Document Type: Monitoring and Evaluation

In May 2012, USAID initiated a five-year activity (2012–2017) entitled People, Rules, and Organizations Supporting the Protection of Ecosystem Resources (PROSPER). The overall goal of the activity is to introduce, operationalize, and refine appropriate models for community management of forest resources for local self-governance and enterprise development in targeted areas of the country. The three primary objectives and program components are:

1. Expand educational and institutional capacity to improve environmental awareness, natural resource management, biodiversity conservation, and environmental compliance (Component 1);
2. Improve community-based forest management leading to more sustainable practices and reduced threats to biodiversity in target areas (Component 2); and
3. Enhance community-based livelihoods derived from sustainable forest-based and agriculture-based enterprises in target areas (Component 3).

EVALUATION PURPOSE AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS

This performance evaluation provides an independent and in-depth examination of the progress and achievements of the PROSPER activity. The evaluation was framed by eight evaluation questions, which the evaluation team used to identify the activity’s specific achievements, performance issues, and constraints. The main questions are listed below:

1. Benefits and Beneficiaries
   1. What is the extent of monetary and non-monetary benefits that have accrued under PROSPER?
2. Forest Management
   1. Do the communities/community members understand sustainable management concepts and how the concepts would apply in their forest management activities?
   2. Is the PROSPER approach to Community Forestry management working?
3. Engagement of Women and Youth
   1. Have women and youth been empowered as a result of their participation with PROSPER?
4. Institutional Capacity, Ownership, and Sustainability
   1. What are the results in terms of strengthening local institutional capacity, ownership, and the likelihood of long-term sustainability, especially within Government of Liberia institutions?

EVALUATION DESIGN, METHODS AND LIMITATIONS

The Liberia Strategic Analysis (LSA) evaluation team used a mixed-methods approach to its data collection, reviewing available quantitative data and collecting qualitative data relevant to the evaluation questions posed. The approach included:

• Review of documents and data, including existing quantitative data, PROSPER deliverables and reports, and background reports.
• Semi-structured key informant interviews (KIIs) and small group interviews of 77 individuals (18 women and 59 men) at national, local, and pilot locations, including national and local GoL officials, traditional and community leaders, PROSPER and PROSPER partner staff, community forest governance body members, general community members, private sector representatives, current and former USAID Mission and PROSPER staff, and other donors.
• Forty-one focus group discussions (FGDs) that included participants from PROSPER enterprise groups, traditional leaders, along with general community members. About 288 individuals participated in FGDs (130 women and 158 men).
• Direct observation at pilot locations.

The LSA evaluation team used a set of data collection instruments to guide the KIIs, FDGs, and Direct Observation. In total, the evaluation team collected data from 365 individuals (148 women and 217 men).

Site selection and sampling. The LSA evaluation team conducted data collection in Monrovia and at all 11 project locations in Grand Bassa and Nimba counties. At each of the 11 project locations, the team interviewed individuals from three or four towns or villages. In addition, the team interviewed PROSPER staff, partners, and local government officials at central locations in each county. The LSA team used purposeful and random selection methods for data collection locations, key informants, and focus group categories and participants.

Data analysis. The LSA team used the following methods and tools to assist in its analysis of the data: 1) individual assignments of LSA team members for a set of evaluation questions; 2) triangulation of available quantitative data with qualitative data, of qualitative data gathered using different methods, and data gathered at different locations; 3) systematic note-taking practices that included contemporaneous note-taking, regular review and recording of notes by note takers and interviewers, and team review of recorded notes; and 4) use of a Preliminary Findings Matrix to record preliminary findings and conclusions and encourage information sharing, testing of hypotheses, and challenging findings and conclusions by team members.

Limitations on access to data and data quality. The LSA team noted four circumstances that it recognized could impact the quality of the data collected.

In May 2012, Tetra Tech was contracted by USAID Liberia to implement the PROSPER Program. The goal of the five-year program is to “introduce, operationalize, and refine appropriate models for the community management of forest resources for local self-governance and enterprise development in targeted areas.”

