Strengthening Economic and Social Rights for Dignified Life of

Marginalized Farmers

Submitted to Governance Facility Nepal

Community Self Reliance Centre

27 May 2015

i

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................. i

Acronyms ........................................................................................................................................................... ii

Glossary of Terms .......................................................................................................................................... iii

Summary ........................................................................................................................................................... iv

I. Organizational Information .................................................................................................................... 1

History of the organization ........................................................................................................... 1

Legal identity of the organization .............................................................................................. 1

Organizational identity .................................................................................................................. 1

Institutional governance ............................................................................................................... 2

Institutional landscape/network and geographical coverage ........................................ 2

Organizational expertise ............................................................................................................... 3

Organizational capacity assessment and requirement ...................................................... 3

II. Justification of the Project Intervention ........................................................................................... 4

Governance challenges ................................................................................................................... 4

Core problem that the project aims to address ..................................................................... 4

Stakeholder engagement in analyzing the problem and designing the project ........ 6

Relevance of the proposed intervention ................................................................................. 7

III. Project Description ................................................................................................................................. 8

Project impact, outcomes and outputs ..................................................................................... 8

Implementation strategy ............................................................................................................. 10

Key project activities .................................................................................................................... 11

Project beneficiaries ..................................................................................................................... 13

Location of the project .................................................................................................................. 14

Project time frame ......................................................................................................................... 14

Management arrangement (including project governance /administration

structure) .......................................................................................................................................... 15

Coordination and linkages .......................................................................................................... 17

Contribution to the cross-cutting issues of the governance facility ............................ 17

Monitoring and evaluation plan ............................................................................................... 18

Risk and mitigation plan.............................................................................................................. 19

Sustainability and phase-out plan............................................................................................ 19

IV. Project Budget and Justification ....................................................................................................... 20

Summary of the project budget ................................................................................................. 20

Annex 1. Project Log Frame ...................................................................................................................... 22

Annex 2. Results-Based Monitoring &Evaluation Framework .................................................... 27

Annex 3. Risk Management Plan ............................................................................................................ 32

Annex 4. Individual Organization Detailed Budget Format .......................................................... 37

Annex 5: Primary and secondary beneficiaries of the project, their role and benefits ..... 50

ii

Acronyms

ANGOC: Asian NGO Coaliation, 10, 17

CBO: Community Based Organization, 22

COLARP: Coordination Centre, and Consortium for Land Research and Policy Dialogue, 7

CSO: Civil Society Organization, 10, 15, 22

CSOs: Civil Society Organizations, 14, 17, 18, 19 CSRC: Community Self Reliance Center, v, 6-8, 10-12, 14-26

DAO: District Administration Office, 6, 11

DDC: Distric Developmen Committee, 13, 16-20

DLRF: District Land Rights Forum, 8, 11, 14, 16, 17, 21, 24

DLRO: District Land Reform Office, 9, 11, 16, 17, 19

DLSO: District Land Survey Offices, 9

DoLRM: Department of Land Recorm and Management, 11, 18

EC: Executive Committee, 7, 20, 21, 22, 24

ED: Executive Director, 20, 21 ESCR: Economic, Social and Cultural Right, 16, 18, 21

FRMS: Financial Resource Management System, 20

FUG: Forest Users' Group, 14 GA: General Assembly, 7

GBV: Gender based violence, 9; Gender Based Violence, 15, 17, 18

GDP: Gross Domestic Product, 13, 14

GESI: Gender Equality and Social Inclusion, 25

GF: Governance Facility, 11, 12, 17, 20

HLCSLR: High Level Commission on Sustainable Land Reform, 10

HRBA: Human Rights Based Approach, 6, 14, 15, 19, 21

HRMP: Human Resourc Management Policy, 23

HRMS: Human Resource Management System, 20, 21 ICESCR: International Committee for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 23

ILC: International Land Coaliation, 7, 10, 22; International Land Coalition, 17

LRF: Land Rights Forums, v, 6, 8, 11, 12, 14-19, 23-25 LRO: District Land Revenue Office, 9

LWF: Luthran World Foundation, 21

M&E: Monitoring and Evaluation, 23 MC: Management Committee, 7, 20

MoLRM: Ministry of Land Reform and Management, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18, 19

NGO: Non Governmental Organization, 7, 21, 22, 24

NHRC: National Human Rights Commission, 18, 22

NLRF: National Land Rights Forum, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 21, 22, 24

NRs: Nepalese Rupees, v, 8, 25, 26

OD: Organizational Development, 21

PAN: Permanent Account Number, 6, 20

PC: Procurement Committee, 20

PME: Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, 21, 23

PRRP: participatory review, reflection and planning, 23, 24

PSC: Project Management Committee, 20

SMC: School Management Committee, 14

UPR: Universal Peridic Review, 13

VAT: Value Added Tax, 20

VDC: Village Development Committee, 13, 15-19 VLRF: Village Land Rights Forum, 8, 11, 13,, 14, 16, 17, 19, 24

VSO: Voluntary Service Overseas, 21

iii

Glossary of Terms

Janajati Ethnic nationalities in Nepal

Dalit Untouchables in traditional Nepali caste hierarchy

Eviction The removal of a tenant from possession of premises in which he or she resides or has a property interest done by a landlord either by re-entry upon the premises or

through a court action.

Guthi land A land endowment made for a religious or philanthropic purpose

Tenant A farmer who cultivates landlord’s land with an agreement of sharing the

agriculture product the farmer produces

Landless farmers Farmers who depend on agriculture cultivation for living but lack ownership of land

Smallholders Farmers who depend on agriculture cultivation for living but owns less than 0.5

hector of agricultural land

Land rights Rights of farmers to land ownership

Tenancy rights Farmers’ legal entitlement of tenancy of the land that they have been cultivating

for long time prior to 1996

Unregistered tenants Farmers who have been cultivating land owned by landlords for long time prior to

1996 but legally not recognized as the tenants

Birta Land grants made by the state to individual usually on an inheritable and tax exempt basis which was abolished in 1959

Lal Purja Official document of land ownership

Dual ownership of land Agricultural land of which the official ownership document is explicit of the owner and the tenant

Joint ownership of land Plot of land that is officially registered in the names of both husband and wife

Users’ group Legally recognized community group entitled to manage and use natural

resources and/or public property

Community forest Forest area located within specific community that is in the custody of local

community to manage for common benefits

Ukhada land Government land given to local elite the full control of assigning and terminating

tenancy to agriculture labourers and imposing tax on the product as the elite sees

justifiable—a tradition abolished in 1964.

Marginalized farmers Farmers engaged in agriculture labour or tenancy whose livelihood depends on

subsistent farming and agriculture products not enough to sustain the family food

security need

Land-poor farmers Farmers engaged in agriculture production but possessing less than 0.5 hector of

land per family

Panchyat era Nepal’s autocratic regime ruled by the absolute constitutional power of the King

during the period between 1961 to 1990

Terai A strip of Nepal’s southern plain land mass running from east to west bordering

India to the east, south and west

Madheshi Nepali people inhabiting in Terai which they claim to be Madhesh.

iv

Summary

The proposed project aims to address the historically rooted problem pertaining to the inability of

tenants, landless and smallholder farmers to claim land ownership and/or have access to and use

natural resources and increase productivity. The problem is deeply linked with the intricate and

confusing land policy environment, how the land and natural resources sectors are governed and the

quality, effectiveness and efficiency of the roles that the duty bearers are playing to allow the land-

poor farmers an access to land and natural resources related public services. The problem has led to

the marginalization of the land-poor farmers depriving them of their rights to land ownership,

judicious and sustainable use of natural resources and enjoy decent livelihoods.

The proposed intervention intends to bring about socio-economic change among at least 60 thousand

of these marginalized farmers particularly those living in 1 hill and 6 Terai districts—Sindhupalchok,

Bardiya, Banke, Dang, Mahottari, Sarlahi and Rauthat. Sindhupalchok has been included as an

additional project district keeping in view the serious social, economic and emotional impact that the

devastating earthquakes of 25th April and 12

th May 2015 have had on the survivors and the

contribution CSRC can make to address not only the issues of economic and social rights but also the

humanitarian assistance to them through its strong local level network and organizational base.

Taking a two-pronged approach CSRC will collaborate with both the land-poor farmers as the rights

holders and politicians, policy makers and bureaucrats as the duty bearers to accelerate the

improvement of both demand and supply side of public service delivery related to land governance.

The results and the outcomes that the initiative will deliver will contribute to improving economic and

social conditions of marginalized farmers.

The four outcomes that the initiative intends to achieve are:

1. marginalized farmers acquired land and improved their family’s food security;

2. marginalized farmers enabled to influence the formulation and implementation of pro-poor

and gender sensitive acts and policies on land and agrarian rights;

3. woman farmers enabled to strengthen their social and economic rights; and

4. CSRC’s organizational capacity strengthened to contribute to the development of knowledge

and resource base for promoting land rights.

These outcomes will be achieved through the delivery of the following four results or outputs:

a. land rights forums (LRFs) are enabled to strengthened the campaigns, activism as well as

productivity of landless/tenant and smallholder farmers;

b. LRFs played a critical and constructive role in influencing the formulation and

implementation of land, agrarian reform and/or natural resources acts and policies;

c. women’s land ownership rights promoted; and

d. CSRC’s governance systems, structure and human resource are strengthened and effectively

mobilized.

CSRC, with a proven track record of over a 2-decade long experience promoting and supporting

marginalized farmers’ organizations to secure land-poor farmers’ rights to tenancy and land

ownership, presents itself as a well established organization equipped with necessary human and

material resources to manage the proposed project and deliver the desired results. The organization is

linked by networks at local, national, regional and global levels, hence is successful in pushing land

rights to be priority agenda at all these levels. More notably and importantly, the ever strengthening

global and local linkage further empowered the land-poor farmers to remain organized and endure with their campaign to achieve the goal of securing social and economic rights. At the national level,

since 2009, CSRC has been strategically collaborating and coordinating with its strategic partners

comprising of DanidaHUGOU, Action Aid International Nepal, Care Nepal, Oxfam GB and Luthran

v

World Federation. The partnership has further strengthened the organization’s facilitating role to

support the campaigns of land-poor farmers and accelerate the land and agrarian reform process.

The NRs 74.83 million that the project will be investing for a period of 2.5 years (16 July 2015 to 15

January 2018) on about 60 thousand tenants, 249 thousand land-use deprived agricultural families and

more than 60 thousand women in these families, about a dozen land-governance-related government

and non-government offices, and on CSRC’s institutional capacity building is expected to have contributed to improving national economy, human rights and peace conditions. The proposed

initiative will directly yield: land ownership among 6500 tenants; assure land-use rights for increased

productivity among 5000 land-poor farmers; food security among 7500 such farmers. Moreover, the

initiative will also deliver the results such as: formation of 240 additional public forums through

which marginalized farmers including women will have their voices heard; more than 1000 LRFs will

have been engaged with land and natural resource related government offices; 3 new land and natural

resources related policies and/or Acts will have been formulated and implemented with improved

services of land-related duty bearers which will be supporting the land-poor farmers to secure their

economic and social rights; 5000 joint land ownership certificates of wives and husbands will have

been issued; 50% of the poor-farmer families will have women involved in decisions related to family

financial matters; domestic and gender based violence against women will have been reduced by

70%; 120 women will have been engaged in the decision making bodies of various public forums and

CSRC will have been emerged as a resourceful institution for land-poor farmers to have a sustained

access to land and agrarian related technical support; and for academia, students, researchers and

interested organizations the access to the knowledge products that CSRC will have made available.

These project results will have been delivered by reaching out to a conservative estimate of 60,000

poor farmer families with an average unit cost of less than NRs. 1500, which can be argued to be a

worthwhile value for money.

1

I. Organizational Information

History of the organization

The restoration of democracy in 1990 laid open a favourable political context for a group of aspiring

youths who grew up in a rural context of Sindhupalchok district—which unfortunately is devastated

by the 2015 deadly earthquake. Those youths who, in those days, were hired as the “Child-to-Child

Schoolteachers” by a locally implemented educational development project aspired to broaden their

engagement in the processes of local development and social transformation. Their exposure to the

local issues/challenges and the lessons they learned inspired them further to be a more organized,

constructive and independent agent of change. In 1993, they eventually established the Community

Self Reliance Centre (CSRC) registering it in the Sindhupalchok District Administration Office

(DAO), about 100 kilometres east of the capital city. The organization which started off as a local

community based organization has now grown into becoming a national level non government

organization covering 53 districts and having links to several national and international networks.

The triggering question for the youths, at the time, was ‘why most children belonging to poor famer’s

families were deprived of their rights to basic education.’ In their pursuit to seek answers the youths

engaged with CSRC realized how not only the children’s lack of access to education but also the

extreme poverty that the poor farmers were trapped in was linked with the intricate and extremely

skewed power relations between the local landlords and landless/tenant farmers. Since then, CSRC

started working with the landless, tenants and smallholder famers supporting them to secure their

basic economic and social rights.

In the course of its engagement with this specific group, CSRC pioneered not only in identifying the

fundamental and deep-rooted issues related to land ownership rights but also in addressing them

through effective means. Since the beginning it remained committed to adopting and taking human

rights based approach (HRBA) as a cross cutting principle to organizing, educating, and empowering the landless/tenant farmers enabling them to assert and claim their rights to land ownership through

non-violent campaigns and legal processes. The pioneering tools adapted by the organization pertain

to, among others, legal literacy, popular education, participatory rural appraisal, participatory

consultative processes, stakeholder engagement and management, social mobilization, formation and

strengthening of peoples’ organization, non-violent advocacy and campaigns, participatory

monitoring and evaluation, and gender and social audits.

