Was it effective? ___YES ___ NO; if not, why not? _____________________

22. How were the topics of the trainings selected? ________________________

23. Did the trainees (both instructors and those from industry) participate in the selection of the topics? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? _______________________________________________________________

24. Were the topics of the trainings?

a. Relevant _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not?

b. Appropriate _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not?

c. Realistic _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not?

25. In what way did FTP International Ltd. help in the selection of the topics? _______________________________________________________________

26. Were there additional trainings of CICAFOR instructors after the project? _____ YES ______ NO; if none why? ________________________________

27. Were there additional trainings by CICAFOR of industry members after the project? _____ YES ______ NO; if none why? _________________________


28. Did the industry understand the importance of consolidating the industry associations and forming cooperative? _____YES _____ NO; if not why not? _______________________________________________________________

29. Did they eventually and willingly participate in consolidation of the industry associations and forming the cooperative? _____YES _____ NO; if not why not? ___________________________________________________________

30. What was the strategy adopted by CICAFOR to get support from the industry in consolidating the industry associations and forming the cooperative? _______________________________________________________________

31. Was the strategy effective? ___YES ___ NO; if not why not? _____________

32. Were the funds of the project utilized?

Efficiently _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? _______________

Effectively_____ YES _____ NO; if not why not _________________

33. Were there requests for further training from the members of the consolidated industry association and from the cooperative after the project? _______ YES ______ NO; if none why? _________________________________________

List of trainings Requested Conducted

1.

2.

34. Were there requests for training from non-members of the consolidated industry association and the cooperative after the project?

_____ YES _____ NO; if none why? ______________________________

List of trainings Requested Conducted

1.

2.

35. Was CICAFOR able to implement additional activities regarding PD 13/95 after the Project?

ACTIVITIES YES NO WHY

1. Curricular development for training the industry sector, in particular the members of the COTRAMASIL and ECASUL.

- Who developed the curricula?

- Who trained instructors of CICAFOR with the industry?


2. Development of training courses?

- How many

- Which are these?

- Who developed training courses

- Who trained instructors of CICAFOR with the industry?

3. Training of CICAFOR instructors

- How many were trained?


4. Training of COTRAMASIL and ECASUL members

- How many were trained?


5. Were new training materials produced?

- How many

6. Revision of old training materials?

- How many

- What are these materials?

7. Further development activities for the industry members other than training?

36. Are the project activities still included in the 2005 business plan of CICAFOR? ______ YES ______ NO; if not why not? __________________

37. Is the business plan of CICAFOR for 2005 supported by ESNACIFOR? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? ___________________________________

38. Did the trained members of the cooperative and consolidated industry associations apply their gained knowledge in the performance of their tasks? ______ YES _____ NO; if not why not?

39. Did the training of members of the cooperative and the consolidated industry association result in:

Increased income? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not?____________________________

Increase in employment? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? ______________________

Increase in productivity? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not?___________________

40. Are the cooperative and the consolidated industry association still functioning as such? ______ YES ______ NO; if not why not? __________________________________________

41. What new activities have they done together as cooperative/industry association?__________________________________________________________________

42. Was CICAFOR able to generate outside funds/support for training after the project?

YES ______ NO; if not why not? ________________________________________________


43. Sources of funds/support? ______________________________________________________

44. How can this project be made sustainable? ________________________________________

45. What actions has CICAFOR done to ensure sustainability of the project? ___________________________________________________________________________

46. Please supply a list of the following:

Curriculum developed During the project After the project

1.

2.

Training courses developed During the project After the project

1.

2.

Training courses implemented During the project After the project

1.

2.

47. Please provide the following:

Training curricula developed Implemented

No. of trainees

Yes No

1.

2.

Training implemented Number of trainees

Gov’t sector Private sector

1.

2.


Annex 7a COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPANTS

PHILIPPINES

EX-POST EVALUATION OF ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV.3(1)


1. Did you participate in the Pilot Course for Community Representatives organized under the ITTO Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3 (I) conducted on November 2-5, 1999 by TREES of the UPLB College of Forestry and Natural Resources in Los Banos? _____ YES _____ NO

2. If Yes, do you remember the following topics covered during the pilot course:

a. Financing SMEs and how to access their funds ____ YES ____ NO b. Appraising the capability to develop and enterprise ____ YES ____ NO c. Assessing a person’s entrepreneurial ability ____ YES ____ NO d. The business idea ____ YES ____ NO e. Markets and marketing ____ YES ____ NO f. Clustering ____ YES ____ NO g. Identification of sustainable business projects ____ YES ____ NO h. Identification of appropriate forest products i. Utilization technologies for community-based forest management projects ____ YES ____ NO

3. Were you able to apply what you have learned in the pilot course in any business of your cooperative? _____ YES _____ NO

4. If Yes, what was the business/enterprise your cooperative was engaged in where you applied your learning from the pilot course? ________________________________________________

5. What was the result of the application of your learning in the pilot course?

a. Increase in productivity _____

b. Reduction in production cost _____

c. Improvement in product quality _____

d. Increase in sales/income _____

e. Creation of employment in the cooperative _____

6. If No, why were you not able to apply what you learned in the pilot course?

_____________________________________________________________________________

7. What additional training needs of your people working in the enterprise of your cooperative?

a. _________________________________________________________________________ b. _________________________________________________________________________


Annex 7b RESOURCE PERSONS/INSTRUCTORS WHO PARTICIPATED IN

THE WORKSHOPS/TRAININGS PHILIPPINES

EX-POST EVALUATION OF ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV.3 (1)


ITTO Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3(1) was approved by the Forest Industry Committee in 1996 with

the overall project development objective “to contribute to the improvement of the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in four selected ITTO producer member countries”. Specifically the project hoped to a) to develop the curricula of the selected training institutes for on-going training on planning and management of appropriate forest industries, b) to improve the capacity of resource persons in the planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses, and c) to produce training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on planning and management of appropriate forest industries.



NAME OF RESPONDENT: ___________________________________________________________

POSITION: ________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: _______________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

1. Would you consider the overall ITTO project a success in terms of achieving the overall development objective of the project namely contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in ITTO producer member countries? _____ YES _____ NO

2. If yes, what do you think were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project?_______________________________________________

3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objective? ______________________________________________________


4. Would you consider the overall ITTO project a success in terms of achieving the overall specific objectives of:







Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3



Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3

7. Please list the topics or titles of training courses that were covered in the training that you participated in under the ITTO overall project.

7a. _________________________________________________________________________


7b. ________________________________________________________________________

7c. _________________________________________________________________________

8. Were the topics of the trainings, with respect to Philippine condition/situation:

Relevant _____ YES _____ No, if no why not? _______________________

Appropriate _____ YES _____NO, if no, why not? _______________________

Realistic _____ YES _____ NO, if no, why not? ______________________

9. Did you participate in the preparation of the training curriculum that was prepared under the ITTO overall project for TREES? _____ YES _____ NO.

10. If yes, what was your participation? ______________________________________________

11. Did you participate in the preparation of training materials that were used during the implementation of the ITTO training courses on the planning and management of appropriate forest industries? _____ YES _____ NO.


13. Would you consider the Philippine National Project (the project prepared for the Philippines under the ITTO overall project) a success in terms of achieving the objective “to uplift the socio-economic well being of the selected forest-based communities through the establishment of small and medium scale forest-based enterprises in the selected sites in the Philippines? _____ YES _____ NO

14. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? ___________________________________________________________________


16. Would you consider the Philippine National Project a success in terms of achieving the following specific objectives: 1) To enable the communities to realize the business ideas developed by their representatives to the FTP/ITTO pilot training facilitating community business planning; 2) To assist the communities in gaining access to sources of capital needed for their enterprise; 3) To assist the communities in the construction and installation of facilities and in the actual operation of a community-based enterprise; 4) To provide exposure to and training opportunities on processing and to put in place enabling mechanisms to improve entrepreneurial/managerial skills; and 5) To assist in product promotion and market development. _____ YES _____ NO



19. Did you participate in the preparation of the Philippine National Project prepared under the ITTO overall project for implementation under Phase II? _____ YES _____ NO.


21. What development lessons were learned from the ITTO overall project with respect to?


b. Project implementation –


22. What operational lessons were learned from the ITTO overall project with respect to?

a. Project organization and management -

b. Monitoring and evaluation -

c. Communication among project participants - 23. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the ITTO overall project towards

contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in ITTO producer member countries? _____________________________________

24. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Philippine National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Philippines? _____________________

___________________________________________________________________________

25. In your view what were unsatisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in your country? ____________________________________

26. At the level of TREES what changes would you institute in undertaking future capacity building projects like this? _____________________________________________________

27. Please list also the training courses you helped implement as a resource person/instructor under the project:

27a. ____________________________________________________

27b. ____________________________________________________

27c. ____________________________________________________

28. Did the ITTO overall project improve the capacity of TREES to plan and implement training in planning and management of forest industries? _____YES _____NO.