That goal is to be achieved through the accomplishment of three major objectives:

• Expanded educational and institutional capacity to improve environmental awareness, Natural Resources Management (NRM), biodiversity conservation, and environmental compliance
• Improved community-based forest management, leading to more sustainable practices and reduced threats to biodiversity in target areas
• Enhanced community-based livelihoods derived from sustainable forest-based and agriculture-based enterprises in target areas

With assistance from the international community, Liberia has developed a strong legal framework to support community forestry, and is supporting pilots in 11 community forests in Nimba and Grand Bassa Counties. PROSPER and its predecessor project, the Land Rights and Community Forestry Program (LRCFP) have worked extensively on community-based livelihoods in and around community forests by building a greater understanding of the income-generation opportunities of non-timber forest products, and through work on sustainable agricultural practices. Community forestry is in its nascent stages in Liberia, and its potential benefits to communities and to Liberia’s development generally are not understood. More importantly, community forestry could play a critical role in the management of Liberia’s forestry sector and serve to balance a sector that is currently managed largely for and by foreign commercial interests through concession agreements. Additional enterprise development opportunities may exist in and around community forests related to sustainable wood-based enterprises.

However, these opportunities are poorly understood in terms of:

• the existing natural resource base;
• necessary rural infrastructure (transport and energy);
• technical and administrative human capacity to develop and manage rural forest product enterprises;
• value-added products;
• economics of supply and demand; and
• required investment (capital and knowledge).

In Liberia, commercial timber concessions are the primary means of exploiting timber resources. However, the opportunities for communities to participate in these markets are poorly understood. The dynamics of domestic timber production and opportunities for micro-scale harvesting, processing, and trade are not widely understood within the development community.

While PROSPER has been promoting forest management mainly based on the use of non-timber products, different circumstances have led to the need to incorporate the potential for timber product management. To be able to properly harvest forest products, the operations must incorporate appropriate planning practices, and forests must be managed based on best applicable practices to promote and achieve the sustainable management of forests.

Some prior efforts by the PROSPER Project have been aimed at training staff and community members on the appropriate procedures for planning forest management operations. In this sense, important efforts have been carried out in order to train personnel on implementing forest inventories and censuses and thus obtain the information required for planning management operations.

This report is part of the efforts to promote forest management that considers low impact timber production, among the communities assisted by PROSPER as an alternative to improve their living conditions and conserve the forest in the long term.

The report provides information on the best practices that should be incorporated into forestry activities in order to start on the path towards sustainable management and to ensure that forests are sustainably managed in the future.

As detailed below, forest management is a process and the main point to eventually attain sustainability is to start that process. If sustainability is viewed purely from a scientific or theoretical standpoint, on-ground action may never start, as all the necessary information and infrastructure to assure sustainability of the operation may be insufficient. This PRACTICAL guide proposes that management may be initiated through a set of basic activities, that may not be all necessary, but that will enable the commencing of the process.

It is likely that looking for an ideal situation may lead us to fall in that never ending discourse on what sustainable management is and is not, while the forests continues to be degraded through deforestation; as a result of stakeholders resorting to uninformed destructive short-term economic activities. It is possible that at the onset of the process not all the scientific or theoretical requirements may be complied with, not due to unwillingness to do so but simply because the conditions to fulfill them are not there.

This report constitutes a practical guide for forestry technicians, forest stakeholders, community leaders, and government officials involved in work with communities. The report has been developed using plain language in order to facilitate its application and promote its use. The extent to which the different topics are dealt with is based on the author’s experiences in Liberia in 2014, 2015 and 2016, including the field work and the needs identified during this field work. Also, the necessary level of detail and the way of presenting the topics have been discussed with the PROSPER staff and implementing partners that are in direct contact with the end users of this product.

This report has a sole and clear purpose; to promote forest conservation through responsible use in order for the forest to fulfill the functions required by its owners and users. Forest conservation is not pursued just to protect the forest, but instead to benefit the communities that need to use the forest and have preserved it so far and are, therefore, the main stakeholders for its conservation. Forest conservation cannot be considered without utilization or not taking into accounts the communities living in or around the forests.

This document refers to the best practices applied to the processes to start and implement Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) focusing on local communities, emphasizing timber and non-timber products; the former as they have the best potential to increase immediate socio-economic benefits and the latter due to its connotations for the current livelihoods of the communities in Liberia.

The term “immediate”, however, does not mean that we are to forgo long-term benefits such as wildlife and environmental services that are also part of SFM. Experience with this type of processes suggests that if we help local communities in starting actions in search of quick financial returns through the two products mentioned above, good incentives will be in place for the communities to continue learning from SFM and together with their social interaction processes, define and design high-value relationships with the market, implement suitable mechanisms to participate and collectively manage the benefits accrued, increase their technical capabilities to sustain SFM in a competitive way, embark in new processes to add value to their products or services, and learn to avoid or resolve conflicts, among others.