All through, CSRC operated primarily as an enabling or cushioning agent. And within the period of

10 years (1993-2003), 1783 landless and/or tenant farmers obtained the ownership certificate (the Lal

Purja) for their rightful share of land they were tilling for generations. At a more macro level, the

community and village based land rights forums have now federated at the district and national levels

with sufficient capacity and a developing institutional base. CSRC, on the other hand, finds itself

evolving as a land-right based national resource centre with the peoples’ land rights forums (LRFs)

taking more control over the processes of asserting and securing their rights to land ownership and/or

use. CSRC will continue its technical assistance to these LRFs with more emphasis on strengthening their management and leadership capacity, agro-based skills and products so that poor farmers can

more fully enjoy their economic and social rights.

Legal identity of the organization

As already mentioned above, CSRC is registered (registration number 56) in Sindhupalchok DAO as

per the Social Organizations Registration Act 2034 (1978). It is also affiliated to the Social Welfare

Council (registration number 1100) and has a Permanent Account Number (PAN) 301596208 of the

Inland Revenue Office. The legal validity of the organization has been maintained through regularly

renewing the registrations abiding by the rules of the Government of Nepal.

Organizational identity

CSRC from its inception is clear on its Vision, Mission and Goals; however, objectives have been

revised as per the changing needs and context. The vision, mission and goals are stated as following:

2

Vision: People with self-reliance and dignity

Mission: Enhancing the power of land-poor farmers leading land and agrarian reforms

Goal: Land for land-poor farmer and their secure livelihoods

The organization’s current objectives are to: i) organize and mobilize land-poor farmers enabling

them in claiming and exercising land and agrarian rights with improved livelihoods; ii) advance pro

resource-poor farmers land and agrarian rights policies and governance; iii) reduce gender inequalities

in access to and control over resources, by strengthening women’s right to land; and iv) strengthen

CSRC as a well-governed civil society organization and a leading knowledge and resource base for

non-violent social movements

Institutional governance

As per CSRC’s Statute, the General Assembly (GA) is the organization’s supreme governing body

which elects a fully authorized Executive Committee (EC) every third year. The EC primarily

deliberates and guides the Management Committee (MC) on policy issues and strategic directions.

The MC comprising of selected EC and senior staff members facilitates staff members to execute and

mainstream the daily organizational activities in line with the broader policy guidelines. Abiding by

the institutional policy, the Executive Director leads the overall staff team and the program.

The organization has a broader membership base, where members come from diverse gender,

caste/ethnic, and linguistic background including grass-roots level social activists, academicians, development practitioners, and human rights defenders. As an organizational policy CSRC has

ensured the membership distribution to be inclusive and as such it is currently represented by 40%

women, 20% belonging to ethnic groups, and 15% Dalits. The inclusive structure has also been

reflected in the composition of the organization’s EC, which currently has nine members with five

female and four male which include 1 hill Janajaties, 1 Terai Janajati, and 1 Madheshi. The present

EC members are all well experienced and established professionals and/or practitioners in their fields

of expertise which include academic and applied research, financial management, organizational

development, social activism, community development and leadership.

CSRC has established itself as a fully transparent organization with a clear division of the roles and

functions among the EC, the MC and the staff. The organization’s day-to-day operation involving

financial and human resources management is guided by its established governance tools such as the

Human Resource Management System, Financial Regulation and Management System and

Institutional Good Governance Policy.

The recruitment of staff members strictly follow the relevant section of the human resource policy that allows the applicants to go through a fair and transparent process including a preferential treatment

favouring competent women, persons with disabilities, minorities and Dalits. CSRC’s Institutional

Governance Policy requires the staff composition to have at least 50 percent female along with others

representing socially excluded and marginalized communities. The current CSRC core team

comprises of 26 members with 11 female and 15 male of which 6 are Dalits, 9 are Janajatis and 1 is

Madheshi. Among the 137 field staff, 67 (49%) are women; 56 (41%) are Dalits, and 41 (30%) are

Janajati.

Institutional landscape/network and geographical coverage

CSRC has a well established linkage with networks of relevant international and national

organizations. It has been an active member of the International Land Coalition (ILC), Forum Asia

for Human Rights, Land Watch Asia, International Initiatives for Land and Agrarian Rights and

Development, Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development. In the national

context, since 2009, CSRC has been strategically collaborating and coordination with its Strategic

Partners (SPs) comprising of DanidaHUGOU, Action Aid International Nepal, Care Nepal, Oxfam

GB, Lutheran World Federation.

In addition, CSRC is a member of the NGO Federation, Human Rights Treaty Monitoring

Coordination Centre, and Consortium for Land Research and Policy Dialogue (COLARP). CSRC

3

also closely coordinates with relevant government offices, particularly with the Ministry of Land

Reform and Management (MoLRM) and its branches.

Organizational expertise

CSRC’s work revolves around ensuring the land and agrarian rights of land poor farmers, hence it has

worked closely with landless/tenants and smallholder, including women farmers. It has supported

these farmers to establish their own organizations at the village, district and national levels which are popularly known as Village Land Rights Forum (VLRF), District Land Rights Forum (DLRF) and

National Land Rights Forum (NLRF). These forums are well recognized by the Government of Nepal

and the political parties. The NLRF is beginning to receive global recognition and has now become

an Executive Member of Asian Farmers Association for Rural Development.

The seed that CSRC sawed 20 years ago has now started bearing fruits. To date, there are 39,167

landless/tenant farmers who have been successful in acquiring the land ownership document of the

land, or the portion of it, they had been cultivating for generations. The current market value of the

land they have acquired is estimated at Nepalese Rupees 220 million. There are other benefits that the

land ownership brought to the farmers, e.g., there is a growing sense of economic security, individual

and social dignity, livelihood security and citizenship.

At the same time, CSRC also engages with the government in policy advocacy and connects the land

rights forums with politicians, bureaucrats and relevant line ministries. It has forged a successful

collaboration with the state party to uphold the importance of addressing land rights issues and in

drafting the National Land Policy. In doing so, CSRC aptly shared the outcomes of its successful

engagements with the land-poor farmers, landlords and local stakeholders as evidence to influence

and support the policy dialogue and the drafting process.

Over the period of the last 2 decades CSRC has evolved as a learning organization. The valuable

lessons it learned and the experiences it gained from what, at the outset, seemed to be an extremely

uphill task equipped the organization with a strong knowledge base on issues of land ownership and

rights. The organisation has continued to build on its strengths with more innovative approaches and

strategies. Now there has been a growing realization that CSRC needs to further strengthen its

knowledge and resource base to serve land poor farmers as a fully fledged resource centre not only to help them acquire land ownership but also to become skilled, innovative and enterprising farmers in

order to enhance productivity.

The remarkable results that CSRC has produced over the years secured the trust and confidence of

donors, partners and stakeholders. The organization has been arguably effective in resource

mobilisation and utilization. In past three years, the total budget it managed amounted to NRs 151,

894,798. The organization is known to have maintained a high degree of transparency and

accountability in its utilization and management of resources. Its programs are subjected to internal and external evaluations, while the income, expenditure, fund utilization and management are

periodically audited both internally and independently by reputed auditing firms. Both the program

and budget related information is available for public scrutiny, which is also disseminates widely

through the social audit process.

Organizational capacity assessment and requirement

CSRC has been evaluated as a well equipped and evolving human rights based organization capable

to engage with marginalized farmers as well as the state parties. However, the organizational capacity

which is hitherto limited primarily to strengthening awareness among marginalized farmers and

drawing policy response, needs to be further diversified for the organization to address the issues

related to land-poor farmers’ economic empowerment and poverty alleviation.

CSRC realizes that it now needs to take more of a holistic approach encompassing rights of poor

farmers’ access to and use of natural resources. It will have to strengthen its capacity to support LRFs

to focus on: increasing productivity and achieving economic empowerment; ensuring farmers’ access

to and use of natural resources; mapping natural resources, taking stock of how they are being used

and proposing how they may be used more equitably and sustainably.

4

II. Justification of the Project Intervention

Governance challenges

The issues of landlordism vis-à-vis marginalization of tenants and landless farmers are historically

contentious in the context of farming communities. Thousands of hectors of Terai lands that most

landlords received historically as gifts (known as Birta) from the then rulers during Rana regime

started a form of slavery exploiting the labor of local poor and marginalized farmers. Similarly, land

poor farmers in the hills suffered from issues of tenancy rights and the ownership rights of Guthi land.

While the landlords benefited almost entirely from the agriculture products, the laborers were pushed

to the poverty trap deliberately created by the landlords. With this came the political power among the landlords and their subtle control over the governance mechanism. The poor tenant/landless and

smallholder farmers were made to believe on their fate for the socio-economic misery they continued

to face generations after generation.

The marginalization of land-poor farmers is historically rooted to the pro-elite power nexus that

shows no interest to address the issues of irregularities, corruption and mismanagement in the District

Land Reform (DLRO), Land Revenue (LRO) and Land Survey Offices (DLSO). It is argued that

court verdicts on legal cases filed by land poor farmers are generally delayed due to the influence that

the power nexus have on the state machine. The community based natural resources user groups are

also believed to be under the similar influence. Although the process of forming the Executive

Committee of such user groups is claimed to be democratic, it is far from being inclusive.

The other important governance challenge in land and natural resources sector pertains to promoting

gender equality in land ownership and access to natural resources. The challenge is further

exacerbated by the persistence of GBV against women, which is likely to increase in the post-

earthquake context of the affected communities. Securing women’s ownership of land, which also

enhances their economic, social and political power, is not fully accepted within many families and in the society due to the persistence of patriarchic mindset. The gender biased mindset is persistently

reflected in the current land and natural resources governance processes.

The pending passing of the 6th amendment of the Land Reform Act 1964 unfolds a serious governance

challenge to legally respond to more than 40 thousand land tenancy cases filed. This has compelled

many of the land poor tenants to withdraw the case and settle the dispute for little or no justice.

Commercial banks have made the situation worst by financing massive land purchase leading to the

sudden rise in land price benefiting only the elites. Landless farmers and tenants are forced by landlords and land mafia to give up cultivating the land accepting unjustified compensations.

Core problem that the project aims to address

The core problem that the proposed project aims to address pertains to the inability of landless, tenant

and smallholder farmers to claim land ownership and/or have access to and use natural resources and

increase productivity. The problem is deeply linked with the situations aroused after the Land Reform

Act came into being in 1964 and its successive amendments.

The Act defined the ceiling of land holding as well as assured tenants’ right to land ownership.

However, it did not bring justice to hundreds of thousands poor farmers serving the landlords for

generations cultivating their land but lacking written proof of tenancy.1 The 3

rd amendment enacted

during the Panchayat era opened an opportunity to hitherto unregistered tenants to be locally verified

and become legally recognized tenants. But the verification process was a total failure precisely due

to the lack of political will, elitism and absence of organized and vibrant farmer-led campaigns.

The fourth amendment dealt only with the elimination of dual ownership of land entitling the tenants

to claim the ownership of the half of the land they had been cultivating, but the implementation was

hampered due to the armed conflict which started in 1996. According to MoLRM 370,217 families of

poor farmers are still working as the tenants. The amendment also fell short of addressing the land

ownership issue of the unregistered tenants, which according to Badal Commission (1995) numbered

1 Sharma, P.M. (2011). Review of land-related legislation in Nepal in preparation of an integrated land law. TCP/ENP/3301, Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations

5

450 thousand.2 Instead it went as far as abolishing the very provision of local verification of tenancy

depriving forever the unregistered tenants to claim their tenancy right.

In the current context, the landlords are no longer legally obliged to share the 50% ownership of the

tilled land with the tenants. The law, however, allows a negotiated settlement between the landlord

and the tenant which serves the interest of the landlords more than that of the tenants. The proportion

of land that the tenants are offered is reduced to 10% to 30%. According to the record maintained by MoLRM 370,217 tenants are yet to settle the land ownership issue with the landlords.

Due to the lack of legislative support, many of the 450 thousand unregistered tenants and 861,317

landless farmers have been evicted from the land they have been cultivating. According to a survey

carried out in13 Terai districts a total of 5,968 unregistered tenants or landless farmers were being

harassed to give up the tenancy, and 31 farmers (of whom 10 were women) were jailed for not giving

up the land.3

The 6th amendment of the Land Reform Act 1964 which was submitted to the parliament by the

Cabinet proposes an extension of the deadline to do away with the dual ownership of land. But this

amendment too speaks nothing in favor of the unregistered tenants. Therefore, a strong political

advocacy is needed to amend the amendment itself which is being pursued by the NLRF and CSRC.

The landlessness compounded by the lack of skills to diversify farming and the capability to assert

their rights to access and use natural resources has a persistent negative effect on the life and

livelihoods of the land-poor farmers. They have been the historical victims of persistent deprivation

from social and economic rights and left to remain entangled in the poverty trap. The landless and the

smallholder farmers have faced the problem of lack of entrepreneurship, know-how to modernize and

diversify the farming, and the political strength to secure the rights to access and use natural resources.

The gender discrimination and social exclusion in land ownership is also a serious effect of the lack of

a strong legal and policy provisions supporting women and marginalized groups their right to land

ownership. Only 19.71% Nepali women have the ownership of land despite the fact that women are

the ones involved most in agriculture labor. Due to this women’s power equation in family,

community and society at large is weak. Similarly, 44% Dalits in Terai and 22% of those in hills are

landless4 who are deprived of their socio-economic rights.

The issue of land ownership has also given rise to conflicts among family members, tenants and

landlords, and men and women. Currently there are 42,910 (27.4%) cases filed in various courts of

Nepal which are related to land dispute.5 The situation has contributed to the persistence of poverty

on one hand and ineffective productivity on the other.

