Assist initiative groups in ensuring the project transparency and awareness among community
members through conducting regular meeting and share information on project developments
and financial aspects
The main trends identified during PM&E activities in target communities are:
Project planning and implementation are transparent with the creation of water committees for
water projects and trustees committees for school projects. to oversee project progress.
The main and traditional approach Ashar tends to be the most effective and popular tool to
mobilize local resources.
The community initiative groups improved their skills and knowledge in financial reporting as
CSSCs indicated improved quality of financial reports of grantees.
The analysis of 43 follow up evaluation reports indicated a sufficient level of sustainability of
95% of evaluated CAGs. The sustainability of the projects means that all the projects results are
functional, communities own projects' results and the fees collection systems are in place.
The target communities demonstrated potential in attracting other financial sources 44 of them
received financial support from other organizations and local government of $193,880.
53 income generation projects resulted in establishing community foundations in 42 target
communities. All community foundations have organizational structure, including governing
body (general meeting), management unit (community initiative group/CBO/NGO leaders),
revision body (revision committee, elder people committee), an accountant, and a credit
committee (where micro crediting activities are in place). 16 of 42 community foundations have
got legal status (microcredit agency, public association, public foundation). The main income
sources for these foundations are membership fees, micro crediting activities, seed funds, animal
and poultry farming, processing of agricultural products, etc.
The actual number of beneficiaries of all CAG is amounted to 134,462, which means that the
number of beneficiaries per project is 1,702 ($1.5 per beneficiary). Each $1 spent generated $1.20
from other sources.
Most target communities started the process of official registration, and to date 17 community
initiative groups have registered as local NGOs.
Networking among target communities is being successfully developed three community forums
were conducted in Naryn, Nookat and Talas to identify common problems impeding community
development and ways to address them. These conferences resulted in establishment of two
coordination committees on community network development consisting of representatives from
NGOs, CBOs and local authorities.
The main problems encountered during the CAGs implementation include:
Some communities had problems receiving support from local governments, as they were not able
to make contributions to CAG projects as promised earlier.
Some CIGs had to introduce changes to their project workplans and budgets because of drastic
changes in prices at local markets and shortcomings of a planning process.
There were cases when community members were better informed about the projects at the
beginning stage rather than during implementation.
On April 10 11, the Hub Office conducted a country meeting of the CSSCs, where they discussed
regulations of the Development Fund of the CSSC Association. The participants also discussed
achievements and challenges of the Association's activities and made recommendations. The Hub
office presented the Healthy Communities project, funded by USAID, and Promoting
Entrepreneurship on a Local Level, funded by TACIS. The USAID's RFA on Civil Society Support
Initiative was also presented as well as the strategy of Counterpart and the Association to respond to
this RFA. The Hub Office facilitated the development of the network project aimed at conducting the
advocacy campaign on effective application of NGO tax regulations.