PEACE WORKS, Assam Riot Victims’ Rehabilitation and Development Support Midterm Evalauation Report

Background

In May 1996 and September 1998 Kokrajhar district (lower Assam), consisting of two subdivisions - Kokrajhar and Gossaigaon - witnessed violent ethnic conflict between the majority Bodos and the minority migrant Santhal community. (Although the conflict affected other districts such as Dhubri and Bongaigaon, Kokrajhar was the worst affected.) Hundreds were reportedly killed, thousands of homes destroyed, and several lakh people of both communities displaced. The Assam State government brought in military force to quell the rioting, and over 250,000 people took refuge in 68 relief camps.

LWSI responded by providing temporary housing assistance, supplementary nutrition meals for women and children, economic skills training, clothing, education (school buildings and teachers) and so on. In this, it has been working together with other national and international NGOs. LWSI was also closely involved in the work of the local Inter Church Peace Mission, which worked to restore mutual trust between the two communities. NELC and Normisjon were also partners in these peace efforts.

During 2003 the conflict level gradually came down, and lot of people wanted to go back to their homestead where they had to begin rebuilding their village totally from scratch.

LWSI was approached by the District Commissioner to assist in rehabilitating those families who have returned to their own lands, by providing a variety of support - infrastructure (roads), housing, drinking water, education and livelihood. There were also requests coming from the riot victims and the government officials for rehabilitation that LWSI should intervene substantially and without delay, to address the severe economic and social problem being faced by the affected communities in the current situation.

LWSI prepared a project proposal for rehabilitation and development to Normisjon in 2003. Normisjon further approached NORAD for support. From 2004 a 5 year project was approved by support from Normisjon and NORAD with an Annual budget of approximately 150 000 USD.

Purpose/objective

2006 is the third year of the project and it is time for a project review to evaluate whether the project is on the right track. That means whether the approach is appropriate and effective in serving the target people in the best possible way and whether limited human and monetary resources are utilized efficiently. We also like to know how well the involvement of LWSI is welcomed and accepted by the local people. Practical recommendations for improvement will be an integrated part of the evaluation.

Methodology

The evaluation was be participatory in its approach and was done by combination of the following methods:
• Study plans and reports of the project
• Interviews
• Group discussions
• Field observations

Key findings

The community members themselves were all positive too about the relevance and effectiveness of project intervention although they were not familiar with the overall project goal and objectives. The impact of the project is to bring more development to the district than was likely without the troubles. The quality of livelihood support and infrastructure construction appeared good. The overall perception on the use of funds is that there is good value for money. Community discussions revealed that family income has risen; the rating out of 5 points was 3.5. The number of self-help groups, largely women's groups, that are operating and the level of organisation is impressive. This programme has some marked success areas such as the grain bank, mushroom growing and tailoring. However, several skills training courses did not show any income-generating results e.g. candle -making. LWS trained 35 Community Health Volunteers but they are not functioning regularly as a healthcare service in the community.
The creation and training of the Village Development Committees has led to positive improvements in the quality of village life. The public opinion is that VDCs have brought about better infrastructure from the Government as well as LWS.
The project has contributed significantly to the improved trust and solidarity between the people groups of the area. The construction of simple community centres located between villages of different people groups has been an enormous asset.

Recommendations

? The more remote villages should not be rejected but their remoteness should make them more suitable to be served by the project.
? On balance, the recommendation is that to allow all affected villages to be covered within the present project period, the project time in each village is reduced somewhat with the phases of resettlement contracted by 12-18 months.
? Gender issues need to addressed as a fundamental issue, probably in staff first and then in the community. This is probably the best route to address alcoholism, by aiming to increase family responsibility in men.
? Training results assessment is necessary
? More detailed training plans are needed with follow-up plans built in and budgeted