29. If No, why did it not improve the capacity of TREES to plan and implement training in planning and management of forest industries? _____________________________________

30. How could the capacity building project like the ITTO project be made sustainable? __________________________________________________________________________


Annex 7c TREES OFFICIALS

PHILIPPINES

EX-POST EVALUATION OF ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV.3(1) Capacity Building in Training in Planning and Management of Forest Industries






NAME OF RESPONDENT: __________________________________________________________

POSITION: _______________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS: ______________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

1. Would you consider the ITTO overall project a success in terms of achieving the overall development objectives of the project namely contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in ITTO producer member countries? _____ YES _____ NO

2. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project? ___________________________________________________________________


4. Would you consider the ITTO overall project a success in terms of achieving the overall specific objectives of:


SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE

YES NO






Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3



Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3

7. Please list the components of the training curriculum that was prepared under the ITTO overall

project for TREES. 7a. _________________________________________________________________________

7b._________________________________________________________________________


8. Please list the topics covered in the training of resource persons in planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses under the ITTO overall project.

8a. _____________________________________________________

8b. _____________________________________________________

9. Please list the training materials that were prepared under the ITTO overall project for the implementation of training courses on the planning and management of appropriate forest industries.

9a. _____________________________________________________

9b. _____________________________________________________

10. Would you consider the Philippine National Project (the project prepared for the Philippines under the ITTO overall project) a success in terms of achieving the objective “to uplift the socio-economic well being of the selected forest-based communities through the establishment of small and medium scale forest-based enterprises in the selected sites in the Philippines”? _____ YES _____ NO



13. Would you consider the Philippine National Project (PNP) a success in terms of achieving the specific objectives, 1) To enable the communities to realize the business ideas developed by their representatives to the FTP/ITTO pilot training facilitating community business planning; 2) To assist the communities in gaining access to sources of capital needed for their enterprise; 3) To assist the communities in the construction and installation of facilities and in the actual operation of a community-based enterprise; 4) To provide exposure to and training opportunities on processing and to put in place enabling mechanisms to improve entrepreneurial/managerial skills; and 5) To assist in product promotion and market development? _____ YES _____ NO





a.1. Were the various stakeholders involved in the project design and problem analysis during the formulation phase of the PNP?





Project design


1.

2.

b. Project implementation

b.1. Was the project design followed? _____ YES ______ NO b.2. What were the deviations if any?


CORRECTIVE MEASURES

CONSULTATIONS ON CHANGES


c.1. How were the financial aspects of the project planned? _________________

c.2. What was the involvement of stakeholders in financial planning of the project? ______________________________________________________

c.3 How much was proposed as contribution of the Philippine Government to the project?____________________________________________________


d.1. Were there changes in the financial aspects of the project? ____ YES _____ NO; if none why? _______________________________

d.2. If yes, where did the changes occur? ____Executing Agency level _____TREES’ level

d.3. What were the causes of the changes in financial aspects of the project? _____________________________________________________________

d.4. Did they affect outcomes of the project? _____ YES _____ NO

d.5. If yes, in what way? ____________________________________________

d.6. If not, why not? ________________________________________________

d.7 How much was the actual contribution of Honduras Government to the project? ______________________________________________________



a.1. How was the project organized at the level of TREES _____________________________________________________________

a.2. What challenges were met in organizing and managing the project? _____________________________________________________________

a.3. How were these challenges met/resolved? __________________________


a.4. Were there changes in Project Management? _____ YES _____ NO; if Yes, what was reason for the change? __________________________________

a.5. If yes, did it affect the implementation of the project? ____ YES _____NO

a.6. If yes in what way? ____________________________________________

a.7. If not, why not? _______________________________________________


b.1. Was project reporting according to agreed schedule? ___ YES ___ NO

b.2. What were the causes of delay or non-reporting? _____________________

____________________________________________________________________

b.3. Were the content of reports according to agreement?

_____ YES _____NO; If not why not? _____________________________

b.4. How did the your agency meet challenges in project documentation?________________________________________________

b.5. Was the strategy effective? ____ YES ____ NO; if not why not? _____________________________________________________________


c.1. How was the project monitored? ________________________________

c.2. Was there a monitoring system agreed upon among various participants? _____YES _____ NO; if none why? _______________________________

c.3. Was there a feedback mechanism installed in the system? _____ YES _____ NO; if none why? _______________________________

c.4. Was the monitoring of the project done according to schedule? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? _____________________________

c.5. How did your Agency meet challenges in monitoring and evaluation?____________________________________________________

c.6. Was the strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? _______________________________________________

c.7. Did the monitoring improve the implementation of the project? ______YES ______ NO; if not why not? ______________________________________


d.1. What were the challenges in establishing smooth communication among stakeholders? _________________________________________________

d.2. How did TREES improve communication with the Executing Agency (FTP International, Ltd)?_____________________________________________

d.3. Was the strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? _____________________________________________________________

d4. What was the strategy of TREES in establishing communication between the industry and the TREES? _____________________________________

d.5. Was the strategy effective? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? _____________________________________________________________


18. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the ITTO overall project towards contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in ITTO producer member countries? ____________________________________

19. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Philippine National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Philippines? _____________________

___________________________________________________________________________

20. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in your country? ____________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

21. At the level of TREES what changes would you institute in undertaking future projects like this? ______________________________________________________________________

22 What department/unit of UPLB, or other government agency, is doing technology transfer to the wood industry and in particular the furniture/wood industry of Philippines? ___________________________________________________________________________

23. Any collaboration between TREES and this unit in transferring technology to the industry? ___________________________________________________________________________

24. How many participated in the national workshops and training courses held in April, October and November 1999?

List of Training Courses

No. of Participants

TREES/CFNR

Other Agencies

Forestry Industry

Non-forest industry

25. List of training courses implemented by TREES as a follow-up of the above training courses?

List of Training Courses

No. of Participants

TREES/CFNR

Other Agencies

Forestry Industry

Non-forest industry

26. Were the topics of the workshops and trainings, with respect to Philippine condition/situation?

Relevant _____ YES _____ No, if no why not? _______________________

Appropriate _____ YES _____NO, if no, why not? _______________________

Realistic _____ YES _____ NO, if no, why not? ______________________

27. Did the stakeholders (industry, communities, instructors, etc.) participate in the identification of the topics of the training? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? ___________________________________________________________________________


28. What government or private sector organizations were approached to obtain their support for the continuation of the project? a. ________________________________________________________________________ b. ________________________________________________________________________

29. Did the design of the project (community-based enterprise development) had an effect in the lack of support for the project? _____YES ______ No. If yes, why? _____________________

30. Did the ITTO overall project improve the capacity of TREES to plan and implement training in planning and management of forest industries? _____YES _____NO.

31. If No, why did it not improve the capacity of TREES to plan and implement training in planning and management of forest industries? _______________________________________________

32. What factors affect the sustainability of training projects like this?

a. ___________________________________________________________________________

b. ___________________________________________________________________________

33. How could you make projects like this sustainable? ___________________________________

34. What actions were taken by TREES to ensure the sustainability of the capacity building project? _____________________________________________________________________________


Annex 8a NATIONAL PROJECT COORDINATING TEAM

PERU



ITTO Project PD 13/95 Rev. 3(1) was approved by the Forest Industry Committee in 1996 with the overall project development objective “to contribute to the improvement of the economic, social and ecological impacts of forest industries in four selected ITTO producer member countries”. Specifically the project hoped to a) to develop the curricula of the selected training institutes for on-going training on planning and management of appropriate forest industries, b) to improve the capacity of resource persons in the planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses, and c) to produce training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on planning and management of appropriate forest industries.

The general objective of the Peru National Project was to achieve a major development of the

SMEs in the secondary wood using industry of Peru. Its specific objective was to increase the demand of products, the productivity and competitiveness of the SMEs.



NAME OF RESPONDENT (Nombre el respondente): ____________________________________

POSITION (Posicion): _____________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS (Agencia/Direccion): ____________________________________________

1. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the overall development objective namely contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in Peru? (Podria vd considerar el proyecto un exito en los terminus de ejecutar los objectivos de desarrollo entero del proyecto para contribuir a la mejora de la accion economica, social y ecological de las industrias de forestales de Peru? _____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No)

2. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contribuyeron al logro de los objectivos del desarrollo de este proyecto?) _______________________________________________


3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron las factores que acaussaron o contribuyeron a los que no ha logrado en el los objectivos del desarrollo?) _______________________________________________________________

4 Would you consider the project a success in terms achieving the overall specific objectives of (Podria vd considerar el proyecto un exito en ganar los objectivos specificos?)


1. Develop curricula of selected training institutes in ITTO producer member countries for ongoing training in planning and management of appropriate forest industries (Desarrollar un curso de estudios de algunos institutos escogidos de la disiplina en el ITTO miembros de produccion de naciones para la disiplina salida en panear y manejar los industrias apropiado de los bosques)

2. Improve the capacity of resource persons in participating ITTO producer member countries in planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses (Improvar mas la capacidad de los personas de recursos en la participacion de los miembros de producion del ITTO en manejar y planear los cursos de disiplina)

3. Produce training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on the planning and management of appropriate forest industries (Producir materials de disiplina necesarias para la implementacion de estos cursos de disiplina en panear y manejar las industriales de los bosques)

5. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the specific objectives of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contribuyeron al exito de los objectivos specificos del proyecto?)