Lack of entrepreneurship and interest to optimize the productivity is yet another effect of the problem

of unaddressed land ownership issue faced by the landless/tenant farmers. Because of this problem,

neither the tillers/tenants nor the landlords are interested to invest on diversifying the farming and

increasing productivity and income. The effect is more acute for the poor farmers as their

involvement in agriculture labor does not yield enough economic return to come out of their

subsistent farming and poverty trap. The landless farmers also do not have access to user groups of

natural resources and essential public services such as electricity and water supply which further

block them from taking innovative initiatives to improve the farming and generate decent income.

The key causes of the persistence of landlessness and socio-economic marginalization of the land

poor farmers hinge on the lack of legislative, legal and policy support at the macro level and weak

organizational capacity, legal awareness, resource base and political confidence among the land-poor

farmers at the micro level.

The poor economic status of the tenants prevents them from filing the land claim case in the court

which involves lengthy and expensive process. The helpless condition of the farmers and the

2 This figure was reported by the High Level Land Reform Commission 1995 headed by Keshab Badal 3 CSRC/ANGOC/ILC 2014. CSO land reform monitoring report 2013/14. 4 HLCSLR 2012. 5 Source: Annual progress report 2070-71of the Supreme Court.

6

prevalence of forced eviction, mostly in the case of unregistered tenants, is the result of the delay in

having the 6th amendment of the Land Reform Act 2014 passed by the parliament.

The 6th amendment without modification will not address all the issues related to land ownership of

unregistered tenant farmers. The state needs to come up with policies addressing the concerns of poor

farmers cultivating Birta, Guthi and Ukhada land for which the LRFs need to continue their campaign

and organizations supporting them need to continue engaging in policy advocacies.

The Landless Problem Solving Commission 2014 was formed to address the issue of land ownership

of the land/homeless farmers all over the nation. However, the impartiality of the Commission’s work

was challenged in the court indicating that it lacked a sound mechanism to identify the genuinely

landless farmers from among the 861,217 applicants. The Commission is currently defunct because

of the Supreme Court’s stay order. Therefore the Commission’s mandate to address the land

entitlement issue for the genuinely landless farmers and helping them to overcome their economic and

livelihood hardships is in limbo.

Stakeholder engagement in analyzing the problem and designing the project

Various entities involved in land-related activities at the national and local levels include MoLRM

and its relevant departments, parliamentarians, political parties, NLRF, DAOs, DLROs, District

Agriculture Offices, District Local Development Offices, District Irrigation Offices, district leaders,

Community Forestry Users Groups, DLRFs and VLRFs.

These entities have always been CSRC’s key counterparts since its formation and more notably after

the organization’s engagement in the strategic partnership with donors since 2009, hence the

organization’s strategic directions and programmatic decisions are guided by the concerns and issues

raised by the representatives of these bodies. The five-yearly strategic plans that the organization

developed in the past sought and incorporated inputs from the stakeholders representing these entities.

CSRC’s five-year strategic plan 2014-2019 provides the overarching operational and results

framework for the design, development and implementation of its current projects and programs.

Although the scope of the proposed project has also been aligned within the framework of the current

strategic plan, its stakeholder-ownership has been further ensured through a renewed consultative

process involving the key stakeholders as mentioned above. The concept note submitted earlier to GF

was informed by the outcomes of the earlier consultation meetings with the local level stakeholders

which included land rights based activists, civil society organizations, and CSRC’s collaborating

partners. The consultative process included analysis of the current contexts of the landless/tenant

farmers and smallholders, the lessons learned from the past and current initiatives, key issues related

to land ownership rights and economic empowerment, the approach that the new initiative could take

and the poor farmers’ issues and needs it should take into account.

The acceptance of the concept note and the call for a detailed proposal by GF followed a series of

further consultative meetings with relevant stakeholders in selected districts which included the

Secretary of the MoLRM, Director General of the DoLRM, Land Revenue Officer, Women

Development Officer, Forest Officer, politicians and media representatives. These meetings

deliberated on key aspects of the approved concept note and discussed in length what the proposed

project’s scope should be, what approach it should take and what results it should deliver.

The stakeholders emphasized on the importance of continuing the land rights campaigns by the LRFs

with the possible involvement of relevant retired but seasoned bureaucrats as advisors. The Secretary

expressed the ministry’s commitment to continue collaborating with CSRC and NLRF which was

complemented by his immediate action calling and organizing a joint meeting on 20th April 2015 that

discussed the issues related to land ownership rights of the tenants cultivating Birta land. The

discussion also focused on the need to establish a sound and scientific mechanism of identifying

genuine squatters and landless farmer so that the work of the Landless Problem Solving Commission

would bring optimum benefits to the deserving farmers. It was also felt necessary to strengthen the

land governance through institutional and duty bearers’ capacity building so that land poor farmers

could benefit from effective and pro-poor land policies and legislations.

7

The stakeholders underscored that securing women’s right to land ownership and land-poor farmers’

access to and use of natural resources should remain high in CSRC’s agenda. Also emphasized was

continued formation and strengthening of locally based land rights forums which should empower

land-poor farmers through their participation in legal education vis-à-vis critical and constructive

interactions with duty bearers and politicians. The need for CSRC to evolve as a well equipped human rights based resource and knowledge center specializing on rights to land and natural resources

and promoting agro-based enterprises was also felt strongly by the stakeholders.

Relevance of the proposed intervention

The proposed project will be built on CSRC’s past experiences and lessons learned to address the

causes of deprivation of the landless tenants/famers and small holders from their economic and social

rights. The delivery of the outputs will primarily address the issue of skewed power dynamics and the

economic, social and emotional deprivation of the land poor farmers by further strengthening their

political activism but focusing more on their economic empowerment. As already discussed in length in the earlier sections, CSRC during the past 20 years has already leveled the playing field on which

the activities of the proposed initiative could be built in a more focused manner and deliver the

desired results. CSRC will bring its experiences of working both at the grassroots and the

policy/political levels to optimize the impact of the proposed initiative.

To date, CSRC has strengthened the organizational and networking capacities of more than 92

thousand land-poor families of 53 districts to come together and engage in collective actions and

dialogues with landlords and relevant state parties both to build pressure at bureaucratic and political levels and create conducive legislative and policy environment to secure their rights to land ownership.

The value that the proposed initiative will add includes its systematic support for securing family

housing and food security, accessing and using natural resources, attaining gender equality in and

inclusive ownership of land and the social and economic gains it brings to the poor farmers.

Similarly, the coordination, collaboration and linkages with the wide spectrum of stakeholders that the

organization has already established will be further strengthened in its future course of action. CSRC

will ensure that stakeholder mapping and background analysis will continue being its periodic task.

The implementation of the proposed project will take a more progressive strategy of stakeholder coordination, collaboration and linkages by putting in place a stakeholders’ forum with opportunities

to meet at least once every 6 months. This will also be strengthened through the organization of

annual reflective and capacity building workshops. The collaborations will be formalized, where

necessary, with the signing of the memorandum of understanding between or among relevant

stakeholders.

In order for CSRC to smoothly exit from the state of being a directly active support organization and

move towards becoming a land and agrarian development based resource center the proposed project includes a strong organizational development component. CSRC’s new role will allow the land poor

farmers to turn to a sustained support system and endure their long campaign towards securing the

economic and social rights even after the proposed project comes to an end.

The proposed project complements and contributes to the 3rd outcome and the impact that the GF

indents to achieve in Nepal. The GF support for the project will not only fulfill the funding

requirement but also will bring technical and political benefits to the land-poor farmers and the benefit

of institutional capacity strengthening to CSRC and NLRF. The land-poor farmers’ campaign on securing their economic and social rights is aligned squarely with the GF’s agenda of promoting

human rights, democracy, inclusive economic growth and poverty alleviation. To realize these rights

the LRFs are supported to have land-poor farmers’ voices heard and responded to by the state

institutions through improved services of the duty bearers.

8

III. Project Description

Project impact, outcomes and outputs

The proposed intervention intends to bring about socio-economic change among the huge number of

marginalized farmers living in 1 hill and 6 Terai districts who are land/homeless, tenants and

smallholders. Therefore, there is a need to make consorted efforts to improve both demand and supply

side of public service delivery related to land governance complemented by behavioral change among

this segment of population so that their fundamental human rights are secured. In this context the

results which the proposed intervention aims to deliver along with the performance indicators are

logically structured and outlined in this section (also see Annex 1).

Impact

The impact that the proposed project aims to contribute to is stated as “economic and social

conditions of marginalized farmers improved.”

Following are the three indicators at the impact level:

• % increase in per capita GDP

• % of economic and social rights-related UPR recommendation implemented

• % increase in Peace Index

It is expected that the improvements in the land rights condition of and productive use of land by

landless, tenant and smallholder farmers along with those in land governance and policy contexts,

which the project aims to bring about, will contribute to achieving the national targets on these three

indicators.

Outcomes

The intervention aims to achieve the following four outcomes:

1. Marginalized farmers acquired land and improved their family's food security.

Indicators:

• # of tenants in the 7 project districts reduced by 10% (3000 each in year I & II and 500 in year III)

• # of the land-use deprived agricultural families reduced by 2% (3000 and 2000 in year II and III).

• # of food insecure farmers reduced by 7500 (5000 in year II and 2500 in year III).

• 240 (60, 120 and 60 in year I, II and III respectively) public forums represented by marginalized

farmers of the 7 districts.

2. Marginalized farmers enabled to influence the formulation and implementation of pro-poor and

gender sensitive acts and policies on land and agrarian rights.

Indicators:

• 300 LRFs (150 each in year I and II) engaged with land and nature resources related government

offices, DDCs and VDCs at the central and local levels to discuss and influence the formulation

and implementation of land and/or natural resources acts and policies.

• 3 (1 each in year I, II and III) gender sensitive land and/or natural resources acts and/or policies

formulated and implemented.

• At least 50% respondents representing landless, tenant and smallholder farmers of 7 districts

expressed satisfaction with the services of land and/or natural resources related government offices.

3. Women farmers enabled to strengthen their social and economic rights

Indicators:

• At least 40% women respondents representing landless, tenant and smallholder farmers of 7

districts expressed their engagement in collective decisions on family financial matters.

9

• Domestic violence against women reduced to 30% (60%, 40% and 30% in year I, II and III

respectively) in the families of landless, tenant and/or smallholder farmers of the 7 districts

acquiring the joint ownership of land.

• A total of 120 (50, 60 and 10 in year I, II and III respectively) women farmers of the 7 districts

appointed in public decision making bodies/mechanisms of community institutions (e.g., SMC,

FUG, Commissions, development focused users' groups).

4. CSRC’s organizational capacity strengthened to contribute to the development of knowledge and resource base for promoting land rights.

Indicators:

• The HRBA and/or land reform expertise of 50 (10, 30 and 10 in year I, II, and III respectively)

general or staff members used by LRFs, public institutions, international organizations or CSOs.

• Five (2 each in year I&II and 1 in year III) resource materials developed

• Five (2 each in years I&II and 1 in year III) research/position papers produced by CSRC referred to

by public institutions (government, bilateral, inter governmental and/or academic institutions)

• At least 2500 (1000 each in year I&II and 500 in year III ) farmers and individuals visited CSRC

and/or its web site seeking information/knowledge products on its governance practice and land

rights campaign.

The above four outcomes would lead to the improvements not only in the way the land and/or natural

resources sectors are governed in the country but also in the capacities of both relevant duty bearers and rights holders to ensure a more equitable distribution and/or use of land and natural resources.

Obviously these outcomes have a strong bearing to contribute to strengthening the national economy.

With the achievement of these outcomes the socio-economic status of a sizable number of poor and

marginalized section of the population in 7 agrarian districts will certainly be improved which will in

turn contribute to improving the national per capita GDP, human rights situation and effective

implementation of international instruments on human rights.

Outputs

1. Land Rights Forums (LRFs) are enabled to strengthen the campaigns, activism as well as productivity of landless/tenant and smallholder farmers.

Indicators:

• 13,500 (3000, 9000 and 1500 in year I, II and III respectively) families of landless, tenant,

smallholder farmers of the 7 districts lodged applications related to land ownership or land use

rights to relevant government institutions

• 850 (300, 400 and 150 in year I, II and III respectively) families of landless, tenants, smallholder

farmers of the 7 districts undertook agro-based enterprises

• 190 (75, 100 and 15 in year I, II and III respectively) DLRFs/VLRFs received financial resources

from government and non government institutions to promote agro-based enterprises

• 924 (308 per year) land rights campaigns organized by 300 VLRFs, 7 DLRFs and 1 NLRF

2. LRFs played a critical and constructive role in influencing the formulation and implementation of land, agrarian reform and/or natural resources acts and policies

Indicators:

• 120 parliamentarians, bureaucrats, political leaders engaged in dialogue sessions and joint actions

related to drafting policy/act briefs

• Five (2, 2 and 1 in year I, II and III respectively) theme-specific initiatives/actions carried out with

government and academic institutions.

• 6 (3 each in year I and II) national policies and/or acts reviewed and/or recommended.

3. Women's land ownership rights promoted.

Indicators:

10

• 18000 (6000, 8000 and 4000 in year I, II and III respectively) families of landless, tenant,

smallholder farmers of 7 districts sensitized on women’s land rights.

• 30 (10, 15 and 5 in year I, II and III respectively) district, regional and/or national government and

non-government organizations collaborated with LRFs’ campaigns on women’s access to land

• 1500 (1000, 400 and 100 in year I, II and III respectively) GBV survivor female farmers received

support to overcome the physical and psychological pain

• 5000 (2000, 2500 and 500 in year I, II and III respectively) couples of landless/tenant/smallholder

farmer-families of 7 districts received joint or women’s individual land ownership certificates.

