Maal Department, Government of the Punjab has initiated the scheme titled “Strengthening of Existing Old Age Homes and Establishment of 3 More Homes in Punjab”. The project was commenced in December 2005 and the actual completion date of the project was 30th June, 2012. The project was approved with an original planned cost of Rs. 216. 741 million and it was revised four times with planned cost of Rs. 103. 157 million, Rs. 127. 597 million, Rs. 123. 552 million and Rs. 216. 741 million respectively while the gestation period of the project increased to thirty six (36) months in final revision of the project.
The actual cost of the project remained Rs. 216. 93266 million which is higher then the planned project cost in 4th revision of the project PC? I. The request for PC? IV evaluation of the project was submitted after the closure of the project on 7th November, 2012 to Directorate General of Monitoring & Evaluation, Planning & Development Department. 1. 1 THE EVALUATION REPORT: PURPOSE & STRUCTURE This evaluation report is divided into five different parts. The first part starts with introduction giving details about the project domain and structure of the project evaluation report.
The second part of this report focuses on evaluation methodology, followed by documents review, selection of performance indicators, project site visit plan etc. The third part of the report depicts the DGM&E’s assessment pertaining to the actual status of the project performance against its planned objectives and data analysis based on project cost. The fourth part of report consists of observations regarding the project activities made by the evaluation team of DGM&E, P&D Department. The fifth and the most critical part reflect recommendations for effective use of project outcomes and resources.
This section addresses the suggestions for improvement in project planning and execution as well as, 1 | P a g e identifying matters requiring follow up actions. The rationale for recommendations is clearly explained and linked with the information collected during evaluation. 1. 2 THE PROJECT Following is the project information as per PC? I & PC? IV. Table 1: Project Brief Project Title Strengthening of Existing Old Age Homes And Establishment of 3 More Homes in Punjab Location Sahiwal, Narowal, T. T. Singh, Lahore, Rawalpindi, Multan Sponsoring Ministry/
Agency Department of Social Welfare & Bait? ul? Maal, Department Punjab. Execution Agency (s) Directorate General of Social Welfare, Bait? ul? Maal , Department Punjab Operation & Maintenance Department of Social Welfare and Bait? ul? Maal Punjab PCI Original cost 216. 741 Million PC1 Revised cost (20062007) 103. 157 Million PC2nd Revised cost (20092010) 127. 597 Million PC3rd Revised cost (20092010) 123. 552 Million PC4th Revised cost (20112012) 216. 741 Million PCIV Actual Cost 216. 93266 Million Planned Start Date 22nd December, 2005 Planned End Date June 2008
Revised End Date June 2012 Actual End Date June 2012 Beneficiaries Old age and shelter less people 2 | P a g e 1. 3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES Department of Social Welfare strives for the welfare & development of all segments of population Department of Social Welfare has established many Institutions for orphans, homeless and shelter less etc persons. This scheme is also in continuation of department’s ambition to expand the network of old age homes for male and female in the whole province. The following objectives were defined in the PC?
I of the project: 1) Strengthening of existing Old Age Homes of Lahore, Multan & Rawalpindi by providing these homes with least equipment, furniture and additional staff so that these homes may develop a better service delivery system. 2) Establishment of 3 new Old Age Homes at the district of Narowal, Sahiwal & T. T. Singh. 3) To provide facilities like boarding & loading, food, clothes, regular medical Checkup & recreational services to inmates. 4) To provide Counseling Services. 5) To establish Senior citizen`s club through active involvement of community members.
6) Technical/vocational skill development training in collaboration with the other social welfare institutions. 3 | P a g e 2. METHODOLOGY Following criteria has been use to carry out evaluation of the project as elaborated in flow chart as given in Figure 1; 2. 1 TEAM FORMATION Evaluation team was constituted in a meeting held in the office of DGM&E for evaluation of the project having expertise in project’s domain, data collection methods, data analysis and interpretation along with preparation of evaluation report. The project was assign to Mr. Majid Ali Khan, Statistical Data Processor for evaluation purposes.
2. 2 DOCUMENTS REVIEW Following project documents, evaluation tools and techniques were consulted. 1. Planning Commission Form? I (PC? I, Original & Revised) of the Project 2. Planning Commission Form? IV (PC? IV) of the Project 2. 3 IDENTIFICATION OF KEY INDICATORS Project performance parameters are defined in the following term; i) Project cost ii) Project time duration iii) Project achievements against its per approved objectives & targets • Enrollment of Old inmate (50 males & 50 female) • Facilities like boarding & loading, food, clothes, regular medical Checkup • Pre?