Objective 1

(Objectivo1)

Objective 2

(Objectivo 2)

Objective 3

(Objectivo 3)

6. If not, what were the shortcomings and the factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the specific objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron los faltos y factores que causaron o contribuyeron a no lograr de los objectivos specificos?)



Objective 1

(Objectivo1)

Objective 2

(Objectivo2)

Objective 3

(Objectivo3)

7. Would you consider the Peru National Project a success in terms of achieving its general objective “to achieve a major development of the SMEs in the secondary wood using industry of Peru” (Podria vd considerar que el Proyecto National de Peru un exito en lograr sus objective general “lograr un mayor desarrollo de las PYMES de la transformacion secundaria de la madera en el Peru”?)_____ Y ES (Si) _______ NO (No)

8. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contibuyeron para el logro de los objectivos del proyecto?) _________________________________________________________________

9. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron los faltas y factores que causaron o contribuyeron en lo lograr en los objectivos de desarrollo?) ___________________________

10. Would you consider the Peru National Project a success in terms of achieving the specific project objective of increased demand of products, productivity and competitiveness of the SMEs). (Podria vd considerar que el Proyecto Nacional de Peru es un exito en lograr sus objectivos specificos “Demanda de los productos, productividad y capacidad de negociacion incrementadas de las PYMES”. ______ YES (Si) ______ NO (No)

11. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contribuyeron en lograr en los objectivo del proyecto?) ___________________________________________________________________

12. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to the non-attainment of the objective? (Si es no, cuales fueron los faltas y factores que causaron o contribuyeron en lo lograr en los objectivos de desarrollo?) ___________________________________________

13. What development lessons were learned from this project? (Que lecciones de desarrollo fueron aprendidos de este proyecto?)

a. Project planning (Planear de proyecto) ____________________________________

b. Project implementation (Implementacion del proyecto) ________________________

c. Financial planning (El plano financial) ____________________________________

d. Financial implementation (La implementacion financial) ______________________

14. What operational lessons were learned from this project with respect to? (Que lecciones de operacion fueron aprendidos del proyecto con respeto a?)


a. Project organization and management (La organizacion y manejo del proyecto)

______________________________________________________________________

b. Project documentation (Documentacion del proyecto)_________________________

c. Monitoring and evaluation (El monitorio y evaluacion) _______________________

d. Communication among project participants (Comunicacion entre los participantes del proyecto) ___________________________________________________________

15. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Peru National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Peru? (En su vista, cuales fueron los actos de ejecuciones significantes del proyecto al desarrollo sostenado de los bosques en Peru?) _____________________________________________________________________________

16. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Peru? (En su vista, cuales resultas que no fueron satisfechos del proyecto segun el desarrollo sostenado de los bosques de Peru?)________________________________________________________________________

17. What were the most significant lessons learned from this project in coordinating national projects? (Cuales fueron los lecciones signifacntes aprendidos del proyecto en la proyecto de coordinacion nacional?)_________________________________________________________

18. How can this project be made sustainable? (Como se puede sostener este proyecto?) _____________________________________________________________________________

19, What actions have the NPCT taken to ensure sustainability of the project? (Que acciones ha tomado el NPCT para asegurar el sostener del proyecto? _______________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________


Annex 8b SMALL SCALE FURNITURE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AND FIRMS AT THE INDUSTRIAL VILLAGE OF VILLA EL SALVADOR

PERU





The general objective of the Peru National Project was to achieve a major development of the SMEs in the secondary wood using industry of Peru. Its specific objective was to increase the demand of products, the productivity and competitiveness of the SMEs.



NAME OF RESPONDENT (Nombre el respondeente): _______________________________________

POSITION (Posicion): _________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS (Agencia/Direccion): ________________________________________________

1. Would you consider the Peru National Project a success in terms of achieving the general objective to achieve a major development of the SMEs of the secondary wood working industry in Peru? (Podria vd considerar el Proyecto National Peru un exito en los terminus de ejecutar los objectivo lograr un mayor desarrollo de las PYMES de la transformacion secundaria de la madera en el Peru?)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No)


2. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contibuyeron para el logro de los objectivos del proyecto?) ____________________________________________________________________

3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron los faltas y factores que causaron o contribuyeron en lo lograr en los objectivos de desarrollo?) ____________________________

4. Would you consider the Peru National Project a success in terms of achieving the specific objective of increasint the demand of products, productivity and competitiveness of the SMEs? (Podria vd considerar que el Proyecto Nacional de Peru es un exito en termino de lograr el s objectivo specificos del proyecto “demanda de los productos, productividad y capacidad de negociacion incrementadas de las PYMES”?)____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

5. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contibuyeron para el logro de los objectivos specificos del proyecto?) ________________________________________________________

6. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron las faltas y factores que causaron o contribuyeron en lo lograr en los objectivos de desarrollo?) ____________________________

7. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Peru National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Peru? (En su vista, cuales fueron los actos de ejecuciones significantes del Proyecto Nacional del Peru al desarrollo sostenado de los bosques en Peru?)_____________________________________________________________________

8. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Peru? (En su vista, cuales resultas que no fueron satisfechos del proyecto segun el desarrollo sostenado de los bosques de Peru?)______________________

9. How was the information about the project disseminated to the industry? (Como fue diseminado la informacion del proyecto a la industria?)__________________________________________

10. Did you fully understand the Peru National Project and its objectives? (Ha comprendido vd muy bien el Proyecto Nacional de Peru y sys objectivos?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (no); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________

11. What were your expectations from the training program? Were these expectations realized? (Que fueron sus expectaciones de la programa de formacion? Fueron realizado estes expectaciones?)

Expectations (Expectaciones) Achieved

Remarks/comments (Comentarios) Yes No

12. What was the strategy of UNALM in getting support from the industry? (Que fue la estrategia de UNALM en tomar suporta de la industria?) _______________________________________

13. Was it effective? (Era efectivo?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?) _________________________________________________________________________


14. What was the strategy of UNALM in establishing communication between the industry and the Association? (Que fue la estrategia de UNALM en establecer comunicacion entre la industria y la asociacion?)_________________________________________________________________

15. Was it effective? (Era efectivo?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si es no, porque no?)___________________________________________________________________

16. How were the topics in which the instructors and the trainees from industry were trained selected? (Como fueron los asuntos an que los instrutores y los aprendizos de la industria fueron encogidos formar?)________________________________________________________

17. Did the trainees (from industry) participate in the selection of the topics? (Han tomado parte los aprendizos de la industria en la seleccion de los asuntos?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)______________________________________________________

18. Were the topics relevant, appropriate and realistic? (Fueron relevante, apropriado y realistico los asuntos?)

Relevant (Relevante) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________________

Appropriate (Apropriado) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________________

Realistic (Realistico) _____ YES (No) _____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________________

19. Did you understand the importance of establishing enterprise chains among industry firms in Villa el Salvador? (Ha comprendido vd muy bien la importancia de establecer “cadenas de negocios” entre los negocios de la industria en Villa el Salvador?) _____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No)

20. Did you willingly participate in the enterprise chains? (Ha tomado parte en la “cadena de negocios” con mucho gusto?) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

21. How did the enterprise chains affect your firm? (Como ha afectado por la “cadena de negocios” su companya?)

Impact of project on firms (Impacto del proyecto en el negocio)

Average impact on firms (Impacto

promedio en negocio)

Number of firms

(Numero del negocios)

Productivity of firms (Produccion)

Income of firm (Ganar)

Employment of firms (Empleado)

Others (Otros)

22. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in your country? (En su vista, que fueron los exitos significantes al desarrollo sostenado de los recursos de los bosques en su pais?)_______________________

23. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project toward sustainable development of forest resources in your country? (En su vista, que fueron las resultas que no satisfactorio a sostenable desarrollo del recursos forestales en su pais?) ___________________


24. What activities had the enterprise chains members undertaken to promote productivity and efficient operations? (Que actividades ha tomado los miembros de las “ cadenas de negocios” para promoter la produccion y la operation eficiente?)

Activities of enterprise chains (Actividades de la “cadena de negocios”)

No. of firms

“Nomero del

negocios)

Impact of activities on individual firms

(Impacto de las actividades en los negocios individuales)

1.

2.

25. Did you participate in the Trainer’s Training Course held on February 2-5, 1999? (Ha tomado parte en la”Trainers Training Course en 2-5, 1995?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

26. Please provide the following (Por favor, haga una lista de los siguientes):

Curriculum you participated in developing during project (Los cursos donde vd ha participacion en el desarrollo durante el

proyecto)

Curriculum you participated in developing after project (Los plano de studio donde vd ha participacion en su

desarrollo despues del proyecto)

1. 1.

2. 2.

Training courses you participated in developing (Cursos de formacion que donde ha participando en

desarrollo)

During the project

(Durante del proyecto)

After the project

(Despues del proyecto)

1.