4. CSRC's governance systems, structure and human resource are strengthened and effectively mobilized.

Indicators:

• 50 (20 and 30 in year I and II respectively) CSRC general members and staff members trained on

HRBA and land reform issues

• 5 (2, 2 and 1 in year I, II and III respectively) policy briefs and research reports published

• 5 (2, 2 and 1 in year I, II and III respectively) collaborative initiatives undertook jointly with

networks/alliances/coalitions at national and international levels

• Results based monitoring and evaluation system established and fully implemented

Implementation strategy

The proposed intervention is founded on CSRC’s organizational principle of engaging in and

promoting bottom-up participatory approach to working with rights holders/defenders and all the

stakeholders. CSRC believes on the potential of organized initiatives of people themselves to utilize their own knowledge and power performing as the very agency of change for desired economic and

social transformation. CSRC’s primarily role will be supporting people to realize and make use of

such a potential. At the supply side, CSRC promotes integrated approach to stakeholder management

and engagement to work collaboratively with government agencies, CSO partners, donors and inter

governmental organizations.

In this context, CSRC will take a two-pronged approach to addressing the issues and problems that the

proposed intervention aims to tackle, which involves working with people at the community level and the State machineries at the policy level. At the community level, landless, tenant farmers and

marginalized farmers will be empowered to rationally, logically and forcefully raise their voices. At

the national level, consensus will be built amongst politicians and bureaucrats to initiate pro-poor land

and agrarian reform policies and programs.

The key thrust to delivering the results of the intervention hinges primarily on how the project

beneficiaries are mobilized. What worked for CSRC in the past was the organization of localized

encampments with the participation of up to 200 farmers at a time and local stakeholders including

the landlords. Mobilization of this size of participants could be possible because of the primacy of the

land agenda, one that concerns most for the marginalized farmers, on which the gathering would be

deliberating and the opportunity it provided to identify with other farmers facing the same problems

and to establish functional relationship with relevant stakeholders e.g. VDC, local political leaders,

media people, social workers to solve the problem.

The popular interest in such events made it possible for CSRC to realize the strengthened partnership

with local and national stakeholders and their commitment to remain accountable to the marginalized

farmers in terms of resolving their land rights-related problems. It also empowered the marginalized farmers to have access to local resources and effective service delivery, which in turn encouraged

them not only to participate in the campaigns and encampments but also to bring together in-kind

contributions needed to organize such events.

Meanwhile, CSRC will also ensure that the support to marginalized farmers in their campaigns is

complemented by the engagement with and seeking support of the social elites. It will be reflectively

assessed and consciously ensured that people's campaigns are guided by the fundamental principle of

non-violence. CSRC will strategically engage with the land-poor farmers and the elites in dialogical

11

processes to initiate land and agrarian reform, help marginalized farmers to co-exist with local elites

as their allies than oppressor and ensure justice and dignity for them.

Key project activities

The activities pertaining to each output are outlined below with the explanation of how each of them

will be implemented.

Activities for output 1 (Land Rights Forums are enabled to strengthen the campaigns, activism as well

as productivity of landless/tenant and smallholder farmers).

The 4 key activities under the Output 1 outlined below are related to strengthening the demand side

capacities raising awareness of the direct beneficiaries on their political and legal rights and the state’s

commitment in international forums on ESCR.

1.1 Context mapping, identification of marginalized farmers, establishment of baseline and

participatory planning

CSRC staff will assist the LRFs’ facilitators to carry out this activity. The farmers residing in the 7

project districts will be involved in this activity during the first 3 months of the implementation.

1.2 Formation of VLRFs and strengthening LRFs on mobilization and organizing campaigns

The current DLRFs with the assistance of CSRC staff will form 300 new VLRFs in the communities

of the 7 districts. The formation of VLRFs will be completed by July 2016 and the strengthening of all the LRFs in the 7 project districts and at the national level will be a continuous process till the end

of the project with the organization of quarterly workshops and mobilizations.

1.3 Support landless, tenant and smallholder farmers to take legal action and claim land ownership

and use rights

NLRF and DLRF facilitators with the assistance of CSRC staff will organize legal camps/clinics to

raise legal awareness, prepare legal cases and file the tenancy-related cases to DLRO or DLRO. The

cases related to land use rights will be filed in VDC, municipality or DDC. The activity will be

commenced in September 2015 and continue through till the end with quarterly organization of

encampments/clinics.

1.4 Support for agro-based enterprise and agriculture cooperative

The farmers who will be successful in acquiring land ownership or use rights will be supported by

CSRC staff, LRFs and resources persons on agro-based enterprise and agriculture cooperative. The

activity will be commenced in July 2016 and continue through till the end with the organization of

quarterly workshops.

Activities for output 2 (LRFs and CSRC played a critical and constructive role in influencing the

formulation and implementation of land and agrarian reform acts and policies)

The following 2 key activities which will contribute to deliver Output 2 revolve around the

engagements, dialogues and brainstorming with politicians and bureaucrats reflecting on the demand

side results achieved during the programme intervention which will in turn lead to the formulation of

pro-poor land and/or natural resources related acts and policies.

2.1 Collaborate with parliamentarians, political parties, MoLRM, DDCs and VDCs to organize

dialogue and discussion sessions at VDC to national levels for acts and policy formulation and

implementation.

To carry out this activity, CSRC staff will mobilize national and international resource persons from among its alliance members and assist LRFs to reflect upon the land and natural resources related

issues that land-poor farmers are facing. The dialogue and discussion sessions will be organized

every 6 months at VDC, DDC and national levels until the end of the project.

2.2 Carryout policy review and develop policy recommendation papers

12

LRF will be assisted by CSRC professionals and resource persons to carry out this activity reflecting

upon the field realities and issues. The national and local level stakeholders from MoLRM, DDCs

and VDCs will be consulted and regularly shared the review findings and proposed recommendations

for inputs and feedback. The activity will be commenced in January 2016 until July 2017.

Activities for output 3 (women's land ownership rights promoted)

Lack of land ownership among women subjects them to be the victims of violence and discrimination. GBV is likely to increase, unfortunately, in the post disaster context of Sindhupalchok district. The

key activities under Output 3 include capacity building, support to realize equitable role of women in

land rights related leadership and decision making process, policy analysis leading to formulating acts

and laws in favour of women and their ownership of land and support to GBV survivors with referral

and/or female friendly space services.

3.1 Organize awareness on women’s right to land, and mobilize and support families to obtain the

couple’s joint of women’s independent ownership of land

CSRC staff with technical support of partners having expertise in gender issues will assist LRFs to

carry out this activity. The awareness workshops will be organized every 6 months commencing in

August 2015 and continue until July 2017. The mobilization and support will be started in September

2015 and will be continued as per the need until the end of the project.

3.2 Provide specialized support to victims of GBV

The survivors of the GBV will be referred to appropriate entities and specialists for timely treatments

and services. They will also be connected with authorities, health service providers, psychologists

and women friendly spaces as appropriate.

3.3 Organize discussion sessions involving representatives of VDC, DDC, CSOs, DLRO and local political leaders on women’s land rights issues and concerns raised by families through mobile

DLRO camps to support women obtain land ownership (joint or individual)

With CSRC’s technical support this activity will be carried out by DLRF, VLRF, VDC, CSOs and

DLRO. The activity will be commenced in October 2015 and continue on a quarterly basis until

December 2017.

Activities for output 4 (CSRC's governance systems, structure and human resource are strengthened

and effectively mobilized)

The 4 activities proposed are primarily the organization’s reflective initiatives on carrying out

research studies, keeping track of the dynamism of ensuring the social and economic rights of

home/landless settler and marginalized farmers, developing and organizing resource materials,

preparing position papers which will contribute to delivering Output 4.

4.1 Induction/orientation of project team and preparation of detailed work plan of the project

With the technical support of GF and relevant expert, all the CSRC staff members and Executive

Board will be involved in this activity. There will be annual planning and budgeting of CSRC

programs and activities. The review of progress will be carried out every 6 months. There will be

mid and final evaluations of the proposed projects carried out by independent evaluator. CSRC will

prepare quarterly, half yearly, annual and project completion reports which will be reflected in the

organization’s overall annual reports. The organization will carry out annual social audit in the month

of September.

4.2 Organize training, workshops and exposure visits

CSRC staff, Executive Committee and general members will be involved in this activity with

technical support from GF, CSRC’s strategic partners and alliance members (ILC, ANGOC, Forum

Asia, Leitner Centre for International Law and Justice, Asia Farmers’ Association, Global Platform).

There will be about 10 training workshops conducted with an average of 2 to 3 workshops annually.

There will be about 3 international and 10 in-country exposure visits by 25 staff and general members.

13

4.3 Carryout research, develop and update position papers, resource materials, modules and web page

CSRC staff will work with academic institutions to carry out one research on land related issues to be

commenced in December 2015 and completed in November 2016. The organization will seek the

professional assistance of a resource materials and modules developer to review CSRC’s works,

engage with CSRC staff and LRF members, and participate in relevant workshops and training

programs in order to consolidate CSRC experiences and learning and develop packages of resource materials and modules. CSRC web page will be revised and updated regularly by CSRC web

designer and professional staff.

4.4 Build network, collaboration, partnership and alliances

CSRC will expand its network with FECOFUN, Confederation of Natural Resources Management

and National Alliance for Sustainable Agriculture and look for possibility to link with at least 2

international networks within the life of the project. CSRC will collaborate, partner and build alliance

with at least 1 of these entities every year to strengthen CSRC’s capacity to promote ESCR and build

national and international pressure group to influence the formulation of legislative acts and policies

in favor of land poor farmers.

Project beneficiaries

The proposed intervention will have the land-poor, landless agriculture labourers, registered tenants,

unregistered tenants, smallholder farmers and the farmers who survived but seriously affected by the

earthquake 2015 as the direct beneficiaries whose right to land ownership is denied leading them to

marginalization and deprivation. The selection of the primary beneficiaries will be based on the local

level stakeholders’ identification of the victims of land deprivation, human rights violation and food

and shelter insecurity. The project will involve the primary beneficiaries in programs such as

awareness raising, land-related legal education and initiatives, mobilization, agricultural cooperative,

volunteerism, agro-based initiatives, use of public land and natural resources for increasing

productivity and referral and/or female friendly space services for GBV survivors, particularly in the

earthquake affected communities. Obviously, the benefits the project will bring to them will include

rights awareness, land use and/or ownership, enhanced productivity, access to local resources and

public services, increased visibility and participation in public forums.

The secondary beneficiaries include politicians, MoLRM, DoLRM, District Land Reform, District

Land Revenue and District Agriculture Offices, DDCs, VDCs, local leaders, local elites and landlords,

CSOs and NHRC. It has been felt that participation of relevant parliamentarians is critically

important as they play critical role in deliberating and passing land laws and Acts in the parliament.

The local level line agencies such as District Land Revenue and Land Reform Offices, District

Agriculture Office, DDCs, VDCs are important secondary beneficiaries because of their roles either

as direct duty bearers related to land governance or as direct local level land and/or agriculture sector

related public service providers. Also because of the very stake that the local elites and landlords take

in land ownership disputes their involvement in the project as secondary beneficiaries cannot be

undermined.

The secondary beneficiaries will be involved in policy dialogues, interaction with the primary

beneficiaries, collaborative initiative to draft Acts and/or policies, provision of effective public

services, supporting land-poor farmers in their campaigns, and in the processes of dialogues,

negotiations and legal actions. The benefits that the secondary beneficiaries get from the projects

include awareness and knowledge about the land rights issues, political credibility, trust and

recognition for politicians, exposure and enhanced capacity of duty bearers on land governance,

improved capacity to deliver land-related public services among the local level service providers,

peaceful co-existence with tenants for the landlords, and the involvement of the CSOs and NHRC will

benefit them from constructive and creative partnership, access to CSRC-knowledge products and

opportunity to enhance the impact of their own work through synergy and coordination.

The summary of different categories of primary and secondary beneficiaries is in Annex 5.

14

Location of the project

The proposed intervention will have a National Coverage, particularly for creating a favorable macro

level policy environment supporting landless/tenants’ right to land ownership and use for increased

productivity, poverty alleviation and secure human rights. The intervention will be implemented in 7

districts—Bardiya, Banke, Dang, Mahottari, Sarlahi and Rauthat in Terai and Sindhupalchok in hills.

Sindhupalchok, where CSRC already has an effective local network and physical presence, has been considered as an additional project district in order to respond to the emergency humanitarian needs of

the farmers who are badly affected by the 2015 earthquake with almost all the houses collapsed and

the highest number of casualties and injuries.

Along with the humanitarian crisis in Sindhupalchok, all the 7 districts constitute the most number of

marginalized tenants, landless farmers and smallholders including Dalits, Janajatis, Madheshi and

Tharus who are suffering from the issues and problems related to land ownership, access to legal and

bureaucratic services, agricultural productivity and livelihood support and sustenance.

The landless or land-poor tenants who are yet to settle the land ownership issue with the landlords in

Sindhupalchok, Rautahat, Sarlahi, Mahottari, Dand, Banke and Bardia are 658, 14609, 17176, 8244,

3602, 5067, 11093 respectively. Similarly the numbers of landless farmers in these districts who

submitted the application to the Landless Problem Solving Commission 2014 seeking land ownership

are 360, 12606, 11800, 7612, 53800, 45271, and 51949 respectively.

Project time frame

The proposed project will be implemented over 3 years period starting from 16 July 2015 to 30th June

2018. The project work plan with quarterly breakdown for year I is outlined below.

Activity Year I

Year II Year III What to achieve Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1.1 Context mapping, identification of

marginalized farmers, establishment of

baseline and participatory planning.

---

Baseline established through a

participatory consultative

process

1.2 Formation of VLRFs and strengthening LRFs

--- --- --- -------- ------ 300 VLRF formed, 752 LRFs mobilized.