vocational/technical skill development • Counseling Services • Establishment of Senior citizen`s club 2. 4 PROJECT SITE VISITS The randomly selected project sites were visited by the Evaluation Team of the Directorate General, Monitoring & Evaluation, Planning & Development Department for data collection & evaluation purposes on July 22nd November, 2012 and 5th December, 2012. Detail has been given in the ensuing paragraph; 4 | P a g e Table 2: Plan for Evaluation along with detail of Team Members SR # 1. 2. LOCATION/DISTRICT DATE OF VISITS Existing Old Age Home (Multan) 22. 11. 2012
New Old Age Home (Narowal) 05. 12. 2012 TEAM MEMBERS 1. Muhammad Azhar (System Administrator) 2. Majid Ali Khan (Statistical Data Processor) 3. Muhammad Asif (Data Entry Operator) 1. Majid Ali Khan (Statistical Data Processor) 2. Muhammad Asif (Data Entry Operator) 2. 5 INTERVIEWS WITH PROJECT OFFICIALS The interviews and telephonic conversation were conducted with the following project official. Table 3: Detail of the Project Officials interviewed SR # NAME DESIGNATION DEPARTMENT CONTACT # 1 Ms. Sofia Shahida Research Officer Social Welfare 0334? 4365276 2 Mr. Javed Butt DEO, Narowal
Office Official Social Welfare 0346? 4484836 5 | P a g e Fig 1: Flow chart/ Schematic diagram for project evaluation 6 | P a g e 3. DGM&E ASSESSMENT The DGM&E assessment has been carried out regarding planned objectives as well as planned targets of the project as following:? Table 4: DGM&E Assessment of Planned Objective/Targets ACTIVITIES/TARGETS DGM&E ASSESSMENT • Strengthening of existing Old Age Homes of Lahore, Multan & Rawalpindi by providing these homes with least equipment, furniture and additional staff so that these homes may develop a better service delivery system
Partially Achieved • Establishment of 3 new Old Age Homes at the district of Narowal, Sahiwal & T. T. Singh Achieved • Facilities like boarding & loading, food, clothes, regular medical Checkup & recreational services Partially Achieved • Counseling Services Partially Achieved • Senior citizen`s club through active involvement of community members Not Achieved • Technical/vocational skill development training in collaboration with the other social welfare institutions Not Achieved 3. 1 PROJECT COST ANALYSIS 1. Total Planned Cost (Original):
• Capital Cost Rs. • Revenue Cost Rs. TOTAL 67. 700 Million 149. 041 Million Rs. 216. 741 Million 2. Total Planned Cost (1st Revised): • Capital Cost Rs. 67. 700 Million • Revenue Cost Rs. 35. 457 Million TOTAL Rs. 103. 157 Million 3. Total Planned Cost (2nd Revised): • Capital Cost Rs. 67. 700 Million • Revenue Cost Rs. 59. 897 Million TOTAL Rs. 127. 597 Million 4. Total Planned Cost (3rd Revised): 7 | P a g e • • Capital Cost Rs. 70. 165 Million Revenue Cost Rs. 53. 387 Million TOTAL Rs. 123. 552 Million 5. Total Planned Cost (4th Revised): • Capital Cost Rs. 67.
700 Million • Revenue Cost Rs. 149. 041 Million TOTAL Rs. 216. 741 Million 6. Total Expenditure: • Capital Exp. Rs. 80. 15266 Million • Revenue Exp. Rs. 136. 78 Million TOTAL Rs. 216. 93266 Million Table 5: Financial Phasing as per PCI, Allocation and Actual Expenditure (Rs. in millions) as per PCIV % age Utilization on Releases 2. 000 1. 600 80% 25. 000 25. 000 23. 312 93. 248% 22. 000 22. 000 22. 000 19. 614 89. 15% 2008? 09 28. 000 28. 000 19. 818 16. 511 83. 31% 2009? 10 37. 854 37. 854 37. 854 39. 572 104. 54% 2010? 11 13. 120 13.
120 13. 120 24. 543 187. 06% 2011? 12 12. 017 12. 017 12. 017 11. 628 96. 76% TOTAL 139. 017 M 139. 017 M 131. 809 M 136. 78 M 103. 771% Year PCI Phasing PSDP Allocation Releases 2005? 06 2. 000 2. 000 2006? 07 25. 000 2007? 08 Expenditure 8 | P a g e 45 5 40 0 Amount in Rs. Millions 35 5 Relea ases Expenditure as E s per PCIV 30 0 25 5 20 0 15 5 10 0 5 0 200506 200607 200708 200809 200910 201011 201112 Years Fig 2. Year? w F wise Allocat tion, Release es and Expe enditures Table 6: : Itemswis se Planned & Actual Expenditure es (Only pr rovided dat ta for 2009 910) (Rs s.