2.

Training courses you participated in

(Cursos de formacion dond vd ha participando)

During the project(Durante

del proyecto)

After the project


1.

2.

27. Are you willing to send your workers to further training at the UNALM? (Estas de conforme en mandar sus empleados para tener mas formacion en el UNALM)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?) _______________________________________________

28. If yes, under what conditions, if any? (Si es si, bajo de que condiciones, si hay?) ____________


29. Did you or your workers apply what you or your workers learned in the trainings you/they attended at UNALM? (Ha aplicado vd y su empleados los conocimientos aprendido en UNALM?)

Association member (Miembro la asociacion)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?) ____________________________________

Workers (Empleados) _____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si es no, porque no?)____________________________________________________

30. Are you willing to pay for further training at the UNALM? (Estas conforme de pagar para mas formacion en el UNALM?)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si es no, porque no?__________________________________________________________________________

31. In what way can industry owners help make the training program be sustainable? (En que manera puedes los duenyos de la industria puedan hacer el programa de formacion sostenable?) ___________________________________________________________________

32. What action has the industry association taken towards making the training program at UNALM sustainable? (Que acciones ha tomado la asociaciones de la industria para hacer el programa de la formacion en UNALM sostenable?) ____________________________________________


Annex 8c UNALM INSTRUCTORS AND THOSE WHO HAVE UNDERGONE

TRAINING UNDER THE PROJECT PERU

EX-POST EVALUATION OF ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV.3 (1)







NAME OF RESPONDENT (Nombre del respondente): ______________________________________

POSITION(Posicion): _________________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS (Agencia/Direccion): _______________________________________________

1. Did you fully understand the Peru National Project and its objectives? (Ha comprendido vd muy bien el proyecto nacional de Peru y sus objectivos?_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

2. If YES, would you consider the Peru National Project a success in terms of achieving the objective of (Si es si, pudiera vd considerer que era un exito el proyecto nacional de Peru en ganar sus objectivos_____________________________________________________________


3. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? ((Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contribuyeron al logro de los objectivos del desarrollo de este proyecto?) _____________________________________________________

4. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? ((Si es no, cuales fueron las factores que acaussaron o contribuyeron a los que no ha logrado en el los objectivos del desarrollo?)_________________

5. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Peru National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Peru? (En su vista, cuales fueron la ejecusiones significantes del proyecto nacional de Peru para sostener el desarrollo de los recursos del bosques en Peru?)______________________________________________________________

6. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Peru? (En su vista, cuales fueron los faltas y factores que causaron o contribuyeron en lo lograr en los objectivos de desarrollo?) ___________________

7. What were your expectations from the training program? Were these expectations realized? (Cuales fueron sus expectaciones del programa de formacion? Fueron realizado estos expectaciones?)

Expectations (Expectaciones) Achieved Remarks/comments

(Comentarios) Yes No

8. What were the trainings you participated in under the project? (Cuales fueron las formaciones donde vd ha participado bajo de proyecto?)

Trainings participated in (La formacion participado)

1.

2.

9. Have you applied what you have learned from the training? (Ha aplicado vd lo que ha aprendido de la formacion?)____YES Si)__ NO (No).

If yes in what way? (Si si, en que manera?)__________________________________________

If not why not?(Si es no, porque no?)_______________________________________________

10. How were the topics in which the instructors and the trainees from industry were trained selected? (Cuales fueron los asuntos en que los instructors y los aprendizes de la industria escozido fueron formacion?)______________________________________________________

11. Did the trainees (instructors from UNALM) participate in the selection of the topics? (Tomaron parte los instructors aprendizes de UNALM es escoger los asuntos?_____ YES (Yes)_____ NO;(No) if not why not? (Si es no, proque no?)_______________________________________

12. Were the topics relevant, appropriate and realistic? (Fuern relevantes, apropiado, y realistico?)


Relevant (Relevante) _____ YES (Si)) _____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________________

Appropriate (Apropiado)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________________

Realistic (Realistico) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?) _____________________________________________________________________________

13. Have you been or are you currently involved in the development of the following at UNALM: (Ha tomado vd o esta vd tomando parte en el desarrollo de los siguestes en UNALM?)

Curricula for the furniture/wood industry? (Los planos de estudios para la industria de muebles/Madera)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO(No)

New training courses for the furniture/wood industry? (Nuevos cursos de formacion para la industria de muebles/Madera)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

14. Have you conducted additional training for: (Ha dado mas formacion para):

a. Members of the furniture/wood industry? (Miembros de la industria de muebles/Madera?)___ YES (Si) ___ NO (No)

b. Non-members of the industry? (No miembros de la industria?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

Trainings for members of industry

(Formacion para miembros)

Training for non-members

(Formacion para no miembros)

1.

2.

15. Did the project improve your capability to plan and implement training programs for small-scale enterprises? (Ha mejorado el proyecto su capabilidades a planear y implementer las programs de la formacion a los negocios pequenyos?) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)________________________________________________________________

16. Did the project improve the capability of UNALM to plan and implement training programs for small-scale enterprises? (Ha mejorado el proyecto los capabilidades de UNALM a planear y implementer las programs de la formacion para negocios pequenyos?)

_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no? _______________________

17. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project for the forest-based SMEs in Peru? (En su vista cuales fueron las resultas significantes del proyecto para los negocios pequenyos de forestales en Peru?)________________________________________

18. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project for the forest-based SMEs in Peru? (En su vista, cuales fueron las resultas de poca satisfaction del proyecto para los negocios pequenyos de forestales en Peru?)__________________________________________

19. Did you participate in the Trainer’s Training Course held on February 2-5, 1999? (Ha tomado parte en la ‘Trainer’s Training Course’ en el Febrero 2-5, 1999?)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if not why not?(Si no, porque no?)______________________________ ______________

20. How can the project be made sustainable? (Como haria sostenable el proyecto? _____________________________________________________________________________

21. Please provide the following (Por favor, da los seguintes):


Curriculum you participated in developing during the project (Planos de estudios que

ha tomado durante del proyecto)

Curriculum you participated in developing after the project (Planos de

estudios que ha tomado despues del proyecto)

1. 1.

2. 2.

Training courses you participated in developing (Cursos de formacion que ha

participacion en el desarrollo)

During the project (Durante del

projecto)

After the project (Despues del

proyecto)

1.

2.

Training courses you participated in during project (Cursos de formacion que donde ha

paticipacion durante el proyecto)

During the project (Durante del

projecto)

After the project(Despues

del proyecto)

1.

2.


Annex 8d UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AGRARIA LA MOLINA OFFICIALS

PERU








NAME OF RESPONDENT (Nombre del respondente): _____________________________________

POSITION(Posicion): _______________________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS (Agencia/Direccion): ______________________________________________

1. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the overall development objectives of the project namely contributing to the improvement of the economic, social, and ecological impacts of forest industries in Peru? (Pudiera vd considerer se un exito el proyecto en ganar todos los objectivos desarrollo del proyecto para contribuir al mehorar de los gran acciones economicos, socials y ecologicas de las industrias de los bosques Peru?) _____ YES _____ NO

2. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the development objectives of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contribuyeron al logro de los objectivos del desarrollo de este proyecto?) _____________________________________________________


3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron las factores que acaussaron o contribuyeron a los que no ha logrado en el los objectivos del desarrollo?) _____________________________________________________________________________

4. Would you consider the project a success in terms of achieving the overall specific objectives of (Podria vd considerar el proyecto un exito en los terminos de ejecutar los objectivos specificos?):


1. Develop curricula of selected training institutes in ITTO producer member countries for ongoing training in planning and management of appropriate forest industries (Desarrollar un curso de estudios de algunos institutos escogidos de la disiplina en el ITTO miembros de produccion de naciones para la disiplina salida en panear yh manejar los industrias apropiado de los bosques)

2. Improve the capacity of resource persons in participating ITTO producer member countries in planning and management of appropriate forest industries and in planning and management of training courses (Improvar mas la capacidad de los personas de recursos en la participacion de los miembros de producion del ITTO en manejar y planear los cursos de disiplina)

3. Produce training materials necessary for the implementation of training courses on the planning and management of appropriate forest industries (Producir materials de disiplina necesarias para la implementacion de estos cursos de disiplina en panear y manejar las industriales de los bosques)

5. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the specific objectives of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contribuyeron al exito de los objectivos specificos del proyecto?)

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE FAVORABLE FACTORS (FACTORES FAVORABLES)

Objective 1

(Objectivo1)

Objective 2

(Objectivo2)

Objective 3

(Objectivo3)

6. If not, what were the shortcomings and the factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the specific objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron los faltos y factores que causaron o contribuyeron a no lograr de los objectivos specificos?)