1.3 Support landless/tenant and smallholder

farmers to take legal action and claim land ownership and use rights

- -- -- -- -------- ---

13500 landless/tenants, and

smallholder farmer families lodged applications

1.4 Support for agro-based enterprise and

agriculture cooperative - -- -- -- ---- ----

850 families engaged in

agriculture entrepreneurship

6000 families organized in

cooperative

2.1 Collaborate with parliamentarians,

political parties, MoLRM, DDCs and

VDCs to organize dialogue and discussion

sessions at VDC to national levels for acts

and policy formulation and implementation.

- - - - ---- ----

120 parliamentarians,

bureaucrats and political

leaders engaged in dialogue

sessions and joint actions

related to drafting policy/act brief.

2.2 Carryout policy review and develop policy

recommendation papers - - ---- ---- 6 national policies and/or acts

reviewed and/or recommended.

3.1 Organize awareness on women’s right to

land, and mobilize and support families to

obtain the couple’s joint or women’s

independent ownership of land.

-- --- --- --- ---- --

18000 landless/tenant and

smallholder families sensitized.

5000 couples received joint or

individual ownership.

3.2 Organize mobile DLRO camps to support

women obtain land ownership (joint or

individual).

-- -- -- ---- --

30 DLRO camps participated

by VDC, DDC, CSOs, DLRO

and local political leaders.

4.1 Induction/orientation of project team and preparation of detailed work plan of the

project

- - -- -- Project team oriented and the detailed work plan of the

project prepared

4.2 Organize training, workshops and

exposure visits - - - - - -

50 CSRC members and staff

trained on HRBA, land reform

4.3 Carryout research, develop and update

position papers, resource materials,

modules and web page

- - - -

5 policy briefs and research

reports published

4.4 Build network, collaboration, partnership

and alliances (national/international) - - - -- - - 6 collaborative initiatives

undertook

15

Since 2009, CSRC has already initiated interventions on land and agrarian rights campaign in 53

districts with funding from its strategic partnership with DanidaHUGOU, Action Aid, Care Nepal,

Lutheran World Federation and Oxfam. After this partnership was phased out in March 2014, the

Governance Facility started supporting CSRC as its inception phase partner to continue facilitating the

land and agrarian campaign. Therefore, the commencement of the proposed intervention will have the support of CSRC’s past experiences to which more value will be added. The proposed initiative will

adopt a more focused approach to supporting the mobilization of marginalized farmers to claim their

rights and effectively hold the duty bearer accountable emphasizing on a more critical and

constructive partnership with local stakeholders and line agencies.

The commencement of the project activities will involve orientation of the project team followed by

that of the key stakeholders at national, district and local levels. These stakeholders are already in a

working relationship with CSRC and its staff members and are well familiar with the organization’s

approach to project management and implementation. As the initial strategy to roll out the project

activities CSRC will ensure that the staff members both at the Kathmandu and field levels with

remarkable performance evaluation records will be retained and their job description refined. There

will be 7 teams of project staff members each taking responsibility of delivering the planned activities

in one of the 7 districts. The Executive Director with strategic policy support of the Executive

Committee will oversee the progress of the launching and roll out of the project activities.

Management arrangement (including project governance /administration structure)

Organizational arrangements. The proposed project will have a management structure consisting of a Project Steering Committee (PSC) and District Coordination Committees (DCCs). The PSC as the

apex body will have the Chair and 4 members represented by MoLR, GF, CSRC EC, two relevant

independent professionals. The members of the DCC will have the representative of DDC, Land

Revenue Office, Land Reform Office, Chair of District LRF and CSRC district Coordinator. Both

PSC and DCCs will invite individuals to participate in their meetings as relevant. The PSC will

monitor the implementation of the project fund, review the annual progress reports prepared and

advise on strategic guidance for an effective implementation of the project activities. The PSC will make its decisions by consensus, to be recorded in agreed minutes on the meetings. The PSC shall

establish internal Rules of Procedure, to be adopted by its members during the first meeting. The DCC

will monitor the implementation of the project funds, review the district specific annual progress

reports and advise on strategic guidance.

Financial management. The administrative and financial management of the organization is guided by

its FRMS and HRMS. The organizational procurement policy is clearly outlined in Section 8 of

CSRC’s document on FRMS. The procurement decisions are made either by Procurement Committee

(PC) or by Management Committee (MC). The PC assesses the procurement requirement of general

goods and makes procurement recommendations for approval either by the MC or by the EC. The

actual procurement of general goods does not involve the ED, AFC and SFO. The Logistic Officer is

responsible to make the procurements as per the approvals. The MC decides on service procurement.

Every purchase the organization makes obtains PAN/VAT bills from the vendors, tax deduction at

source (TDS) is done as per government regulations, and financial transactions are carried out through

bank. CSRC’s document on FRMS explains the organization’s process of planning and budgeting,

cash and bank operations, authority structure, payment procedures, procurement policy, delegation of

authority, bookkeeping and accounting procedures, audits etc. The compliance of all the financial

transactions and operational processes are assessed by the internal control mechanism supported by

Admin and Finance Coordinator, Field Finance Monitoring Officer and internal auditor. The

compliance is also assessed during the social audits. Similarly it is also assessed by the external

auditor. CSRC allows staff and consultants to take advances with due procedure for carrying out

planned/agreed activities and to manage official expenses and field visit expenses. CSRC’s internal

checks and control is governed by its FRMS. An internal Audit Committee in CSRC is led by 3

general members that prepares the terms of reference for the internal audit of the organization and

guides the Admin and Finance Coordinator to collect quotations from qualified auditing companies.

The Audit Committee assesses the quotations and selects the best audit firm which is submitted to the

EC for approval. The internal audit of the organization is carried out every six months that also

16

covers auditing of samples of RCs, ROs, NLRF and DLRFs. The internal auditor shares the findings

of the audit with the Management Committee seeking response to issues and concerns raised. After

receiving the management response the auditor finalizes the audit report and submits it to the Audit

Committee. The Audit Committee submits the report to the EC for discussion. The EC instructs the

MC to implement the audit recommendations.

Human resource management. CSRC’s approach to human resources management and development is guided by its document on HRMS. This system and policy document is in compliance with the

law of the land and organizational norms, values and standards at all level. The EC, ED, and AFC are

key responsible officials in executing the HRMS. CSRC takes into account organizational needs, staff

performance and competency to strategically support staff professional development. Staff members

participate in monthly and quarterly review meetings to present and reflect upon the progress and

achievements against their progress markers. Staff members are expected to experience professional

growth and develop their competencies through such reflective engagements with other colleagues.

Customized training opportunities are made available for them to enhance their capacities. The

exposures and work experiences in CSRC coupled with the regular participation in reflective sessions

have allowed most of the staff members to become trainers in their respective fields. CSRC’s HRMS

is explicit about equal employment opportunity and none-discriminatory policy which is well

reflected in the current organizational structure. CSRC, therefore, represents an all inclusive staff

structure comprising of members with diverse ethnic, culture and gender background. The CSRC

governance policy document precisely outlines the requirement for the staff composition with at least

33% women and appropriate representation of ethnic groups and Dalits. The current CSRC structure

of 26 staff members comprises of 11 women, 15 men, 5 Dalit, 9 Janjati, 1 Madheshi and 10 other cast

groups such as Brahmin and Chhetri. The composition of the 137 field staff members represents 67

women, 56 Dalits (including Madhesh Dalits) and 41 Janajatis (including Madheshis).

Management strategy. The day-to-day functioning of the organization is managed by a core team of

staff members consisting of the ED, an Advisor, a Finance Coordinator, two Campaign Coordinators,

two Project Coordinators, eight Campaign Officers, a Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

Coordinator, three Finance Officers, a Publication Officer, a Logistic Officer, a driver, two Office

Secretaries. Besides, the organization has also collaborated with Voluntary Service Overseas and

mobilized a VSO based in Kailali district. CSRC also offers internship opportunities to young

professionals and currently two such young professionals are engaged as interns. In managing the

proposed project and supporting the collaborating NGOs, NLRF and DLRFs, the organization will

continue engaging 6 of the current 13 District Coordinators and 30 of the current 122 Land Rights Activists to effectively manage the project and take the land rights campaign forward both at national

and local levels.

Project staff. The current staff members of the organization will be engaged in the implementation of

the proposed project. All the core staff members, district and field level professionals have the

competencies in HRBA, gender sensitivity, social inclusion and ESCR. The program staff members are

competent in land policy advocacy, lobbying and influencing the government and relevant stakeholders

in promoting pro-poor land and agrarian reform. The support staff members are trained in good

governance, human and financial resources management, and accountability. At the local level, the

activists are competent on participatory approaches, social mobilization, advocacy and coordination.

There are a total of 25 core staff members (10 female, 15 male, 8 Janajtis, 5 Dalits,1 Madeshi dalit) in

CSRC as mentioned in the following list.

SN Name of Staff Position % project

time

Responsibility Other projects

involved

1 Mr. Jagat Deuja Executive Director 80 Overall Management CARE & Oxfam GB

2 Mr. Jagat Basnet OD Advisor 50 Research & Policy Advocacy Action Aid & CARE

3 Ms. Shova Dhakal Admin and Finance 50 Administration & Management CARE & Oxfam GB

4 Ms. Geeta Pandit Snr. Financial Officer 100 Financial Management

5 Ms. Kalpana Karki Campaign Coordinator 50 Program Management & Support CARE & Action Aid

6 Mr. Bhagiram Chaudhary Campaign Coordinator 100 Program Management & Support

7 Ms. Aaparajita Gautam PME & Doc. Officer 60 Monitoring & Documentation CARE & Action Aid

8 Mr. Shayam Biswakarma Project Coordinator 0 Program Support & Coordination Oxfam GB

9 Ms. Sarita Luitel Logistic Officer 70 Logistic Support LWF

10 Mr. Biswash Nepali Publication Officer 0 Management of Resource Centre Action Aid

17

11 Mr. Shantiram Bhandari Project Coordinator 0 Program Support & Coordination Oxfam GB

12 Mr. Kumar Thapa Campaign Officer 100 Campaign Facilitation

13 Mr. Suvaraj Chaudhary Campaign Officer 100 Campaign Facilitation

14 Mr. Bhola Paswan Campaign Officer 0 Campaign Facilitation CARE

15 Mr. Nariram Lohar Campaign Officer 0 Campaign Facilitation Oxfam

16 Mr. Bhola Basnet Campaign Officer 0 Campaign Facilitation CARE

17 Mr. Roshan Karki Finance Officer 0 Financial Monitoring CARE

18 Ms. Sumitra Tharu Finance Officer 100 Financial Monitoring

19 Mr. Raj Kumar Tharu Campaign Officer 0 Campaign Facilitation Oxfam GB

20 Ms. Mamata Sunar Campaign officer 0 Campaign Facilitation Oxfam GB

21 Mr. Bikash Man Dangol Driver 100 Driving

22 Ms. Ramita Shrestha Office Secretary 100 Office Support

23 Ms. Rita Baramu Research Assistance 0 Research Support Oxfam GB

24 Mr. Bhojman Chaudhary Office Secretary 50 Office Support CARE & Action Aid

25 Ms. Yasodha Sapkota Office Support staff 50 Office Support Oxfam GB

26 Ms. Rashmi Pandit Campaign officer 0 Campaign Facilitation ILC

Coordination and linkages

CSRC has established linkages with important international, national and local human rights promoting and protecting organizations. It has been an active member of the International Land

Coalition (ILC), Forum Asia for Human Rights, International Initiatives for Land and Agrarian Rights

and Development, Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development. In the

national context, since 2009, CSRC has been strategically collaborating and coordinating with its

strategic partners (SPs) comprising of DanidaHUGOU, Action Aid International Nepal, Care Nepal,

Oxfam GB, Lutheran World Federation.

Over the years, CSRC has evolved as a resource center and a coordinating organization of the land and agrarian campaign which is being coordinated with and led by NLRF, an organization of tenant,

small holders, agricultural laborers and landless farmers facilitated by a coalition of NGO partners and

CBOs. The collaboration and linkages are extended and deepened at the local level through the

strengthening and mobilization of local level LRFs.

Likewise, CSRC has been collaborating with NHRC for systematic monitoring of land rights violation

drawing government’s attention to address the related issues. The organization is also leading the

CSO land monitoring process and documenting the incidents of rights violation related to land and natural resources. It has published materials on good practices and impacts of land and agrarian

campaigns. The articles written by marginalized farmers themselves and land rights defenders have

regularly featured in the leading daily newspapers.

CSRC’s coverage of support to the land rights campaigns in the current 53 will continue mainly with

the leadership of NLRF, which itself has been successful in mobilizing necessary resources both

through donors and from members’ contributions (fees and in-kind). The coordination and further

strengthening of NLRF will continue in the days to come. CSRC’s partnership with the current

donors will also continue. The organization, its EC and the MC are well cognizant about the need to

ensure that the resources and activities of different projects do not result in duplication. The activities

under the proposed project will, therefore, be implemented with utmost care ensuring proper

coordination with all the stakeholders and partners not only to prevent duplication of resources but

also to complement each other and strengthen the synergy.

Contribution to the cross-cutting issues of the governance facility

Within this organizational culture the process of designing and developing any new initiative does not

miss out the need to incorporate the critically important cross-cutting issues, which is well reflected in the descriptions of different components of this proposal.

The very focus on: i) remaining inclusive in all the aspects of the project including the structure of

project staff and the beneficiaries; b) bottom-up participatory process; c) transparency in all aspects of

the project implementation, e.g., mobilization, distribution and utilization of funds; and d)

accountability (ensured through the commitment to be publicly scrutinized with the use of tools such

as social audit) is an example that the proposed project has respected and taken the human rights

based approach to designing both its content and delivery method. Moreover, substantial portion of

the project initiatives is also dedicated to developing the capacity of land-governance-related duty

18

bearers for them to be effective in their approach to service delivery and remain accountable to the

rights holders. The project experiences and achievements will also inform the next shadow report to

ICESCR on the four-yearly (2015-18) progress towards compliance with the international human

rights standards.