Reality, in this case, is simple. We can either start a process to organize how the forest is used in a process that includes some basic planning activities that can be carried out with the communities, or instead follow a course of NOT doing anything as we may:

• not have all the necessary information
• lack all the capacities needed in the field
• not know the impacts that forest use may have, or
• lack all the information on how to manage forest resources, both timber and non-timber, and allow the forest to gradually disappear while we try to obtain all the necessary scientific knowledge required.

As stated above, the main consequence of NOT doing anything may be the disappearance of the forest in the very short-term.

The overarching goal of USAID’s Liberia PROSPER program is to: introduce, operationalize, and refine appropriate models for community management of forest resources for local self-governance and enterprise development in target areas. PROSPER intends to achieve this through the following objectives:

• Objective 1: Expanded educational and institutional capacity to improve environmental awareness, NRM, biodiversity conservation, and environmental compliance
• Objective 2: Improved community-based forest management leading to more sustainable practices and reduced threats to biodiversity in target areas
• Objective 3: Enhanced community based livelihoods derived from sustainable forest-based and agriculture-based enterprises in target areas

A gender assessment, detailed below, was designed for the PROSPER program by PROSPER partner, Development and Training Services, Inc. The purpose of this gender assessment is to effectively integrate gender into programming. In the gender assessment, strategies are identified at the program, objective, and activities levels to support gender integration and the equitable distribution of program benefits.

The Liberian rice economy is extremely important to the diets of the population. According to FAOSTAT (2007) the Food Balance Sheet for Liberia indicates that 33% of per capital caloric intake is from milled rice, followed by 21% from cassava. Liberia relies heavily upon rice imports for 69% of annual consumption (2011 imports of 300 thousand metric tons (MOCI) for estimated 2011 consumption of 437 thousand metric tons (USDA, PSD).

Domestic rice output is predominantly produced under upland (slash and burn) production system. Average yields in Liberia are low by global standards (Figure 1). Most of the domestic rice output only sustains the farm household consumption. Very little surplus of domestic production enters into the commercial market, although accurate data on this flow are not available.

Enabling Environment

Clearly one of the major constraints facing enterprise development in Liberia for the rice sector is the presence and level of activity in rice by relief donor agencies and NGOs. While efforts by these groups have certainly assisted Liberia address food security concerns following the civil strife, their dominant presence in donating seeds, tools, etc. has the effect of suppressing private enterprise development.

Another major constraint is the gap in agronomic and economic research on rice. This gap constrains the ability of the project to promote meaningful farm level extension activities, timely and useful sales of output enhancing purchased inputs that translate research into improvement in productivity at the farm level. There are now credible estimates of the costs of producing rice under rain-fed upland, lowland or irrigated lowland. This is a major challenge for the project as it will need to benchmark progress not only in terms of enterprise development but also in terms of helping to reduce costs per unit of output.

A constraint also exists in terms of labor supply and increases in unskilled wage rates. According to price statistics collected and reported by LISGIS, wage rates have risen over the past two year although a cursory examination of the data suggests that labor markets are not well-integrated across counties.

Recommendations for FED Activities for the Rice Sector

Priorities:

1. Seed sector development. This should be the primary focus in the initial year of the project. There are improved varieties for both upland (Nerica 1, 2, and 14 and LAC 23 (red and white)) and lowland rice (Suakoko 8 and Nerica L 19) which can be produced and demonstrated for rice farmers. The project needs to go big with this activity by engaging as many leading farmers in each town/village to produce this year, even a demonstration plot of improved lowland rice variety, for seed production. Ideally this program should be identified with a name (slogan that the MOA/extension component should help to develop) that will be an identifier of the activity. While the project appears to be limited/focused on enhancing lowland rice, I recommend that where possible that farmers be enrolled to also develop a seed production plots with an improved upland variety.
2. Develop support for manufacture or assembly of farm tools. The 2010 Agricultural Survey reported that the most important constraint among rice farmers was lack of farming tools (Figure 2.2, p. 8). Additional rationale for this recommendation is that wage rates have risen dramatically (nearly doubling) over the past two years (LISGIS price statistics). While lack of farm labor was identified in the 2010 survey as only the fifth most important production constraint, as the mining sector and tree crop sectors siphon off farm labor away from rice production, labor supply will to produce rice access to farming tools and ultimately mechanization will be critical to improving productivity of rice in Liberia.
3. Support basic research trials on varietal selection and response to fertilizer application and timing. Continue research on varietal screening for tolerance to iron toxicity. Support research trials on weed and pest controls on improved varieties. Conduct partial budgeting on such trials.
4. Support a National Workshop on Constraints to Increasing Rice Production in Liberia: Insights from Liberia Rice Farmers, Ministry of Agriculture, and approaches being pursued in Other African Nations, by the Africa Rice Center and by the International Rice Research Institute.
5. Develop support for improved harvest and post-harvest crop management, including: developing private enterprises to supply tarpaulins, build cooperative/village drying facilities, assisting in the development of private enterprises to build more efficient rice hullers/milling equipment such as the Freedom Mills. Assist in the design of procurement systems with either current rice trading firms that engaged in importation of rice or existing rice millers such as Fabrar Rice Mill that can facilitate pooling of surplus production for sale to rice mills.
6. Promote the financing for purchase of inputs by working with micro finance and commercial banks through established input suppliers such as Weinco and other firms, as identified by Jean Nyemba and Mary Miller.

The purpose of this document is to provide a context for crop protection in peri-urban agriculture in Liberia for extension staff working in the Food and Enterprise Development Project in Liberia (FED). The definition of peri-urban agriculture used in this document is production of vegetables for sale as fresh produce or minimally processed such as drying in the case of chilis. Of necessity the document is far from complete and entire categories of crop pests such as post-harvest diseases and moulds, physiological problems, nematodes and weed species have not been included for lack of time and analytical equipment. As such the document must be treated as a work in progress and the interested reader is invited to help elaborate on and add to the contents. The fact that this document can only be a preliminary draft to a more comprehensive document compiled by all those participating in the FED peri-urban value chain is underlined by the fact that many of the pests and diseases described in this document have not been formally recorded in Liberia before.

All figures and diagrams in this document are those of the author. A major point to make is that a publication such as this one can only carry a small fraction of the information available on the internet so is really just a starting point for internet searches. A particularly important source is that of the Infonet-Biovision which has a vast amount on information on vegetable production in Africa. Any reading on peri-urban crop protection should be done in conjunction with Infonet Biovision website and other sources, some such as the IITA in West Africa.

In the specific context of FED there are two other documents complementary to this one – for pest scouting and chemical/bio-rational crop protection. The first step is the correct identification of living organisms on the crop and what they are doing there which is the specific purpose of this document. Should a crop pest be present it is usually the case that they are present at levels that are not economic to control. Therefore it is necessary to put their present in the context of beneficial organisms over time. Therefore any crop protection activity requires systematic scouting over time. Only if it is demonstrated that a pest has got out of control should agricultural remedies be used and even then only those that are soft on beneficial species. A scouting document has been prepared as well as a set of tables for guidance on the use of agricultural remedies.

The horticulture sector in Liberia is characterized by the nature of production which is smallholder based. The climate of the FED project area is primarily a tropical monsoon climate (Am in the Köppen classification) with a relatively short dry season soon after the “winter” solstice i.e. the four months after the third week in December which poses several challenges. These include crop protection, post harvest physiology, logistics, and dry season inputs including the need for irrigation. These problems are coupled with an almost total lack of published information on every aspect of horticultural production in Liberia.

Executive Summary

Liberian horticulture is smallholder based with minimal inputs and localized marketing channels. While there is an immense amount of local knowledge derived from generations of trial and error in practical horticultural production. The sector has lagged behind those in other countries in the region.

The situation is promising in that there is an immense amount of slack to be taken in with a high potential for significant impact. The gaps study identifies a range of targeted interventions to;

1. Carefully identify the production and marketing bottlenecks along the value chain using a variety of scientific, and other analytical approaches.
2. Target interventions where these are identified as limiting, and where intervention costs are economically justified.
3. Ensure that intervention costs can be met by the various actors in the value chain.

The entire horticultural value chain in Liberia is characterized by what can best be described as a continuous bottleneck so it is very important for the USAID Food and Enterprise Development Project (FED) to ensure that the constraints are met holistically rather than piecemeal, and in close collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture and other donor projects.