(FACTORES NEGATIVOS)

Objective 1 (Objectivo1)



7. Would you consider the Peru National Project a success in terms of achieving the general objective to achieve a major development of the SMEs of the secondary wood working industry in Peru? (Podria vd considerar el Proyecto National Peru un exito en lograr un mayor desarrollo de las PYMES de la transformacion secundaria de la madera en el Peru?) _____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No)

If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contibuyeron para el logro de los objectivos del proyecto?) ___________________________________________________________________

If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron los faltas y factores que causaron o contribuyeron en lo lograr en los objectivos de desarrollo?) ____________________________

8. Would you consider the Peru National Project a success in terms of achieving the specific objective of increasing the demand of products, productivity and competitiveness of the SMEs in Peru?. (Podria vd considerar que el Proyecto Nacional de Peru es un exito en termino de lograr el objectivo specificos “Demanda de los productos, productividad y capacidad de negociacion incrementadas de las PYMES”?)______YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the specific objective of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contibuyeron para el logro de los objectivos specificos del proyecto?) ________________________________________________________

If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the specific development objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron los faltas y factores que causaron o contribuyeron en lo lograr en los objectivos de desarrollo?) ____________________________

9. What development lessons were learned from this project? (Que lecciones de desarrollo fueron aprendidos de este proyecto?)

a. Project planning (Plano del proyecto)–

a.1. Were the various stakeholders involved in the project design and problem analysis during the formulation phase of the project? (Tomaron parte los participantes en el disenyo de proyecto y analysis de la problemas durante el fase de la formulacion del proyecto?


STAKEHOLDER (PARTICIPANTE)

INVOLVEMENT PARTICIPACION)

HOW WERE THEY INVOLVED? (COMO TOMARON PARTE)

a.2. Were the design of the project and problems identified validated with the various stakeholders? (Fueron el disnyo del proyecto y que problemas identificadas validamente con los personas apuestas?)

ITEM VALIDATED (VALIDADO)

NOT VALIDATED (NO VALIDADO)

Project design (Disenyo del proyecto)

Identified problems (Problemas identificado, por favor specificar) (Please specify)

1.

2.

3.

b. Project implementation (Implementacion del proyecto)

b.1. Was the project design followed? (Fue segundo el desenyo del proyecto?)_____YES(Si)______NO(No)

b.2. What were the deviations if any? (Cuales fueron los devios, si hay)


CORRECTIVE MEASURES

CONSULTATIONS ON CHANGES

c. Financial planning (El plano financial)

c.1. How were the financial aspects of the project planned? (Como fueron planados los aspectos financial del proyecto?____________________________________________

c.2. What was the involvement of UNAM in financial planning of the project? (Que fue del involmento de UNAM en el plano finanancial de proyecto?) ______________________

c.3 How much was proposed as contribution of the Peru Government to the project? (Cuanto era la contribucion propondido del gobierno de Peru al proyecto?______________________________________________________________

d. Financial implementation (La implementacion financial)

d.1. Were there changes in the financial aspects of the project? (Habian cambios en los aspectos financial del proyecto?)


____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if none why? (Si no, porque no?) ______________________________________________

d.2. If yes, where did the changes occur? (Si si, donde passar cambios?)____Executing Agency level (La agencia ejecutivo?)_____Implementing institution’s level (La institucion implemto?) _____

d.3. What were the causes of the changes in financial aspects of the project? (Cuales fueron los causos de los cambios en los aspectos financial del proyecto?)_____________________________________________________________

d.4. Did they affect outcomes of the project? (Afectaron las resultas del proyecto?)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No)

d.5. If yes, in what way? (Si si, en que manera?) __________________________________

d.6. If not, why not? (Si no, proque no?) _________________________________________

d.7 How much was the actual contribution of the Peru Government to the project? (Cuanto fue la contribucion actual del gobierno de Peru?)______________________________

10. What operational lessons were learned from this project with respect to? (Que lecciones de operacion fueron aprendidos del proyecto con respeto a?)

a. Project organization and management (La organizacion y manejo del proyecto)

a.1. How was the project organized at the level of UNALM? (Como fue organizado el proyecto el level de UNALM?)_____________________________________________

a.2. What challenges were met in organizing and managing the project? (Que concursos fueron encontrados en la organizacion y manejo del proyecto?)___________________

a.3. How were these challenges met/resolved? (Como fueron resolvar los encontrados?) ______________________________________________________________________

a.4. Were there changes in Project Management? if none why? (Habreron cambios en el manejo del proyecto?) ____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No) (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________

a.5. If yes, did it affect the implementation of the project? ? (Si si, ha afectado la implementacion del proyecto?) ____ YES (Si) _____NO (No)

a.6. If yes in what way? (Si si, en que manera?)__________________________________________

a.7. If not, why not? (Si no, proque no?) ________________________________________________

b. Project documentation (Documentacion del proyecto)

b.1. Was project reporting according to agreed schedule? (Fue notificado el proyecto segun el inventario confirmado?) ___ YES (Si)___ NO (No)

b.2. If no, what were the causes of delay or non-reporting? (Si no, que causas del atraso o no notificacion?) ________________________________________________________

b.3. Were the content of reports according to agreement? (Fueron las contenidos de informe segun la acuerdo?____ YES _____NO; if not why not? (Si no, proque no?) ______________________________________________________________________

b.4. How did the your agency meet challenges in project documentation? (Como encontro su agencia los demandas en la documentacion del proyecto?)_____________________________________________________________

b.5. Was the strategy effective? ____ YES ____ NO; if not why not? (Fue efectivo la estategia?) ____ YES (Si)____ NO (No); (Si no, porque no?) ______________________________________________________________________


c. Monitoring and evaluation (El monitorio y evaluacion)

c.1. How was the project monitored? (Como fue monitorio el proyecto?) ______________

c.2. Was there a monitoring system agreed upon among various participants? (Fue una systema de monitorio segun el acuerdo de los participantes?) _____YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if none, why? (Que ninguno, porque?)__________________________________

c.3. Was there a feedback mechanism installed in the system? (Habia un mechanismo de reaccion en la sistema?) ____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if none why? (Si ninguno, porque no?) ____________________________________________________________

c.4. Was the monitoring of the project done according to schedule? (Fue hecho segun el inventario de tiempo el monitoria del proyecto?)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, proque no?)____________________________

c.5. How did your Agency meet challenges in monitoring and evaluation? (Como encuentro su Agencia en el monitorio y evaluacion los cambios?)__________________________

c.6. Was the strategy effective? (Fue efectivo la strategia?) _____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, proque no?)_____________________________________

c.7. Did the monitoring improve the implementation of the project? (Ha mejorado el monitorio la implementacion del proyecto?) ______YES (Si) ______NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)_______________________________________________

d. Communication among project participants (Comunicacion entre los participantes del proyecto)

d.1. What were the challenges in establishing smooth communication among stakeholders? (Que desafios habion en establecer bien comunicacion entro las personas afectados?)

______________________________________________________________________

d.2. How did the UNALM improve communication with the Executing Agency (FTP International, Ltd)? (Como mejoraro el UNALM la comunicacion con la FTP International, Ltd? ______________________________________________________

d.3. Was the strategy effective? (Fue efectivo la strategia?)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?) not? _____________________________________

d.4. What was the strategy of UNALM in establishing communication between the industry and the UNALM? (Que la strategia del UNALM en establecer comunicacion con la industria?)_____________________________________________________________

d.5. Was the strategy effective? (Fue efectivo la strategia?)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?______________________________________

11. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Peru National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Peru? (En su vista, cuales fueron los actos de ejecuciones significantes del Proyecto Nacional del Peru al desarrollo sostenado de los bosques en su pais?) ___________________________________________________________________

12. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in your country? (En su vista, cuales resultas que no fueron satisfechos del proyecto segun el desarrollo sostenado de los bosques de su pais?)________________________________________________________________________

13. At the level of UNALM what changes would you institute in undertaking future projects like this? (Con el level del UNALM, que cambios prodria vd instituir en tomar proyecto futuro como este?) ________________________________________________________________________


14. What department/unit of UNALM is doing technology transfer to the wood industry and in particular the furniture/wood industry of Peru? (Que departamento?unidado de UNALM esta haciendo la tecnologia translador de la industria de Madera y en particular la industria de muebles de Honduras?___________________________________________________________

15. Any collaboration between this unit and the training unit in transferring technology to the industry? (Hay colaboracion entre en departamento y partes de formacion en transladaron technologia a la industria?)_______________________________________________________

16. How many participated in the Trainers’ Training Course held on February 1-5, 1999? What were the titles of the courses? Were there any trainings conducted after the Trainers’ Training Course? (Cuantos participantes en la formacion de los cursos de los discipolos que ha en febrero 1-5, 1999? Que fueron los titulos de los cursos? Habian cursos de formacion despues estos cursos?)