The importance of gender equality and social inclusion is institutionally ensured by CSRC through the

adoption and implementation of Institutional Governance Policy and HRMP. As an institutional policy CSRC makes sure that dalit, Madheshi, Janajati , including at least 50% women, are

represented in every program initiative and in the organizational as well as program structures. This

organizational policy is clearly reflected in the human resource structure, program components and

budget allocations of the proposed project.

Conflict transformation as a cross-cutting issues is well in-built in the propose project. Historically,

landless formers and tenants remained victims of discrimination, deprivation, exclusion, domination

and violence. The proposed project emphasizes on mitigating the possible conflicts and/or legal battle between landlord and landless tillers/tenants through nonviolent means of dialogues and cooperation.

The commencement of the activities of the proposed project will involve the primary and secondary

beneficiaries in a participatory process of mapping the context and assessing the issues. Similar

process will be repeated periodically to review, assess the progress of change, draw lessons and feed

information to take further course of actions. The process will basically focus on optimizing benefits

in favor of the poor and marginalized farmers in terms of securing their rights to land ownership

and/or use.

The participatory process and constructive and critical engagement with government counterpart that

the proposed project has emphasized will ensure strengthening of and a productive linkage between

the supply and demand sides governance of the land sector. The organized engagement and

increasing control of the marginalized farmers in the management of land ownership related issues,

which the proposed project will promote, will strengthen the relevance and significance of LRFs that

will not only influence the shaping of land acts and policies to be pro-poor, but also feed information

and evidence to duty bearers to dispense their services more effectively and responsively.

The day-to-day operation of CSRC, as already mentioned above, is guided by the organizations guiding principles outlined in its key policy documents. The administration, management and

implementation of the proposed project will, therefore, have an institutional base that operates with

the principles of good governance and zero tolerance against any form of corruption.

Monitoring and evaluation plan

A functioning M&E system is already in place in the organization and measuring performance are

part of this system. The process is guided by and carried out with the use of tools such as

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation (PME) manual, PME framework which specifies the

approach to outcome mapping, field monitoring, reviewing and reflecting on results along with

carrying out PRRP (participatory review, reflection and planning) at district, regional and national

levels. Monitoring visits are also carried out jointly with Strategic Partners. The organizations’

quantitative and qualitative achievements are systematically documented and made available for

public consumption and also shared through the social audit process annually.

CSRC will give continuity to strengthening the existing system and the process, which is reflected in

the results-based M&E framework of the proposed project (see Annex 2). Monitoring will primarily

focus on assessing and capturing results against baseline figures at output and outcome levels. The

monitoring system will focus on assessing the progress made towards targets and milestones, drawing

up lessons and good practices and identifying risks and challenges as well as collecting ground-level

feedback.

The participatory approach to program planning, implementation and reviews will be reinforced and

strengthened at all phases and levels. In this process, CSRC will ensure that the primary target groups

and other stakeholders are actively involved.

19

The EC’s regular internal evaluation will be continued during the implementation of the project.

Likewise, the biannual PRRP which the organization will continue will also be applied by the NLRF

and at the national and district levels. The overall purpose of the review and reflection processes will

be to learn and share lessons from the land and agrarian rights campaign’s achievements and failures.

The project’s case studies, personal and/or collective narratives of the land-poor farmers, visual evidences, findings and recommendations of the reviews and evaluations, will inform revisions of the

implementation plan, including organizational development plans, and the organization’s other

publications.

Risk and mitigation plan

CSRC assumes that there will be political stability, will and consensus in the country to take forward

the agenda of protecting human rights and ensuring pro-poor land and agrarian reform. The

Government will demonstrate commitment to effectively implement land and other policy reforms

and that implemented policies are supportive towards the promotion of women’s rights to land and

property.

It is assumed that the landless tenants and farmers, will not face obstruction from any quarter in their

bid to become organized into community groups and participate in the activities determined by them.

It is also assumed that the issues raised by the campaign will feature in the on-going constitution-

making process and become a part of it. Details of the risk mitigation plan is attached in Annex 3.

Sustainability and phase-out plan

Sustainability is understood within CSRC as a holistic concept and a set of consciously thought

through measures application of which establishes a sound foundation so that the land-poor farmers

can build further on what they have achieved during the project phase to continue moving closer to

their goal of securing the rights to land and use of natural resources and ensuring the family’s

wellbeing, despite the ongoing changes in funding sources, program models, service providers,

community demographics and other factors.

Conscious effort will be made to ensure that: i) the organizational structure and the capacity of NLRF,

DLRF and VLRF is strengthened enabling them to independently manage the land rights campaign;

ii) successful and transformative models of pro-poor land and agrarian reform are available for the

national and local people’s organization and other human rights NGOs to adapt, replicate and up-

scale; and iii) CSRC is evolved as a sustained resource centre fully equipped with knowledge resource

base, researchers and trainers to support the people’s organization and NGOs.

The LRFs will be strategically empowered to continue their land rights campaigns more

independently. With the completion of the proposed project, CSRC as an evolving resource center

will have a renewed role to support LRFs which will be strategically reduced to making available

resources and technical know-how on a demand basis. CSRC’s institutional development during the

period of the proposed project will have a major component of consolidating its experiences and

learning leading to the development of important learning resources and modules which will be

extensively utilized in the training, workshops, discussions and advocacy purposes. These learning

resources will be systematically packaged in modular form with proper cataloging for easy reference

and wider public use. The CSRC resource center will remain focused on promoting land and agrarian

rights of marginalized farmers, hence its set up will be customized to fulfill the knowledge and

resources support needs of the land-poor farmers. It will also offer useful knowledge products and

interaction forums for students, activists, researchers, scholars and academia interested in the field. CSRC will expand its services regionally by starting 3 regional centers within next 3 years. Local

level fund mobilization for local initiatives of the national and local structure of the NLRF will also be

promoted.

A sustainability and exit plan will be further strengthened and finalized in consultation with the local

and national level LRFs, strategic partners/donors, and other key stakeholders.

20

IV. Project Budget and Justification

The project budget that CSRC proposes amounts to a total of NRs 748,828,984 for 2.5 years which is

summarized into consolidated costs for delivering the 4 outputs, carrying out the project monitoring

and evaluations, undertaking necessary travels, paying staff salaries, purchasing required equipments,

and meeting the organization’s overhead expenses. As can be noticed in the summary budget, while

the proportion of the budget for the administrative costs has been kept at its bear minimum, almost

three quarters of the budget have been allocated for program costs. The cost particularly for Output 1

is substantially high obviously because the output pertains directly to the primary beneficiaries, the

scale of which is multifold compared to the secondary beneficiaries that the other outputs cover.

The project budget has been prepared as per the organizational policy of GESI responsive budgeting.

Not only is there a separate output focused to GESI for which 8.7% of the total budget has been

allocated, but also the budget has been allocated for specific costs associated with the need to

responding to GESI requirements by examining activities through the GESI lens. For example, costs

for female friendly space, child care, baby milk and necessary allocations for caretaker are included in

budgets for specific activities.

Summary of the project budget

Budget Summary NRs %

Project Activity Costs

Output 1 38,756,292 51.79

Output 2 3,354,663 4.48

Output 3 6,506,884 8.70

Output 4 5,307,988 7.09

Review monitoring and evaluations 2,502,500 3.34

Travel cost 1,801,530 2.41

Human Resource 11,338,773 15.15

Capital Cost/Equipment 365,000 0.49

Overhead 4,895,354 6.54

Total Cost 74,828,984 100.00

The NRs. 74.83 million that the project will be investing on about 60 thousand tenants, 249 thousand

land-use deprived agricultural families and more than 60 thousand women in these families, about a

dozen land-governance-related government and non-government offices, and on CSRC’s institutional

capacity building is expected to have contributed to improving national economy, human rights and

peace conditions. The investment will directly yield land ownership among 6500 tenants, assure land-

use rights for increased productivity among 5000 land-poor farmers and food security among 7500

such farmers along with other outcomes such as 240 additional public forums where marginalized

farmers including women will have their voices heard, more than 1000 LRFs will have been engaged

with land and natural resource related government offices, 3 new policies and/or Acts will have been formulated and implemented with improved services of land-related duty bearers which will be

supporting the land-poor farmers to secure their economic and social rights, 5000 joint land ownership

certificates of wife and husband will have been issued, 50% of the poor-farmer families will have

women involved in decision related to family financial matters, domestic and gender based violence

against women will have been reduced by 70%, 120 women will have been engaged in the decision

making bodies of various public forums and CSRC will be emerged as a resourceful institution for

land-poor farmers to have a sustained access to land and agrarian related technical support and for

21

academia, students, researchers and interested organizations the access to the knowledge products that

CSRC will have made available. With a conservative estimate of 60 thousand land-poor farmer

families that the project will reach out to the unit cost will be less than NRs. 1500 per family. Given

the results that the proposed project will be delivering and the socio-economic impact it will be

making in the lives of the land poor farmers, it can be argued that the investment on the project is an excellent value for money.

22

Annex 1. Project Log Frame

Result Chain Indicator Source Means of Verification Assumptions

Impact Economic and social

conditions of marginalized

farmers improved

• % increase in per capita GDP

• % of economic and social rights-related UPR

recommendation implemented

• % increase in Peace Index

• National Accounts of Nepal of Central

Bureau of Statistics

• UPR report

• NHRC annual report

Outcomes 1: Marginalized farmers

acquired land and

improved their family's

food security.

2: Marginalized farmers

enabled to influence the

formulation and

implementation of pro-

poor and gender sensitive

acts and policies on land

and natural resources

rights.

3: Women farmers enabled

to strengthen their social

and economic rights

4: CSRC’s organizational

capacity strengthened to

contribute to the

development of knowledge

and resource base for

promoting land rights.

• # of tenants in the 7 project districts

(Sindhupalchok, Mahottari, Sarlahi, Rautahat,

Dang, Banke and Bardiya)

• # of land-use deprived agricultural families

• # of food insecure farmers

• # of public forums represented by marginalized

farmers

• # of LRFs engaged with land and natural

resources related government offices

• # of gender sensitive land and/or natural

resources acts and/or policies formulated and

implemented

• % of marginalized farmers satisfied with the

services of land and/or natural resources related

government offices

• % of women respondents expressed their

engagement in collective decisions on family

financial matter.

• % reduction of domestic violence against

women in the families acquiring the joint

ownership of land

• # of women farmers appointed in public

decision making bodies/mechanisms of

community institutions

• # of general members or staff members invited

by LRFs, public institutions, international

organizations and CSOs as HRBA and/or land

reform resource persons

• # of resource materials developed

• # of research/position papers influencing policy

decisions

• # of farmers and individuals visiting CSRC

• Mid-term and final evaluation reports

• Media reports/articles

• Case studies

• Annual progress reports of CSRC and

NLRF

• GF evaluation report

• Mid-term and final evaluation reports

• Media reports/articles

• Case studies

• Government progress report

• Acts/policies/regulations published by the

government

• Mid-term and final evaluation reports

• Media reports/articles

• Case studies

• WOREC monitoring reports on domestic

violence

• Acts/policies/regulations published by the

government

• Mid-term and final evaluation reports

• Media reports/articles

• Organizational capacity assessment report

• Visit record of CSRC web site

Landless farmers and tenants will not be lured

or forced by landlords and land mafia to give up

the land ownership accepting only a nominal

monetary compensation.

The amendment of land reform act and the

formulation of policies do not invite conflict if

and when the administration of the land sector

is devolved to the newly formed provinces

under the new constitution.

The state mechanisms are protected from the

influence of patriarchic mindset and practices

allowing women full access to public services.

The federal and national level administrations

after the enactment of the new constitution with

the federal state structure will continue

recognizing the contributions and capacities of

CSRC as a credible national level NGO.

23

and/or its web site

Outputs 1. Land Rights Forums

(LRFs) are enabled to strengthen the campaigns,

activism as well as

productivity of landless

and tenant farmers.

2. LRFs played a critical

and constructive role in

influencing the

formulation and

implementation of land,

agrarian reform and/or

natural resources acts and

policies

3. Women's land

ownership rights promoted

4. CSRC's governance

systems, structure and

human resource

strengthened and

effectively mobilized.

• # of families lodged land ownership or land use

rights related applications to relevant

government institutions

• # of families undertook agro-based enterprises

• # of DLRFs/VLRFs received financial

resources from government and non

government institutions to promote agro-based

enterprises

• # of land rights campaigns organized by

VLRFs, DLRFs and NLRF

• # of parliamentarians engaged in dialogue

sessions and joint actions related to drafting

policy/act briefs

• # of theme-specific initiatives/actions carried

out with government and academic institutions

• # of national policies and/or acts reviewed

and/or recommended

• # of families sensitized on women’s land rights

• # of government and non-government

organizations collaborated in LRFs’ campaigns

on women’s access to land

• # of GBV survivor female farmers received

support to overcome the physical and

psychological pain

• # of couples received joint or women’s

individual land ownership certificates

• # general members and staff members trained

on HRBA and land reform issues

• # of policy briefs and research reports

published

• # of collaborative initiatives undertook jointly

with networks/alliances/coalitions at national

and international levels

• Results based monitoring and evaluation

system established and fully implemented by

the end of the 1st year of the project

implementation

• Quarterly, half-yearly and annual progress

reports

• Review and reflections reports

• Media reports/articles

• Case studies

• Quarterly, half-yearly and annual progress

reports

• Review and reflections reports

• Media reports/articles

• Meeting minutes

• Policy briefs

• Event reports

• Quarterly, half-yearly and annual progress

reports

• Review and reflections reports

• Media reports/articles

• Event reports

• Quarterly, half-yearly and annual progress

reports

• Review and reflections reports

• Media reports/articles

• Event reports

• Research reports and policy briefs

• CSRC web site

The duty bearers in district land reform office

or district land revenue office will not have strong illicit alliance with local landlords.