In Millions) PC CI ACTUAL L % AGE OF SR # ITE EMS ESTIM MATES UTILIZATION UTILIZATION Employee r E related 1 842. 16% Expenses E 1. 3 308 1. 101545 5 Purchase of P f Furniture & & 2 118. 26% Fixture F 7. 3 317 8. 65284 4 3 P Purchase of f Physical 153. 32% Assets A 2. 1 129 3. 264276 6 4 P Purchase of f Transport (including P P. O. L, repair r 64. 85% & maintena & ance) 21. .74 14. 09888 8 TOTAL L 31. 4 494 37. 0314 4 117. 58% Transpor rt (including P. O O. L, repair & maintenance) ) Purchase of Phy P ysical Assets Purc chase of Furnitur re & Fixture E
Employee relate ed Expenses ACTUAL UT TILIZATION 0 5 10 1 PCI Estimates 15 20 25 Am mount in Rs. Mil llions Fig 3: Pe ercentage Sh hare of Item ms? wise Exp penditures 9 | P a g e 4. OBSERVATIONS Terminal Evaluation of the project has revealed many facts and figures about the project. The observations regarding overall project activities are given in ensuring paragraphs:? 4. 1 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS 1. The project was initiated at its original cost of Rs. 216. 741 million and revised for planned cost of Rs. 103. 157 million, Rs. 127. 597 million, Rs. 123. 552 million and Rs. 216.
741 million in 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th revision respectively. Initially project was conceived with four year gestation period but it was revised for further three years extension in gestation period for the year 2009? 2012. The actual utilization (up to June, 2012) of the project remained Rs. 216. 93266 million as per PC? IV document which is approximately higher than the approved cost (i. e. 2nd Revision cost). Department should justify the issue. 2. The frequent revisions in times and cost reflects poor planning & management and non?
professional handling of the scheme. There was no substantial change in scope of work that could have warranted extension or revision of scheme. Project with initial gestation period of 48 months was completed in 72 months. 3. While initiating the project activities, 50 boarders male along? with 50 female (total 100 per home) were proposed to be accommodated in these newly established Old Age Homes, but the enrollment of inmates against the overall project period e. g. 2005? 2012 remained very low (avg. 23 per home), while carrying out the project analysis as per PC? I. 4.
All the planned targets/activities have been poorly performed under the development phase of the project. But it is strictly required to meet the planned objectives in its right way especially by up? grading the standard of boarding/lodging at Home for Old Age Home inmates and providing them a familiar and healthy environment. 5. Project activities and objectives such as regular medical checkup and recreational services, counseling services, establishment of senior citizen`s club, technical/vocational training in collaboration with the other social welfare institutions was not achieved.
10 | P a g e 6. A post of Psychologist (part time) and Doctor (part time) remained vacant throughout the project life which was the most important objective of the project, because at the time of admission the individuals were supposed to be examined by these professionals to check the physical health & contagious disease of the intakes. 7. Project resources e. g. vehicle for facilitating old mates at both centers procured under the scheme was not delivered to project site. This disturbs the overall planning mechanism of project.
Resources procured under the project should be utilized by the beneficiaries of the same project to get intended impact of development funds. 8. Furniture & Fixture and Machinery & Equipment procured under this project was of very poor quality. Material and items were not purchased in accordance to the specifications, specified in PC? I documents e. g. Sony TV was supposed to be purchased but TV of an unknown Chinese brand was purchased and placed at these Old Age Homes. Moreover, furniture was not made of Shisham and was in degraded condition, unlike specified in PC?
I. Moreover, Washing Machines were purchased and provided to the beneficiaries instead of the Washing Plant as mentioned in the approved PC? I as well as in PC? IV. Department needs to investigate the issue through a Formal Inquiry and fix the responsibility of fault resulting loss to the public exchequer and accordingly appropriate recovery should be made from responsible person. 9. On page 4 of the PC? IV in section 11, total 131. 8 Million rupees were released to this project in seven years, however, total expenditure of 136.
78 Million rupees were made during total gestation period of project. Department needs to explain this issue in evaluation committee meeting and justify how expenditure can be more than releases of the project. 11 | P a g e 4. 2 OLD AGE HOME (MULTAN) OBSERVATION The evaluation team visited the office of the Social Welfare Officer, Old Age Home at Community Centre Building, Multan to assess various project activities like its physical targets, free of cost boarding facilities etc. Evaluation of the project has revealed many facts and figures about the project.
The main observations regarding overall project activities are given in ensuing paragraphs:? 1. According to PC? I, 50 males and 50 females inmates were supposed to be facilitated in these old age home but actually only seven inmates including one female were found at the time of visit. Moreover, hygienic conditions were also found very unsatisfactory. Furthermore, the Old Age Home building, currently located in a building which is very poor in condition and shifted from the new building which was located in industrial area.
2. It was observed that Machinery & Equipment and Furniture & Fixture procured under this project at this site were partially installed and functional and remaining items were placed in stores in its original packing e. g. furniture/fixture, refrigerator. Moreover, purchased items and material was also of not good quality. Microwave oven (01), electric water cooler (02), Installation of telephone, wheel chairs (03), Air cooler (06), Iron (03), book shelves (06), and many other facilities for residential block were found missing.
Most of the Machinery/equipment are stored in the industrial area building which is much far away from the existing building and items which are stored is not in use and still worthless. Department needs to justify the issue. 3. It was also observed during site visit that store rooms consisting two large halls at industrial area building about 20 Km far away from Old Age Home were found full with the inventory, e. g. Machinery & Equipment, Furniture & Fixture as well as the items lying idle even against the vacant seats of inmates is representing the embellished