VZCZCXRO4921
RR RUEHMA RUEHPA
DE RUEHAB #0669/01 1761240
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 251240Z JUN 07
FM AMEMBASSY ABIDJAN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3173
INFO RUEHZK/ECOWAS COLLECTIVE
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 0569
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ABIDJAN 000669 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR AF/W AND PRM/AFR/CACHANG 
STATE PASS TO USAID/OFDA/DDEBERNARDO 
GENEVA FOR RMA 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREF PHUM IV LI
SUBJECT: MONITORING AND EVALUATION REPORT FOR IRC LIBERIA: 
SPRMCO06CA190 
 
¶1.  Summary:  The Abidjan-based Refugee Coordinator 
(RefCoord) for West Africa conducted a monitoring and 
evaluation (M&E) assessment of the International Rescue 
Committee's (IRC) PRM-funded project, "Integrated Protection 
and Assistance to Support the Reintegration of Displaced 
Liberian."  RefCoord visited IRC offices and project sites in 
Monrovia, Zorzor, Yeala, Fissebu, Borkeza, Konia, Voinjama, 
and Kolahun in January and May of 2007.  RefCoord is 
particularly pleased with IRC's education activities and 
encouraged to find so many IRC teachers who had previously 
worked with or were trained by IRC in refugee camps now 
working in schools spread throughout Lofa County.  RefCoord 
believes IRC is on target to meet most of its indicators by 
the end of the project.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.  The Abidjan-based Refugee Coordinator (RefCoord) for West 
Africa conducted a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) assessment 
of the International Rescue Committee's (IRC) PRM-funded 
project, "Integrated Protection and Assistance to Support the 
Reintegration of Displaced Liberians."  RefCoord visited IRC 
offices and project sites in Monrovia, Zorzor, Yeala, 
Fissebu, Borkeza, Konia, Voinjama, and Kolahun in January and 
May of 2007.  RefCoord met IRC staff Nathan Richardson 
(Country Director), Estelle Brumskine (Financial Controller), 
Lynn Bowers (Education Coordinator), Angela Bailey (IRC 
Monrovia), and Elijah Okeyo (Voinjama Field Coordinator). 
RefCoord also spoke to Raouf Mazou (UNHCR Representative) and 
Cesar Ortega (UNHCR Voinjama) with regard to field-level 
coordination with IRC and a number of other NGO staff working 
in collaboration with IRC. 
 
OBJECTIVES AND INDICATORS 
------------------------- 
 
¶3.  OBJECTIVE 1:  To reduce morbidity, mortality and 
disability through improved access to primary health care and 
water and sanitation services in catchment areas in Zorzor 
and Salayea Districts. 
 
-  IRC has conducted targeted health training sessions.  IRC 
will not meet the figure of a 50 percent increase in 
knowledge, however, they do report an increase of more than 
20 percent.  Given the initially high pre-test scores, this 
should be considered as a positive result and having met the 
indicator; 
-  100 percent of deliveries at health facilities received a 
TT2 (above target); 
-  IRC is on target for persons attending health sessions per 
month; 
-  Monthly joint supervision visits are conducted at each of 
the three health facilities; 
-  IRC has had trouble establishing an operational health 
fund with one Community Health Committee.  Health Committees 
have had to be completely reconstituted.  IRC plans to 
establish this fund in Fissebu and will report on progress in 
final report; 
-  IRC expects to meet indicator for water consumption/person 
before end of project; 
-  IRC has met its target on number of water samples that 
have 0 faecal coliforms per 100ml at the point of delivery; 
-  IRC believes it will fall just short of its indicator for 
KAP survey respondents who use latrines; 
-  IRC stated it will meet the indicator on contributions to 
water committees, although assistance will not all be 
financial.  For example, some committees will receive 
agricultural assistance that can be used to generate 
financial 
inputs. 
 
¶4.  OBJECTIVE 2:  To improve prevention and response to 
gender-based violence through partnership with Ministry of 
Gender, the Ministry of Justice and stakeholders such as 
Women's Action Groups (WAGs). 
 
-  IRC reports it has met or will meet all indicators under 
this objective except for the indicator on conducting 4 
training sessions per quarter for 115 persons from partner 
organizations.  IRC reported it was too ambitious with this 
indicator.  IRC stated it will organize four training 
sessions in the last quarter but organized only a total of 
four training sessions for the previous three quarters. 
Although IRC meets regularly with its partners, IRC reported 
it is difficult to generate interest in training activities 
when it does not offer sitting fees or other incentives. 
 
¶5.  OBJECTIVE 3:  To improve access to quality education at 
 
ABIDJAN 00000669  002 OF 003 
 
 
five primary schools and three secondary schools in Zorzor 
and Salayea districts. 
 