Local and central government line agencies are

willing to collaborate with landless farmers and

CSOs

The amendment of Land Reform Act 1964

proposed by the Cabinet is endorsed by the

parliament.

Political parties and bureaucrats will be

supportive to address land rights-related issues

of marginalized farmers.

Political parties, bureaucrats, DDCs and VDCs

are supportive to address gender-related land

rights issues and put the mechanisms in place to

protect women from being victims of possible

violent attacks inflicted by intolerant

individuals or groups. Referral centers and

FFS for GBV survivors are available at the

local level

Social Welfare Council is supportive to CSRC’s

rights-based transformative initiatives and offers due cooperation in the renewal and/or

program approval processes. Government and

donor’s recognition and appreciation of CSRC

as a human rights based organization will be

continued

24

Activities Output 1

4.5 Context mapping,

identification of

marginalized farmers,

establishment of

baseline and

participatory planning.

4.6 Formation of VLRFs

and strengthening

LRFs on mobilization

and organizing

campaigns

4.7 Support landless/tenant

and smallholder

farmers to take legal

action and claim land

ownership and use

rights

4.8 Support for agro-based

enterprise and

agriculture cooperative

Output 2

5.1 Collaborate with

parliamentarians,

political parties,

MoLRM, DDCs and

VDCs to organize

dialogue and

discussion sessions at

VDC to national levels

for acts and policy

formulation and

implementation.

5.2 Carryout policy review

and develop policy

recommendation

papers

Inputs

Human resources (core staff, experts, consultants,

frontline leaders, campaigners), training

(institutional capacity, HRBA, campaign, agro-

based enterprises, cooperatives, legal provisions

on land rights, organizational management),

equipments (computers, cameras, overhead

projectors, vehicles), internet connectivity,

Cost (NPR)

1,125,000

6,990,863

9,279,449

4,932,590

2,828,838

525,825

Parliamentarians have demonstrated political

will to deliberate on the 6th amendments of

Land Reform Act 1964. Local governments are

supportive to the campaigns of LRFs.

Parliamentarians, government and policy

makers are willing to engage in land rights-

related policy dialogues and the ruling parties

and opposition will work together to draft land-

write related acts.

The government will improve the bureaucratic process of approving the applications of joint

ownership of land.

25

Output 3

6.1 Organize awareness on

women’s right to land,

and mobilize and

support families to

obtain the couple’s

joint of women’s

independent ownership

of land.

6.2 Provide specialized

support to victims of

GBV

6.3 Organize discussion

sessions involving

representatives of

VDC, DDC, CSOs,

DLRO and local

political leaders on

women’s land rights

issues and concerns

raised by families and

initiate mobile DLRO

camps to support

women obtain land

ownership (joint or

individual).

Output 4

7.1 Planning, review,

monitoring, evaluation,

reporting and social

audit

7.2 Organize training,

workshops and

exposure visits

7.3 Carryout research,

develop and update

position papers,

resource materials,

4,322,425

1,403,259

781,200

173,388

793,600

4,035,000

Male family members are willing to participate

in discussion sessions on women’s land rights

issues

Necessary CSRC staff members are available

and willing to continue working in the

organization during the project period.

26

modules and web page

7.4 Build network,

collaboration,

partnership and

alliances

306,000

PRE-CONDITION:

• Approval of Social Welfare Council

27

Annex 2. Results-Based Monitoring &Evaluation Framework

Results-Chain Indicator

Definition of

Indicator

Level of Data

Disaggregation Baseline (2015)

Target

Means of Verification Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Outcome 1: Marginalized

farmers

acquired land

and improved

their family's

food security

# of tenants reduced

by 10%

Tenants obtaining the

ownership of at least

50% share of the

cultivated land will be

counted.

1st level by by district,

2nd level by Gende; 23rd

level by Dalit, Janajati and

others. Disaggregation

will be done for the

farmers receiving land

ownership.

60449 tenants in 7

target districts

(District and VDC

Profile of Nepal

2014/15, Intensive

Study and Research

Center, Kathmandu).

57,449 54,449 53,949 Annual progress report of

MoLRM, Half-yearly and

annual project reports and

final report

# of land-use

deprived agricultural

families reduced by

2%

Land-use deprived

agricultural families

are those depending on

less that 0.5 hector of

land for agriculture.

At the 1st level by district,

2nd level by gender and

3rd level by dalit, Janjati

and others of the family

members receiving the

land use authorization.

249026 land-use

deprived farmer

families in 7 project

districts (52.7% of

total agriculture

families, souce:

National Sample

Census of Agriculture

2011/12)

249026 246026 244026 District and VDC Profile

of Nepal 2014/15. NLSS

2010/11. Annual progress

report of MoLRM, Half-

yearly and annual project

reports and final report

# of food insecure

farmers reduced by

3%

Fooe insecure farmers

are those not yielding

enough agriculture

product to feed the

family for 12 months

By Dalit, Janajati and

others

249026 land-use

deprived farmer

families in 7 project

districts (52.7% of

total agriculture

families, souce:

National Sample

Census of Agriculture

2011/12)

249026 244026 241526 District and VDC Profile

of Nepal 2014/15. NLSS

2010/11. Annual progress

report of MoLRM, Half-

yearly and annual project

reports and final report

# of public forums

represented by

marginalized farmers

Village, district and

national level

1st level by district, 2nd

level by Gender; 3rd level

by Dalit, Janajati and

others.

To be determine

through baseline

survey

60 180 240 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

2: Marginalized

farmers enabled

to influence the

formulation and

implementation

of pro-poor and

gender sensitive

# of LRFs engaged

with land and natural

resources related

government offices

Engaged' to discussand

influence the

formulation and

implementation of

land and/or natural

resources acts and

policies

By village, district and

national level LRFs

752 (source: CSRC

record 744 VLRFs, 7

DLRFs and 1 NLRF)

902 1052 1052 CSRC record, half-yearly,

annual and final project

reports

28

acts and

policies on land

and agrarian

rights.

# of gender sensitive

land and/or natural

resources acts and/or

policies formulated

and implemented

1st level by district, 2nd

level by Gender; 3rd level

by Dalit, Janajati and

others.

4 Acts (1 Land

Reform Act, 1 Birta

Act, 1 Guthi Act, 1

Lease Act) and no

policy available

5 6 7 Gazatte, half-yearly,

annual and final project

reports

% of marginalized

farmers satisfied with

the services of land

and/or natural

resources related

government offices

Satifaction level will

be determined through

sample survey

employing a 4-point

scale

1st level by district, 2nd

level by Gender; 3rd level

by Dalit, Janajati and

others.

To be determine

through baseline

survey

20% 40% 50% Baseline and annual

survey reports

3: Women

farmers enabled

to strengthen

their social and

economic rights

% of women

respondents

expressed their

engagement in

collective decisions

on family financial

matter.

Women belonging to

tenant, landless and

smallholder farmers

who will be

responding to baseline

and annual surveys

questions

1st level by district and

2nd level by Janajati, Dalit

and others

To be determine

through baseline

survey

10% 25% 40% Baleline and annual

survey reports

% reduction of

domestic violence

against women in the

families acquiring the

joint ownership of

land

Women receiving the

joint ownership of

land will be

responding to sample

survey question

1st level by district and

2nd level by Janajati, Dalit

and others

To be determine

through baseline

survey

60% 40% 30% Baleline and annual

survey reports

# of women farmers

appointed in public

decision making

bodies/mechanisms

of community

institutions

Public decision

making bodies include

executive committees

of VDCs, FUGs, ward

citizen forums, local

schools, local

cooperatives, VLRFs

and DLRFs.

1st level by district and

2nd level by Janajati, Dalit

and others

To be determine

through baseline

survey

50 110 120 Baleline and annual

survey reports

29

4: CSRC’s

organizational

capacity

strengthened to

contribute to

the

development of

knowledge and

resource base

for promoting

land rights.

# of general members

or staff members

invited by LRFs,

public institutions,

international

organizations and

CSOs as HRBA

and/or land reform

resource persons

1st level by gender and

2nd level by Dalit, Janajati

and others.

20 general or staff

members invited

30 60 70 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

# of resource

materials developed

Resources materials

include modules and

learning packages

developed based on

CSRC's experiences

and learnings

Resource materials will

also focus on women,

dalit, Janajati specific

learning resources

Fresh start 2 4 5 Learning resources

developed

# of research/

position papers

influencing policy

decisions

Research on land and

natural resources

rights issues. Position

papers will define

CSRC's stance on land

and natural resources

issues

By gender, dalit and

Janajati

Fresth start 2 4 5 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports,

CSRC publications

# of farmers,

individuals visiting

CSRC and/or its web

site

Visitors seek

information/knowledg

e products on its

governance practice

and land rights

campaign

By gender, dalit and

Janajati and also

nationality and

organizations

Fresh start 1000 2000 2500 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports, and

hits in CSRC web site

Output 1. Land Rights

Forums (LRF)

are enabled to

strengthen the

campaigns,

activism as well

as the

# of families lodged

land ownership or

land use rights related

applications to

relevant government

institutions

Families of landless,

tenants and/or

smallholders of 6

project districts

By district, gender, dalit,

Janjati and others.

3983 (source: DLRO

Sindhupalchok,

Rautahat, Sarlahi,

Mahotari, Dang,

Banke, Bardia).

6983 15983 17483 DLRO record

30

productivity of

landless tenants

and smallholder

farmers.

# of families

undertook agro-based

enterprises

Families of landless,

tenants and/or

smallholders of 6

project districts

By district, gender, dalit,

Janjati and others.

To be determine

through baseline

survey

300 700 850 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

# of DLRFs/VLRFs

received financial

resources from

government and non

government

institutions to

promote agro-based

enterprises

Sources of financial

assistance are VDC,

Agriculture Office,

DDC, CFUG, Live

Stock Office, PAF,

NGOs

By district, and type of

funding by gender, dalit,

Janjati and others.

Fresh start 75 175 190 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

# of land rights

campaigns organized

by VLRFs, DLRFs

and NLRF

By district, gender, dalit,

Janjati and others.

Start afresh 308 616 924 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

2. LRFs played

a critical and

constructive

role in

influencing the

formulation and

implementation

of land,

agrarian reform

and/or natural

resources acts

and policies

# of bureaucrats,

political leaders and

parliamentarians

engaged in dialogue

sessions and joint

actions related to

drafting policy/act

briefs

By gender Fresh start 120 120 120 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

# of theme-specific

initiatives/actions carried out with

government and

academic institutions

Initiatives in the form

of working groups on specific themes

By gender, Dalit and

Janjati

Fresh start 2 4 5 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

# of policies/acts

reviewed and/or

recommended

By gender, Dalit and

Janjati

Fresh start 3 6 6 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

3. Women's

land ownership

rights promoted

# of families

sensitized on

women’s land rights

Sensitized through

legal education and

resource materials

By districts, Dalit, Janjati Fresh start 6000 14000 18000 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

31

# of government and

non-government

organizations

collaborating in

campaigns on

women’s access to

land

By districts and by

organizations

Fresh start 10 25 30 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

# of GBV survivor

female farmers

received support to

overcome the

physical and

psychological pain

GBV refers to sexual,

physical or

psychological violence

against women.

By districts, dalit, Janjati

and others

To be determine

through baseline

survey

1000 1400 1500 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

#of couples received

joint or women’s

individual land

ownership certificates

Joint ownership

indicates land

ownership document

issued in the name of

husband and wife

By district and at 2nd

level by dalit and Janajati

To be determine

through baseline

survey

2000 4500 5000 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

4. CSRC's

governance

systems,

structure and

human resource

are

strengthened

and effectively

mobilized.

# general members

and staff members

trained on HRBA and

land reform issues

By gender and at 2nd level

by Dalit and Janajati

20 trained general

members and staff

40 70 70 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

# of policy briefs and

research reports

published

By gender and at 2nd level

by Dalit and Janajati

Fresh start 2 4 5 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

# of collaborations

with

networks/alliances/co

alitions at national

and international

levels

By organizations, districts

and themes

5 (NGO Federation,

HRTMCC,

COLARP, ANGOC

and ILC)

7 9 10 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

Results based

monitoring and

evaluation system

established and fully

implemented

By districts, gender, Dalit

and Janajati

1 existing will be

updated and

improved

1 1 1 Half-yearly, annual and

final project reports

32

Annex 3. Risk Management Plan

Results-chain Risks

Likeliho

od of

Risk

(Range

1-3)

Severit

y of

Risk

(Range

1-3)

Total

Risk

Score

Risk narration Risk Mitigation strategy

Outcome(s)

1: Marginalized farmers acquired

land and improved their family's

food security.

Commercial banks that allows

access mostly to elites have

encouraged buying and selling

of land leading to the sudden

rise in land price benefiting only

the elites. Landless farmers and

tenants can be lured or forced by

landlords and land mafia to sell

the land accepting only a

nominal monetary compensation

.

2 1 3

The risk is relatively less

severe because of the

fact that the Natiional

Land Rights Forum

(NLRF) is emerging as a

widely recognized

people's organization.

2: Marginalized farmers enabled to

influence the formulation and

implementation of pro-poor and

gender sensitive acts and policies

on land and agrarian rights.

The amendment of land reform

act and the formulation of

policies can invite conflict due

to the possible devolution of the

administrative authorities related to the land sector to provinces.

This can have an implication to

Nepal's requirement to respond

to the recommendations of the

Universal Periodic Review.

2 1 3 The risk is less sever as

the issue of land reform

is already included in the

comprehensive peace

accord, recommendation of UN Committee on

ICESCR and other UN

committee reports.