The purpose of this document is to provide a context for crop protection in peri-urban agriculture in Liberia for extension staff working in the Food and Enterprise Development Project in Liberia (FED). The definition of peri-urban agriculture used in this document is production of vegetables for sale as fresh produce or minimally processed products such as dried chilis. Of necessity the document is far from complete and entire categories of crop pests such as post harvest diseases and moulds, physiological problems, nematodes and weed species have not been included for lack of time and analytical equipment. As such the document must be treated as a work in progress and the interested reader is invited to help elaborate on and add to the contents. The fact that this document can only be a preliminary draft to a more comprehensive document compiled by all those participating in the FED peri-urban value chain is underlined by the fact that many of the insects and diseases described in this document have not been formally recorded in Liberia before.

All figures and diagrams are those of the author and no permissions are needed for reproducing these elsewhere though the source must be acknowledged. The organization of each section is a work in progress and the interested reader will note inconsistencies from section to section. All the photographs were taken by the author during the course of work on FED related business.

A major point to make is that a publication such as this one can only carry a small fraction of the information that is already available on the internet so the document is really just a starting point for internet searches. A particularly important source is that of the Infonet-Biovision which has a vast amount on information on vegetable production in Africa. Any reading on peri-urban crop protection should be done in conjunction with Infonet Biovision website and other sources, some such as the IITA in West Africa.

In the specific context of FED there are two other documents complementary to this one – for pest scouting and chemical/bio-rational crop protection. The first step is the correct identification of living organisms on the crop and what they are doing there – a specific purpose of this document. Some are harmful, but the vast majority are not, or are indeed, actively helping to keep crop feeding organisms under control. Should a crop pest be present it is often the case that they are present at levels that are not economic to control. Therefore it is necessary to put their present in the context of beneficial organisms over time. Any crop protection activity requires systematic scouting over time. Only if it is demonstrated that a pest has got out of control should agricultural remedies be used and even then only those that are soft on beneficial species. A scouting document has been prepared as well as a set of tables for guidance on the use of agricultural remedies.

Activities of the Soil Specialist during this trip included: 1) training the staff of a private soil testing laboratory, 2) working with Professor Korvah to assist the University of Liberia in providing electricity and water to the university soil science laboratory and 3) meeting with the leadership of Booker Washington Institute (BWI) and Nimba County Community College (NCCC) to plan out how to use rancid soy flour as a soil amendment. The Soil Specialist trained two technicians at Boimah Engineering Inc. (BEI) on how to test soils using the LaMotte AST-5 soil test kit. This was part of the enterprise development aspect of FED to assist local businesses in the agriculture sector. A small, illustrated booklet was prepared of standard operating procedures for soil testing and used to train the technicians. The training lasted two days and the Soil Specialist directly oversaw the initial two days of testing FED demonstration site soil samples. BEI is looking to expand their market to other NGOs, the Ministry of Agriculture and medium to large-scale plantation farmers. The FED extension agents who submitted the soil samples were gathered to review how to convert the results into fertilizer recommendations. Professor Korvah, from the University of Liberia, drafted a document to propose how FED can work with the university to bring electricity and water to the laboratory. This document clearly states the responsibilities of both parties and was drafted into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for approval by FED and the University of Liberia. Recommendations for the use of soy flour in combination with phosphate and potassium fertilizers were given to BWI and NCCC for twelve different crops. Along with general use, experimental and demonstration plots were planned using soy flour on both campuses. Experimental design using computer generated randomized plot distribution was also explained to representatives at both institutions. This was the third and final trip of the Soil Specialist. The groundwork established in the first two trips enabled the start-up of the first private soil testing lab in Liberia during this last trip. Not only will FED projects benefit from these available soil testing services, but Liberia’s agriculture sector as a whole will be able to manage soil resources in an informed way and thereby increase food security.

The STTA focused on the educational activities of the Booker T. Washington Institute and Grand Bassa Community Colleges in order to assess current service-learning and community engagement activities. The STTA conducted an assessment of service-learning at BWI and presented a seminar on service-learning. The STTA also met with the faculty of Grand Bassa Community College and evaluated the Farmer Resource Center that GBCC was negotiating to incorporate into its educational mission and to also engage the local community. The STTA also evaluated the condition of the soils lab at the UL Fendall campus.