-  IRC has met the first two indicators under this objective; 
-  IRC reported it might not be possible to report on its 
indicator for PTAs that generate income from 
income-generating activities due to the difference between 
the project cycle and the planting/harvest cycle.  Most PTAs 
planted crops this past spring and will only harvest them 
after the end of the current project; 
-  The number of repatriating teachers (89) remains below the 
target figure of 200.  However, IRC teamed up with UNHCR and 
the Ministry of Education this spring to offer a specific 
package to qualified teachers in host countries willing to 
work in rural areas.  RefCoord is aware that many teachers 
have accepted this package and RefCoord met IRC teachers 
working in local schools throughout Lofa County in 
particular.  IRC will report final numbers at the end of 
project; 
-  IRC has met its final indicator under this objective. 
 
PROGRAM ISSUES 
 
¶6.  Cross-cutting Goals:  The IRC project targets the health 
and education sector in its projects.  Although many of IRC's 
training and health activities are geared to the larger 
community, IRC does give special attention to the needs of 
vulnerable groups within those communities.  IRC-run schools 
in Lofa County have made significant progress over the last 
two years and school enrollments are up, thus providing 
direct benefits to children.  IRC has significant non-PRM 
donor resources in Liberia and is well poised to carry many 
of its activities through the relief to development 
transition phase in Liberia. 
 
¶7.  Coordination:  IRC decided to withdraw as an implementing 
partner with UNHCR during the project cycle.  This ruffled 
some feathers within UNHCR.  Part of the reason for this 
decision might have to do with the significant amount of 
non-refugee funding sources and its interest to move into 
longer-term activities.  However, IRC and UNHCR are currently 
looking at areas where they can still work closely together. 
The joint IRC-UNHCR-Ministry of Education package offered to 
teachers in countries of asylum willing to work in rural 
areas is a good example of continued, though more limited, 
cooperation. 
 
¶8.  Effective Use of Funds:  RefCoord and other PRM staff 
have come across IRC teachers throughout Lofa County and in 
some areas of Bong County.  These are teachers who were 
either trained by or worked with IRC in refugee camps in 
Guinea and Sierra Leone.  IRC support to bring these teachers 
back and their responsive management of a number of schools 
in Liberia under this and previous PRM-funded projects, has 
been a determining factor in supporting return as a viable 
and durable solution for Liberian refugees.  Likewise, 
IRC-run clinics, alongside other NGO-run clinics, provide 
critical and reliable support to the health care system as 
the local and national health infrastructure comes back on 
line.  IRC is also one of a core group of NGOs in Liberia 
that have taking a leading role in promoting GBV issues. 
 
¶9.  Sphere Standards:  IRC applies SPHERE standards in its 
health and wat/san activities. 
 
¶10.  Financial and Personnel Systems:  IRC has been able to 
identify and release employees involved in financial 
mismanagement through its own internal controls.  RefCoord 
believes current Monrovia and field staff appear more engaged 
than in previous years and have improved supervision of field 
level activities.  IRC Monrovia reports strong coordination 
with its HQs and conducts regular monitoring visits to the 
field. 
 
¶11.  Coordination with PRM:  IRC's new Country Director, 
though fully engaged, has sometimes failed to communicate 
emerging problems with PRM.  This seems to be mostly linked 
to the PRM-funded SEA project, but it has taken him time to 
adjust to the idea of having a regular, working relationship 
with the donor.  Nevertheless, RefCoord has found the IRC 
staff easy to work with and requests for additional 
information easy to gather.  RefCoord and PRM Washington 
staff in January found one of the IRC schools to be suffering 
from obvious management problems during a joint visit with 
IRC.  IRC responded by meeting with the PTA after our visit 
and then dismissed most of the school's administration as a 
 
ABIDJAN 00000669  003 OF 003 
 
 
result of the issues the PRM team found.  Although it would 
have been better not to have arrived a such a point, this 
demonstrates IRC's willingness to respond to PRM's concerns 
when real issues are identified.  IRC has submitted all 
progress reports on time. 
 
¶12.  Security:  IRC reported concern with security at its 
office in Kolahun and was taking steps to improve its 
security profile at its compound.  IRC staff abide by the 
UNMIL midnight curfew in upper-Lofa County. 
 
¶13.  Problems:  IRC reported an increase in malnutrition and 
TB cases at a referral clinic it had just taken over from 
ICRC in Kolahun.  IRC is coordinating a response in 
cooperation with WFP and other NGOs on the ground.  The only 
other significant problem reported involved the decision to 
withdraw as a UNHCR implementing partner as mentioned above. 
 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶14.  RefCoord believes IRC is on target to meet most of its 
indicators by the end of the project.  RefCoord is 
particularly pleased with IRC's education activities and 
encouraged to find so many IRC teachers in schools spread 
throughout Lofa County.  Although IRC has moved quickly, and 
visibly, into areas of upper-Lofa County, RefCoord does not 
believe IRC alone can meet all the needs within the various 
local communities, despite their decision to, "go-it-alone" 
with UNHCR.  At the same time, PRM has encouraged its 
partners to diversify their donors as our funding begins to 
decline.  IRC, with its broad donor base, has positioned 
itself well to make the transition from relief to development 
in Liberia. 
HOOKS