Types of Participants

(Typo de participantes)

Number

(Cuantos)

Title of Training courses

(Titulo del cursos)

Staff of UNALM (Personal de UNALM)

Gov’t Institutions other than UNALM (Del gobierno otro de UNALM)

Private Sector (Sector privado)

Forest Industry (Industria forestales)

Non-forest

Industry (Industria otro las forestales)

17. List of training courses implemented by UNALM as a consequence of the Trainers’ Training Course (Cursos de formacion implementado por UNALM consequencia de “Trainers Training Course”)

List of Training Courses (Cursos de formacion)

No. of Participants (Numero de participantes)

UNALM Other Agencies

Forestry Industry

Non-forest industry

18. Was there training held for potential instructors on forest industries as a result of the Workshop on Planning and Economic and Technical Control of Production held on May 28-29, 1999? (Habia un formacion para los intructores potenciales sobre la industrials foretales como un resulta de “Workshop” en el plano y economia y technical controlado de production en Mayo 28-29, 1999?_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No)


Name of Training (Nombre de formacion) Types of Participants (Typo de participantes)

Number of Trainees (Numero de aprendizos)

1) Staff of UNALM ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

2) Gov’t other than UNALM

( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

3) Private Sector

4) Forest Industry ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

5) Non-forest Industry ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

6)

19. Is the association of small-scale furniture manufacturers established in 1999 in the Industrial Park of Villa El Salvador de Surca Lima still operating as an association? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? (Es la asociacion de productores pequenyos de muebles establicidado en 1999 en la Parque Industrial de Villa El Salvador de Surca Lima todavia era operadia como una asociacion?________________________________________________________________

20. How many original members? (Cunatos miembros original?) ____ How many members now? (Cuantos miembros ahora?)_________________________________________________

21. What common/joint activities have they implemented together to improve their business/operations? (Que actividades comun han implementado en mejora su negocio/operacion?)

Activities (Actividades)

Number of Participating

Firms (Numero de

negocios participar)

Outcome of activities (Resultas de actividades)

22. Participation in the pilot course on The Planning and Management of Small Scale Wood Working Industry organized by UNALM in the Villa El Salvador. (Participacion en los cursos pilotos en el Plano y Manejo de las industriales pequenyos de Madera organizado por UNALM en la Villa el Salvador)

Type of participants (Typo de participantes)

Number of Participating Firms (Numero de negocios

participantes)

Number of participants (Numero de

participantes)

Firm owners (Duenyos de negocio)

Firm managers but not owners (Manejer pero si no duenyos)

Workers (Trabajadores)


23. Training for SMEs as follow up of the pilot course on Planning and Management of Small Scale Wood Working Industry. (La formacion de SMEs como segui en el curso de Planer y Manejar los industriales pequenyos de Madera.)

Title of training courses (Titulo de los cursos de formacion)

Type of Participants (Typo de participantes)

Number of participants (Numero

de participantes)

Funding Source (Fuente la suporta)

1. Firm owners (Duenyos de negocios)

( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

2. Firm managers but not owners (Manejer pero no que duenyos de negocios)

( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

3. Workers (Trabajadores)

( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

24. Did the industry participate in the identification of the topics of the training? _____ YES _____ NO; if not why not? (ha tomado parte la industria en la identificacion de los asuntos de la formacion?)______ (Si) ______(No) ______

25. Is the training continuing up to now? (Continuara esta formacion hasta ahora?)

Title of training courses (Titulo de los cursos)

Still continuing

(Hasta ahora continuando)

No longer offered (No

esta continuando)

Comments (Comentarios)

1.

2.

26. Did the negotiation for technical cooperation with ASINVES (Associacion de Indutriales en la Transformacion de la Madera y Afines) materialize? (Fueron hechas los negociaciones para la cooperacion con ASINVES ?) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

27. If yes, was there any training conducted for the association? (Si si, habion cursos de formacion conductado para la asociacion?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

28. List of trainings conducted (Las formaciones conductada)


Type of Participants (Typo de participantes)

Number of participants

(Numero de participantes)



( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )


( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )


3. Workers (Trabajadores) ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

29. Were the trainings being planned by the Center of Wood Utilization at the Faculty of Forestry of the University of La Molina for the management of small and medium enterprises conducted? (Fueron conductado el plano de formacion del Centro de Utilizacion Madera de Facultad de Forestales de Universidad la Molina para la manejo de industrias pequenyos?)


Type of Participants (Typo de participantes

Number of participants (Numero de

participantes)



( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )


( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

3. Workers (Trabajadores) ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( )

4 Government agencies

30. Was there an actual attempt to establish enterprise chains in the Villa El Salvador where firms could specialize in production of furniture parts instead of producing similar furniture and competing against each other? (Fueron intento actual para establecer una cadena de negocios en Villa El Salvador donde los negocios tienen specialidad en la production los partes de muebles en vez el competicion contra el uno al otro?) _____ YES _____ NO

31. Are these enterprise chains still functioning/operating? (Estan operando has ahora estas cadena de negocios?) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________________

32. What are the impacts of these enterprise chains with respect to (Que son los impactos de estas cadenas de negocios segun?):

Impact (Impacto) Average impact on enterprises (Promedio impacto a el negocio)

Number of firms (Numero del negocios)

Productivity of firms (Producion del negocio)

Income of firm (Ganar del negocio)

Employment of firms (Empleado adicional)

33. Were there networks established? (Fueron ‘network’ establecieron?)

o Between UNALM and the furniture SMEs (Entre UNALM y SMEs de industria de muebles?)_____ YES Si) _____ NO (No)

o Among furniture SMEs (Entre SMEs de industria de muebles?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)


34. How can this project be made sustainable? (Como sera sostenado el proyecto ? _____________________________________________________________________________

35. What support did UNALM get to continue the project after its completion? Was the support provided in 2004 and going to be provided in 2005? (Que suporta ha tomado UNALM para continur el proyecto despues de completer? Era dado en suporta en 2004 y hara dado en 2005?________________________________________________________________________


Annex 8e OTHER FIRMS/AGENCIES DOING CAPACITY BUILDING FOR

FIRMS AT THE INDUSTRIAL VILLAGE OF VILLA EL SALVADOR

PERU








NAME OF RESPONDENT (Nombre del respondeente): ______________________

POSITION (Posicion): _________________________________________________

AGENCY/ADDRESS (Agencia/Direccion): ________________________________

CITE Madera is a government organization under the Ministry of Production with directorate coming from the private sector (Note: CITE Madera was organized after the ITTO Project). It is planned that eventually it will be run by the private sector. It was supervised at the beginning by the Spanish Cooperation project. The conversion into entirely a private entity is not scheduled yet because the private sector is not aware yet of the need to have a center like CITE Madera.

Villa El Salvador has received a lot of free training but this has not been given value by the enterprises. In order to create demand for training it is important to have successful experiences in their


training activities with the private sector. One great mistake of training is the lack of monitoring of the trainees. There is further need to market the services of CITE Madera.

The difference between the UNALM and CITE Madera is the monitoring and the course content. Monitoring is to check whether the trainees apply what they learned. Formerly there were other training institutions for wood technicians but in the last 3 years they have no more training activities.

Recently they monitored so far 8 firms. Since they have not enough people to do monitoring, they have asked the universities to do the monitoring. The concept that they are supporting is the consortium idea and not individual firms. One consortium is made up of 5-6 firms.

Objectives:

1. elevate the level of technology of the wood working industry,

2. elevate the quality and the capacity for innovation in the wood production chain

3. prime mover in the use of wood in the industry and material of contruction

4. increase competitiveness

Functions:

1. Technical support the wood industries

2. Training, technical assistance on production, design, processes

There are about 2000 of potentially commerciable species, they have so far studied only about 40. Their main activities include the investigation of the properties and uses of lesser used species which include dendrology, characteristics, extraction (logging), sawing, drying, preservation, etc. They also do secondary processing and study of timbers for construction. They have just submitted to FOMIN (Interamerican Bank for Development) 3 research projects. FOMIN funds small projects of not more than US$100,000.

Their market are the wood enterprises, give practical training, not theoretical especially with micro/small enterprises.

Did not hear about the ITTO capacity building project undertaken at the UNALM

CITE Madera has good wood working machines, a dry kilm, finishing laboratory which were donations from the Spanish cooperation project, very unlikely that there are agencies that have the same kind of machines/equipment that they have.

They do training for the VES factories on school furniture. They have an annual training program, they have scheduled training already for March, April and May.