OBJECTIVES

During the assignment, the Land Laboratory and Service-Learning Specialist will work with the Vocational Training and Non-Formal Education Specialist (VTNFES), Dr. Dennis Eaton, in coordination with the Ministries of Education and Agriculture to contribute to the development of vocational agriculture programs focused on youth.

The Specialist will:

• Conduct an appraisal of the Land Laboratory (hands-on science) programs and service-learning activities at the Booker Washington Institute, Nimba Community College, and Grand Bassa Community College;
• Develop protocols and procedures to engage students in service-learning activities linked to formal classroom instruction at the Vocational Centers of Excellence;
• Conduct service-learning workshops for vocational instructors and administrators;
• Explore the development and strengthening of the Land Laboratories and integrating into formal classroom instruction at the Center of Excellence;
• Conduct workshops on hands-on science (gardening) applications and implementation in the Centers of Excellence as needed.

DELIVERABLES

• Assessment report of the Land Laboratory and service-learning and recommendations and proposed revisions at all institutions.
• Report on hands-on science and/or service-learning workshops for vocational instructors and administrators.
• Provide the vocational training centers with guidelines and/or materials for developing, and implementing service-learning opportunities.
• Recommend ways to strengthen the connection between formal classroom instruction and the Land Laboratory at the Centers’ of Excellence.
• Recommend how to integrate service-learning as an integral component of the Vocational Education programs.
• Submit and present (e.g. power-point presentation) a preliminary trip report with meeting notes and recommendations to the DAI/FED Project Office before the IDS’s departure for the United States.
• A final trip will be submitted within seven days of his departure.

As stated in USAID’s scope of work for the Food and Enterprise Development (FED) Impact Survey, the “objective of the impact study is to capture the magnitude of the impact of USAID/Liberia’s value-chain investments in FED on agricultural productivity and profitability, investment and earnings, and quality of life”. The evaluation has three primary goals: 1) to measure the difference in key indicators between FED beneficiaries and a comparison group of farmers, making use of standardized Feed the Future (FTF) performance indicators to the maximum extent possible; 2) to disaggregate this impact across four value chain commodities; and 3) to estimate to the extent practicable the impact of FED programming by year of initial program intervention.

The FED Impact Survey focused on five evaluation questions:

1. Have beneficiary farmers applied new practices, and technologies to selected value chains?
2. How much have beneficiary farmers invested (cash or equivalent in-kind) compared to the comparison group?
3. What are the gross profits and productivity of beneficiary farmers compared to the comparison group?
4. What are the household incomes of beneficiary farmers compared to the comparison group?
5. What is the quality of life of beneficiary farmers and their families compared to the comparison group?

PROJECT BACKGROUND

In 2011, USAID launched the implementation of FED, a five-year, $75 million cost plus fixed fee completion type contract under a consortium led by Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI). The objectives of the program, as stated in the contract, were to:

1. Increase agricultural productivity and profitability and improve human nutrition;
2. Stimulate private enterprise growth and investment; and
3. Build local technical and managerial human resources to sustain and expand accomplishments achieved under objectives one and two.

The project was implemented in six counties that collectively include 75% of Liberia’s households, more than two-thirds of all farming households; and nearly 70 percent of the country’s population living below the poverty line; these six counties, which include Grand Bassa, Bong, Margibi, rural Montserrado, Lofa, and Nimba, make up the Liberia Feed the Future Zone of Influence (ZOI).

FED worked in four product value chains (rice, cassava, vegetables, and goats) in partnership with farmers, agribusinesses, non-government organizations (NGOs) and the Government of Liberia. The FED Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 Annual Report estimated that the project had directly benefited at least 102,679 rural households of which approximately 60% participated in the cultivation of rice, 30% in cassava, 5% in goats, and 5% in vegetables.

In 2015, performance monitoring results reported by FED were questioned when an Independent Data Quality Review (DQR) “revealed serious deficiencies throughout the data management process, i.e., instrumentation, collection, collation, monitoring and quality checks, and how information was calculated and selected for reporting purposes.” It concluded that much of the data reported by FED, particularly on the most critical outcome/impact indicators, was of “poor quality and cannot be used for reporting or decision-making purposes.” As a result of the DQR, this impact survey was commissioned by the USAID mission in Liberia, and implemented by International Development Group LLC, to estimate the impacts of FED on beneficiary outcomes in light of unusable performance monitoring information.