 The CDD approach of the Social Investment Funds (SIF) has two main implications for the social protection area. Firstly, it provides a venue for employment generation. Secondly, Social Investment Funds often fill the gap left by the government social protection programs.
Armenia Social Investment Fund (ASIF) : lessons learned and main challenges
The implementation of the ASIF project has clearly demonstrated the critical need to improve project sustainability through a comprehensive framework encompassing strong institutional support from the ASIF office, effective systems and procedures, and greater involvement of the key stakeholders. The strengthened institutional structure of the ASIF focuses on institutional mechanisms to:
1. Improve the quality through compliance with technical standards and closer supervision;
2. Develop the capacity of local authorities and community-based associations through training and technical assistance to help formulate budgets for financing operations and maintenance of completed microprojects;
3. Strengthen local government and community involvement in the design, implementation, and maintenance of microprojects; and
4. Provide training to ASIF staff and to members of the IAs in: a) basic concepts of sustainability; b) how to operationalize sustainability; c) financial implications; and d) methods of financing operations and maintenance activities.
The main ASIF challenges were:
1. Lack of clarity in the role and functions of the Institutions Support Unit. Lack of an integrated institutional framework for carrying out training, monitoring and evaluation activities. This resulted in the lack of a unit responsive to training demands identified at each stage of the microproject cycle; and gaps in training on project implementation, operations and maintenance and quality of works.
2. Limited community participation beyond the project identification phase. This lead to the lack of the communities' involvement in operations and maintenance of facilities.
3. Poor quality of works resulting in a significant number of completed microprojects having quality of works below the acceptable standards.
Despite its limitations, ASIF generated visible development impact in terms of social and economic benefits to the poorest communities of Armenia. Furthermore, being the first SIF in the region, it provided valuable lessons for the subsequent Social Investment Funds in the region. Perhaps the most important lesson was that in order to ensure project success, management issues and institutional aspects have to be addressed in project design. More emphasis is needed on training programs and internalization of good management practices.
Moldova SIF lessons learned and main challenges:
(1) Community development is time consuming;
(2) Scaling up and maintaining the quality of interventions;
(3) Sustaining the impact on community capacity developed beyond the project cycle in an environment of no economic growth and deteriorating economic conditions; and
(4) How to improve impact monitoring, especially when it comes to human and social capital.
 Â Presentation on Moldova Social Investment Fund- Empowering Rural Communities (6MB ppt)
 Notes from the BBL (8k pdf)Â
|
RSS