They train about 250 firms per year. These come from VES and outside (50-50% ratio)

1. Would you consider the Peru National Project a success in terms of achieving the general

objective to achieve a major development of the SMEs of the secondary wood working industry in Peru? (Podria vd considerar el Proyecto National Peru un exito en los terminus de ejecutar los objectivo lograr un mayor desarrollo de las PYMES de la transformacion secundaria de la madera en el Peru?)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No)

2. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contibuyeron para el logro de los objectivos del proyecto?) ____________________________________________________________________


3. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron los faltas y factores que causaron o contribuyeron en lo lograr en los objectivos de desarrollo?) ____________________________

4. Would you consider the Peru National Project a success in terms of achieving the specific objective of increasint the demand of products, productivity and competitiveness of the SMEs? (Podria vd considerar que el Proyecto Nacional de Peru es un exito en termino de lograr el s objectivo specificos del proyecto “demanda de los productos, productividad y capacidad de negociacion incrementadas de las PYMES”?)____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

5. If yes, what were the factors that contributed to the attainment of the above objective of the project? (Si es si, cuales fueron los factores que contibuyeron para el logro de los objectivos specificos del proyecto?) ________________________________________________________

6. If not, what were the shortcomings and factors that caused or contributed to non-attainment of the development objectives? (Si es no, cuales fueron las faltas y factores que causaron o contribuyeron en lo lograr en los objectivos de desarrollo?) ____________________________

7. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the Peru National Project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Peru? (En su vista, cuales fueron los actos de ejecuciones significantes del Proyecto Nacional del Peru al desarrollo sostenado de los bosques en Peru?)_____________________________________________________________________

8. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in Peru? (En su vista, cuales resultas que no fueron satisfechos del proyecto segun el desarrollo sostenado de los bosques de Peru?)______________________

9. How was the information about the project disseminated to the industry? (Como fue diseminado la informacion del proyecto a la industria?)__________________________________________

10. Did you fully understand the Peru National Project and its objectives? (Ha comprendido vd muy bien el Proyecto Nacional de Peru y sys objectivos?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (no); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________

11. What were your expectations from the training program? Were these expectations realized? (Que fueron sus expectaciones de la programa de formacion? Fueron realizado estes expectaciones?)

Expectations (Expectaciones) Achieved

Remarks/comments (Comentarios) Yes No

12. What was the strategy of UNAM in getting support from the industry? (Que fue la estrategia de UNAM en tomar suporta de la industria?) ___________________________________________

13. Was it effective? (Era efectivo?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?) _________________________________________________________________________

14. What was the strategy of UNAM in establishing communication between the industry and the Association? (Que fue la estrategia de UNAM en establecer comunicacion entre la industria y la asociacion?)___________________________________________________________________


15. Was it effective? (Era efectivo?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si es no, porque no?)___________________________________________________________________

16. How were the topics in which the instructors and the trainees from industry were trained selected? (Como fueron los asuntos an que los instrutores y los aprendizos de la industria fueron encogidos formar?)________________________________________________________

17. Did the trainees (from industry) participate in the selection of the topics? (Han tomado parte los aprendizos de la industria en la seleccion de los asuntos?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)______________________________________________________

18. Were the topics relevant, appropriate and realistic? (Fueron relevante, apropriado y realistico los asuntos?)

Relevant (Relevante) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________________

Appropriate (Apropriado) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________________

Realistic (Realistico) _____ YES (No) _____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?)__________________________________________________________________________

19. Did you understand the importance of establishing enterprise chains among industry firms in Villa el Salvador? (Ha comprendido vd muy bien la importancia de establecer “cadenas de negocios” entre los negocios de la industria en Villa el Salvador?) _____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No)

20. Did you willingly participate in the enterprise chains? (Ha tomado parte en la “cadena de negocios” con mucho gusto?) _____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

21. How did the enterprise chains affect your firm? (Como ha afectado por la “cadena de negocios” su companya?)

Impact of project on firms (Impacto del proyecto en el

negocio)

Average impact on firms (Impacto

promedio en negocio)

Number of firms

(Numero del negocios)

Productivity of firms (Produccion)

Income of firm (Ganar)

Employment of firms (Empleado)

Others (Otros)

22. In your view what were the most significant achievements of the project towards sustainable development of forest resources in your country? (En su vista, que fueron los exitos significantes al desarrollo sostenado de los recursos de los bosques en su pais?)_______________________

23. In your view what were the least satisfactory outcomes of the project toward sustainable development of forest resources in your country? (En su vista, que fueron las resultas que no satisfactorio a sostenable desarrollo del recursos forestales en su pais?)

_____________________________________________________________________________


24. What activities had the enterprise chains members undertaken to promote productivity and efficient operations? (Que actividades ha tomado los miembros de las “ cadenas de negocios” para promoter la produccion y la operation eficiente?)

Activities of enterprise chains (Actividades de la “cadena de negocios”)

No. of firms “Nomero

del negocios)

Impact of activities on individual firms

(Impacto de las actividades en los negocios individuales)

1.

2.

25. Did you participate in the Trainer’s Training Course held on February 2-5, 1999? (Ha tomado parte en la”Trainers Training Course en 2-5, 1995?)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No)

26. Please provide the following (Por favor, haga una lista de los siguientes):

Curriculum you participated in developing during project (Los cursos donde vd ha participacion en el desarrollo durante el

proyecto)

Curriculum you participated in developing after project (Los plano de studio donde vd ha participacion en su

desarrollo despues del proyecto)

1. 1.

2. 2.

Training courses you participated in developing (Cursos de formacion que donde ha participando en

desarrollo)

During the project

(Durante del proyecto)

After the project


1.

2.

Training courses you participated in

(Cursos de formacion dond vd ha participando)

During the project(Durante

del proyecto)

After the project


1.

2.

27. Are you willing to send your workers to further training at the UNAM? (Estas de conforme en mandar sus empleados para tener mas formacion en el UNAM)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?) _______________________________________________

28. If yes, under what conditions, if any? (Si es si, bajo de que condiciones, si hay?) _____________________________________________________________________________


29. Did you or your workers apply what you or your workers learned in the trainings you/they attended at UNAM? (Ha aplicado vd y su empleados los conocimientos aprendido en UNALM?)

Association member (Miembro la asociacion)_____ YES (Si)_____ NO (No) ; if not why not? (Si no, porque no?) ____________________________________

Workers (Empleados) _____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si es no, porque no?) ___________________________________________________

30. Are you willing to pay for further training at the UNALM? (Estas conforme de pagar para mas formacion en el UNAM?)_____ YES (Si) _____ NO (No); if not why not? (Si es no, porque no?__________________________________________________________________________

32. In what way can industry owners help make the training program be sustainable? (En que manera puedes los duenyos de la industria puedan hacer el programa de formacion sostenable?) ___________________________________________________________________

32. What action has the industry association taken towards making the training program at UNALM sustainable? (Que acciones ha tomado la asociaciones de la industria para hacer el programa de la formacion en UNAM sostenable?) _____________________________________________


Annex 9 Selected Photographs Taken During the Visits

Pictures taken in Ghana, 22 February – 27 February 2005

A typical class of students attending short-term training in WITC, Ghana. Graduates eventually join the workforce of the furniture industry

Two WITC instructors having a discussion with a furniture manufacturer

A member of the NPCT with another furniture manufacturer


A sala set produced by one of the members of the cluster in Kumasi, Ghana

A typical furniture shop in Kumasi, Ghana with some workers. A very important intervention that could be introduced would be on the 5s of manaufacutirng

The consultant with some WITC instructors and NPCT member


Pictures taken in Honduras, 9 March – 15 March 2005

Member of the COTRAMASIL in Siguatepeque, Honduras

A member showing a copy of the articles of cooperation of COTRAMASIL

ESNACIFOR/CICAFOR faculty member discussing with a furniture firm owner in Siguatepeque


Solar lumber dryer in ESNACIFOR used for training purposes. A similar dryer was contructed for ECASUL in San Pedro Sula, Honduras

Stack of lumber for drying in the solar dryer in ESNACIFOR

A typical piece of lumber bought by lot through auction in Siguatepeque, Honduras


Pictures taken in Peru, 4 March – 8 March 2005

A typical factory in Villa El Salvador, Lima, Peru. Substantial improvement in firm productivity can again be introduced through productivity consultancy services.

Sample of the school chair fabricated by the carpenters trained in UNALM, Lima, Peru

Some products on display at Villa El Salvador, Lima, Peru


The consultant with some furniture firm owners in Villa El Salvador

Some of the UNALM instructors interviewed for the study

Staff of CITE Madera. At the background are samples of lesser used wood species being promoted for use by the furniture industry!


Annex 10 Logical Framework Matrix of the Peru National Project

Project Elements

Objectively Verifiable Indicators



As Verified

General Objective

Attain a major development of small and medium secondary wood working enterprises in Peru

Increase in PEA

Increase in investments

Statistics of the Ministry of Labor

Specific Objective 1

Increased demand for products, improved productivity and competitiveness of SMEs

Increase in 10% of the income of SMEs in Industrial Park in Villa El Salvador;

Subscribe at 2 work contracts

Registry of the PROMPYME; Work contracts

Minimized unfair competition in the Industrial Park of Villa El Salvador

Unable to validate

National Project was not implemented

Results

1. Capacity building plan on planning and management of SMEs executed, apply knowledge learned from training

100 SMEs capacitated;

50% of SMEs organized; Enterprises apply the concepts of planning and management

List of participants; Leaders of the association, Report of meetings, Interview

Adequate supply of wood; passing of a legislation for the promotion of SMEs; stable economy

Interview with trained staff of UNALM

35 SMEs trained in furniture manufacture

2. Capacity building on costing/pricing and markets of wood products executed and the SMEs apply knowledge and lessons learned


10% increase in volume of sales; entrepreneurs apply new concepts of costing/pricing and markets

List of participants, sales records, Interviews


Interview with staff of UNALM

Not attained in full

3. Capacity building on productivity executed and entrepreneurs apply knowledge learned from training


10% increase in production; entrepreneurs apply new concepts of production


Interview with UNALM staff

Not fully attained


Annex 11 Logical Framework Matrix of the Philippine National Project




As verified

Development Objective

To uplift the socio-economic well being of the selected forest-based communities through the establishment of small and medium scale forest-based enterprises in the selected sites in the Philippines

Actual establishment of the enterprise within the community; increase in income generated by the community; increase in the number of employed workers in the community

Actual operation of an enterprise in the community; improved quality of life of the community as manifested by improved peace and order, more opportunities for schooling of children, etc.; community livelihood profile

Community has sufficient forest based resources, government and local institutions willing to support community efforts to establish a forest based enterprise

Specific Objectives

a. To enable the communities to realize the business ideas they developed in the FTP/ ITTO training by facilitating community business planning

Community business planning meeting

Minutes of meetings

Business plans

Community members are willing to partici-pate in business planning to ensure success


b. To assist the communities in gaining access to sources of capital needed for the enterprise

Banks willing to lend capital to communities

Transfer of support funds and investment capital;

Loan agreement

Bank willing to lend capital to communities


c. To assist communities in the construction and installation of facilities and in the actual operation of a community-based enterprise

Actual construction and installation of infrastructure and equipment

Site visits Community able to locate a site for the enterprise


d. To provide exposure to and training opportunities on processing and to put in place enabling mechanisms to improve their entrepreneurial skills

Actual implementation of training and skills upgrading; number of residents who have undergone training

Training design, training curriculum, completion report, evaluation report, availability of skilled workers

Project was able to conduct a training needs assessment that clearly identifies skills and competencies needed in running the



business

e. To assist in product promotion and market development

Market study, participation in trade fairs, establishment of display center

Market study report, actual exhibits, purchase orders and outputs per day

Community able to respond to results of market study and participate in fairs



Annex 12 Logical Framework Matrix of the Ghana National Project




As verified

Development Objectives

Increased productivity, income and employment levels of the SMEs in the furniture manufacturing sector in Kumasi-Ghana

Quality of products per man-time, volume of exports, number of trained personnel in SMEs, sales revenue, sales volume, average unit price, % skilled labor and total employment levels increased

Project Purpose

Improve managerial and technical skills of personnel in the SMEs in the furniture manufacturing sector in Kumasi – Ghana, and enhance their operations through cluster formation

Recovery rate (%) increased

Delivery time improved

Percentage of marks scored in areas of evaluation, i.e. house keeping, quality assurance

Results 1

Two pilot clusters of up to 7 SMEs per cluster in the furniture sector established and assisted

Number of clusters established

Number of SMEs in cluster

Interviews with cluster members (2 clusters of 7 members formed)

Monitoring report

Results 2

Training curricula in business management, quality assurance, plant layout, material handling, maintenance and furniture design are developed and implemented for SMEs in the furniture sector

Total number of courses developed and implemented

Number of participants per course

Interviews with WITC PC and staff

Copies of Curriculum and training materials

Monitoring report

Results 3

Intra and inter cooperation between furniture manufacturing

Number of coordinating meeting held a year

Interviews with WITC staff and PC


associations and forestry related institutions (e.g. FORIG, FC, TEDD, WITC) strengthened

Number of reps of the furniture assoc. attending coordinating meetings

Number of meetings between the furniture assoc. a year

Interviews with members of 2 clusters (WAG and FAWAG)

Results 4

Human resource capacity of 20 WITC developed

Number of instructors trained in computer skills, curriculum development, pedagogics and preparation of teaching materials

Interviews with WITC instructors (only 7 were capacitated)

Results 5

Baseline studies on cluster member companies conducted and overall project activities monitored and reported on

Baseline studies on at least 14 furniture companies

85% of the members SMEs covered in baseline studies

Monitoring report (baseline study completed, 70% of SMEs covered in baseline study)


Annex 13 Logical Framework Matrix of the Honduras National Project

Project Elements Objectively

Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification


As verified

Development Objective

The woodworking sector in the area of Siguatepeque and San Pedro Sula is strengthened in organization and in enterprise development

25% increase in sales

Quality of products at level of national standards

Increase in markets at national level

Sales invoices

List of clients

Interview with COTRAMASIL and ECASUL members (from 10 to 40% increase)

Specific Objectives

10 enterprises in woodworking are organized, consolidated and working efficiently

Production contracts executed by the group

Contract agreements

Legal framework that promotes SMEs in the wood working sector is in place

Interview with COTRAMASIL members, certificate of registration as cooperative (22 members)

Result 1

System of production and market established in the wood working enterprises

Increase production by 10%

25% increase in sales

Purchase invoices of raw materials

Volume of production and sales

Inventory of machineries

Interview with COTRAMASIL and ECASUL members (from 10 to 40% increase in productivity and sales)

Result 2

Programs of capacity building and technical assistance executed and participants put into practice acquired new knowledge

50 participants from the wood working industry capacitated by end of 2001

100 planned technical assistances executed by end of 2001

Report of training

Supervision visits

Registry of visits

Investigation

25 participants from wood working industry trained,

40 technical assistances a year conducted after end of project

Interview with COTRAMASIL and ECASUL members


Annex 14. Production, trade and consumption of tropical timber by country, 1998-2001 (000 m3)

COUNTRY/PRODUCT PRODUCTION IMPORTS EXPORTS DOMESTIC CONSUMPTION

AFRICA 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

LOGS 11080 12191 13287 12980 12814 2 86 66 38 26 4368 4107 4836 4551 4120 6714 8171 8516 8467 8720

SAWN 2130 2012 2614 2217 2260 2 8 8 24 29 1308 1417 2093 1545 1672 824 602 529 696 617

VENEER 561 625 716 710 722 1 1 3 0 3 372 434 394 384 344 190 191 325 327 381

PLYWOOD 355 366 314 297 353 11 135 44 21 11 124 213 200 166 243 242 289 158 152 121

Ghana

LOGS 1138 1102 998 1212 1000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1138 1102 998 1212 1000

SAWN 590 454 475 480 461 0 0 0 0 0 253 250 243 239 288 337 204 232 241 173

VENEER 90 150 245 259 264 0 0 0 0 0 84 101 111 114 112 6 49 134 145 152

PLYWOOD 71 75 90 114 104 0 0 0 0 0 12 25 47 53 40 59 50 43 61 64

ASIA-PACIFIC

LOGS 83167 82385 80538 76491 74809 3186 3963 4236 4495 3532 7983 9974 11536 11119 8438 78370 76374 73239 69866 69904

SAWN 21486 21127 21055 20250 20141 1698 1822 2085 2880 1665 3575 3537 4487 5570 5657 19609 19412 18654 17560 16149

VENEER 1078 1244 1452 1064 1226 98 222 207 221 189 955 1045 1011 712 602 221 421 647 573 812

PLYWOOD 12383 12298 13464 12473 12707 102 97 107 86 73 11201 9750 11319 10028 9914 1284 2646 2252 2531 2866

Philippines

LOGS 634 730 800 401 390 435 584 585 551 531 0 0 0 5 1 1069 1314 1385 947 921

SAWN 222 288 151 199 188 296 381 359 371 369 41 69 120 105 121 477 600 389 465 436

VENEER 59 89 178 255 311 63 139 123 114 130 32 5 5 3 2 90 223 296 366 439

PLYWOOD 281 243 326 348 329 5 5 5 8 8 6 12 11 7 7 280 236 320 349 330


LATIN AMERICA/CARIBBEAN

LOGS 98470 114215 115819 115592 116305 60 36 55 126 115 1088 670 948 837 834 97443 113580 114927 114881 115586

SAWN 23343 21480 26293 26252 26246 354 289 258 249 207 1601 2291 2400 2597 3307 22096 19477 24151 23903 23146

VENEER 513 675 738 735 734 33 22 26 30 16 156 118 91 70 98 390 579 673 695 652

PLYWOOD 2022 2507 2777 2611 2573 62 55 84 89 83 609 1271 1151 1549 830 1475 1292 1710 1151 1827

Honduras

LOGS 795 853 756 832 898 2 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 760 853 756 832 898

SAWN 369 404 437 410 475 16 5 6 6 5 207 130 139 184 150 178 279 304 232 330

VENEER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

PLYWOOD 19 20 7 7 8 2 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 7 7 15 15 2 1 2

Peru

LOGS 1879 1570 1511 1071 1071 11 5 23 21 25 0 0 0 0 0 1890 1575 1534 1092 1096

SAWN 610 835 646 494 494 3 5 7 11 10 63 74 87 80 105 550 766 566 427 399

VENEER 7 7 8 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 8 8 5 0 0 0 2 5

PLYWOOD 57 34 36 71 71 1 0 0 1 1 10 8 14 19 15 48 26 22 52 57

Source: Annual review and assessment of the world timber situation, 2002. ITTO.

EX-POST EVALUATION ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV. 3(1) · 2013-11-06 · Switzerland, decided that an...

Documents

Transcript of EX-POST EVALUATION ITTO PROJECT PD 13/95 REV. 3(1) · 2013-11-06 · Switzerland, decided that an...