33

3: Women farmers enabled to

strengthen their social and

economic rights

The persistent patriarchal

practices prevailing in the state

mechanisms can prevent women

from taking full benefit of public

services that they rightfully deserve hindering their

economic and social progress.

1 2 3 The risk is perceived to

be less sever as many

NGOs, UN agencies and

government bodies are

working towards establishing includive

and gender sensitive

policies and practices.

4: CSRC’s organizational capacity

strengthened to contribute to the development of knowledge and

resource base for promoting land

rights.

The growth of CSRC as a

national level CSO can be less significant once the new

constitution with federal

structure is enacted. The extent

to which CSRC will continue

being as effective as it has so far

been is not certain.

1 1 2 The risk is minimum as

the organization has already established is

bases at the field level.

Besides, it has been

recognized nationally

and internationally as an

established human based

organization. Moreover, the country is

experiencing strong CSO

movement and any

attempt to undermine the

CSO role can be

successfully opposed.

Output(s)

1. Land Rights Forums (LRFs) are

enabled to strengthen the

campaigns, activism as well as productivity of landless/tenant and

smallholder farmers.

The district land reform office

or district land revenue office

can linger the decision on the cases filed by the landless or

tenant farmers. The current

trend indicates that legal cases

filed by land poor farmers are

generally delayed due to illicit

alliance of the relevant

government official and local landlords.

2 1 3 The risk level is low as

the strength of LRFs is

ever growing. The risk of being harassed by the

duty bearer is likely to be

discouraged over time.

34

2. LRFs played a critical and

constructive role in influencing the

formulation and implementation of

land, agrarian reform and/or

natural resources acts and policies.

The issue of land reform is

argued to be provincial subject

by Madhes specific political

parties. The much needed

parliamentary endorsement of amendment of Land Reform Act

1964 will not take effect.

1 2 3 The likelihood of

occurring this risk is

relatively low as the

amendment of the Act

has already been forwarded to the

parliament by the

cabinet. The amendment

which is in

favor of tenants with the

legal provision of 50%

ownership of the land

they have been tilling

will possibly be passed

in the upcoming

parliamentary session.

3. Women's land ownership rights

promoted.

Women's empowered role may

not be fully accepted within

family and in the society due to

the persistence of patriarchal

mindset. Active engagement of

women in land right campaigns

may not be tolerated by

conservative groups. Women

may keep being victims of

mental and physical violence

2 1 3 The risk is less sever as

women's rights issue is

high priority agenda of

the government and civil

society organizations.

Although the patriarchal

mindset has persisted it

is being constantly and

more severely

challenged.

35

4: CSRC's governance systems,

structure and human resource are

strengthened and effectively

mobilized.

The negative perception among

government bodies (e.g. SWC)

against the rights-based

transformative initiatives of the

organization can become stronger and potentially obstruct

or delay the renewal and/or

program approval processes.

2 2 4 The risk is relatively

high. The SWC has

prepared a guideline

requiring high proportion

(60% or more) of project budgets to be allocated

for hardware. The

Council is making all the

efforts to implement

such a guideline. It is

also tacitly disapproving

the organization's focus

on HR based activities.

The authorities of SWC will be

invited to visit the project sites and

engage on interaction sessions

with landless farmers. They will

be appraised of the long term benefit of the transformative

process and empowerment of poor

farmers. Discussions and

dialogues between the authorities

of the line ministry and SWC will

also be initiated.

Activities

Output 1 1.1 Context mapping, identification of marginalized

farmers, establishment of baseline

and participatory planning.

1.2 Formation of VLRFs and

strengthening LRFs on

mobilization and organizing

campaigns 1.3 Support landless/tenant and

smallholder farmers to take legal

action and claim land ownership

and use rights

1.4 Support for agro-based

enterprise and agriculture

cooperative

The delay or non-endorsement

of the amendment of Land Reform Act 1964 will have

negative implication for landless

farmers' inability to claim their

rights to land and be more

productive

1 3 4 The risk is less likely to

take effect but if it hold true the consequence will

be severely damaging in

terms of the human

rights violation of poor

farmers

Continue interactions and lobby

with the parliamentarians, parliamentary committee on

natural resources and political

parties. NLRF will conitnue

lobbying with the line ministry and

the Minister.

Output 2 2.1 Collaborate with

parliamentarians, political parties,

MoLRM, DDCs and VDCs to

organize dialogue and discussion

The task of drafting policies can

be disrupted or sidelined due to

the growing animosity between

the ruling parties and opposition.

1 1 2 The risk is less likely to

occur as the issue of land

rights has initiated wider

national consultation.

36

sessions at VDC to national levels

for acts and policy formulation and

implementation.

2.2 Carryout policy review and

develop policy recommendation papers

Output 3 3.1 Organize awareness on

women’s right to land, and

mobilize and support families to obtain the couple’s joint of

women’s independent ownership

of land.

3.2 Provide specialized support to

victims of GBV

3.3 Organize discussion sessions

involving representatives of VDC, DDC, CSOs, DLRO and local

political leaders on women’s land

rights issues and concerns raised

by families and initiate mobile

DLRO camps to support women

obtain land ownership (joint or

individual).

The government process

regarding joint ownership of

land is complicating. If it

remains so there will be delays in getting joint ownership of

land for women.

1 1 2 The procedure to

simplify the process has

already been developed,

hence the risk is less severe

Output 4 4.1 Planning, review, monitoring,

evaluation, reporting and social

audit

4.2 Organize training, workshops and exposure visits

4.3 Carryout research, develop and

update position papers, resource

materials, modules and web page

4.4 Build network, collaboration,

partnership and alliances

Due to the small size of CSRC

program team and pressing

demand on the team to

excessively engage in delivering

outputs may affect the publication of the knowledge

products as desired.

1 1 2 The risk is low as CSRC

staff members are

already trained in time

management. The

organization is well equipped with necessary

tools at the disposal of

staff to cope with the

work demand.

37

Annex 4. Individual Organization Detailed Budget Format

Amount in NRs

SN DESCRIPTIONS

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

TOTAL

Unit Type Unit Unit Cost Total Unit Unit Cost Total Unit Unit Cost Total

A. PROJECT ACTIVITY

A.1 OUTPUT-1

1.1 Context mapping, identification of

marginalized farmers, establishment

of baseline and participatory

planning

976,500 - - 148,500 - - - 1,125,000

1.1.1 Baseline establishment Time 1 828,000 828,000 - - - - - - 828,000

1.1.2 Planning workshop Time 1 148,500 148,500 1 148,500 148,500 - - - 297,000

1.2 Strengthening and formation of

LRFs on mobilization and

organizing campaigns

2,423,600 2,537,280 2,029,983 6,990,863

1.2.1 Strengthening and formation VLRFs Village organization 300 500 150,000 300 500 150,000 300 500 150,000 450,000

1.2.2 Strengthening DLRFs District organization 7 144,800 1,013,600 7 152,040 1,064,280 7 159,642 838,121 2,916,001

1.2.3 Strengthening NLRF National

organization

1 1,260,000 1,260,000 1 1,323,000 1,323,000 1 1,389,150 1,041,863 3,624,863

1.3 Support landless/tenant and

smallholder farmers to take legal

action and claim land ownership and

use rights

4,105,550 4,302,428 871,471 9,279,449

1.3.1 Training of frontline leaders and

campaigners

Training 7 103,500 724,500 7 108,675 760,725 - - - 1,485,225

1.3.2 Awareness encampment Encampment 14 55,000 770,000 14 57,750 808,500 7 60,638 424,463 2,002,963

1.3.3 Support for scribe training and for

certification

Person 14 12,000 168,000 14 12,000 168,000 - - - 336,000

1.3.4 Local Campaign Campaign 35 15,750 551,250 35 16,538 578,813 15 17,364 260,466 1,390,528

1.3.5 District Campaign Campaign 7 169,200 1,184,400 7 177,660 1,243,620 1 186,543 186,543 2,614,563

1.3.6 National Campaign Campaign 1 707,400 707,400 1 742,770 742,770 - - - 1,450,170

38

1.4 Support for agro-based enterprise

and agriculture cooperative

2,084,800 2,401,540 446,250 4,932,590

1.4.1 Business development training as per

mapping

Training 7 90,450 633,150 7 94,973 664,808 - - - 1,297,958

1.4.2 Support to community initiatives Initiatives 10 85,000 850,000 13 85,000 1,105,000 5 89,250 446,250 2,401,250

1.4.3 Cooperative development training Training 7 85,950 601,650 7 90,248 631,733 - - - 1,233,383

1.5 Full time worker/community

facilitator

Person/months 364 12,500 4,550,000 364 13,375 4,868,500 196 14,311 2,805,005 12,223,505

1.6 District Coordinator month/person 13*7 17,200 1,565,200 13*7 18,404 1,674,764 49 19,692 964,922 4,204,886

Sub-Total Output-1 (A.1) 15,705,650 15,933,012 7,117,631 38,756,292

A.2 OUTPUT-2

2.1 Collaborate with parliamentarians,

political parties and bureaucrats for

acts and policy formulation and

implementation

984,500 1,033,725 810,613 2,828,838

2.1.1 Dialogue / discussions with local

government officials

Session 14 19,750 276,500 14 20,738 290,325 7 21,774 152,421 719,246

2.1.2 Dialogue/discussions and lobby with

bureaucrats and parliamentarians

Session 4 59,000 236,000 4 61,950 247,800 4 65,048 260,190 743,990

2.1.3 Working with government, politicians

and academic institutions to take

initiatives/actions on specific theme

Theme 2 111,000 222,000 2 116,550 233,100 1 122,378 122,378 577,478

2.1.4 Media partnership and support Time 2 125,000 250,000 2 131,250 262,500 2 137,813 275,625 788,125

2.2 Policies review and policy

recommendation papers

Paper 3 85,500 256,500 3 89,775 269,325 - - - 525,825

Sub-Total Output-2 (A.2) 1,241,000 1,303,050 810,613 3,354,663

A.3 OUTPUT-3

3.1 Organize awareness on women’s

right to land, and mobilize and

support families to obtain the

couple's joint of women's

independent ownership of land

1,846,000 12 45,000 2,200,800 12 45,000 275,625 4,322,425

3.1.1 Awareness encampment on JLO Camps 14 45,000 630,000 14 47,250 661,500 - - - 1,291,500

3.1.2 Develop and mobilize women’s

frontline leaders

Person 120 1,800 216,000 120 1,890 226,800 - - - 442,800

3.1.3 Support for joint/individual ownership

certificates

Family 2,000 500 1,000,000 2,500 525 1,312,500 500 551 275,625 2,588,125

39

3.2 GBV Prevention and response 499,000 519,930 384,329 1,403,259

3.2.1 Roving Case Manager Person 1 23,000 299,000 1 24,610 319,930 1 26,333 184,329 803,259

3.2.2 Special support to female through

(health, psychosocial support, legal

support)

Person 100 2,000 200,000 100 2,000 200,000 100 2,000 200,000 600,000

3.3. Organize discussion sessions

involving representatives of VDC,

DDC, CSOs, DLRO and local

political leaders

Workshop 6 42,000 252,000 6 44,100 264,600 6 44,100 264,600 781,200

Sub-Total Output-3 (A.3) 2,597,000 2,985,330 924,554 6,506,884

A.4 OUTPUT-4

4.1 Planning, review, monitoring,

evaluation, reporting and social

audit

55,000 57,750 60,638 173,388

4.1.1 Planning and learning meeting Event 1 55,000 55,000 1 57,750 57,750 1 60,638 60,638 173,388

4.2 Organize training, workshops and

exposure visits

392,000 401,600 - 793,600

4.2.1 Training in house yearly to

training/workshop/exposure

Event 1 192,000 192,000 1 201,600 201,600 - - - 393,600

4.2.2 Support for staff and members as per

needs assessment

Person 10 20,000 200,000 10 20,000 200,000 - - - 400,000

4.3 Carryout research, develop and

update position papers, resource

materials, module and web page

1,597,000 1,732,000 706,000 4,035,000

4.3.1 Research on specific land rights issues Issue/Theme 2 116,000 - 1 910,000 910,000 - - - 910,000

4.3.2 Policy brief Issue/Theme 2 116,000 232,000 2 116,000 232,000 1 116,000 116,000 580,000

4.3.3 Monitoring and documentation of ESC

rights

Event 1 160,000 160,000 1 160,000 160,000 1 160,000 160,000 480,000

4.3.4 Publication of learning document of

CSRC

Times 1 775,000 775,000 - - - - - - 775,000

4.3.5 Other publications year 1 430,000 430,000 1 430,000 430,000 1 430,000 430,000 1,290,000

4.4. Build network, collaboration,

partnership and alliances

Alliances 6 17,000 102,000 6 17,000 102,000 6 17,000 102,000 306,000

Sub-Total Output-4 (A.4) 2,146,000 2,293,350 868,638 5,307,988

TOTAL PROJECT ACTIVITY COST (A.1+A.2+A.3+A.4) 21,689,650 22,514,742 9,721,435 53,925,827

B REVIEW, MONITORING &

EVALUATION

B.1 PRRP in district level Event 14 22,000 308,000 14 22,000 308,000 7 22,000 154,000 770,000

40

B.2 Social Audit in district level District 7 28,000 196,000 7 30,000 210,000 - 35,000 - 406,000

B.3 Social Audit national Level (cost

sharing)

Event 1 397,500 197,500 1 197,500 197,500 1 197,500 197,500 592,500

B.4 Midterm review Time - 1 235,000 235,000 - 235,000

B.5 Final evaluation Time - - 1 310,000 310,000 310,000

B.6 PME training 1 189,000 189,000 - - - - - - -

TOTAL REVIEW, MONITORING & EVALUATION (B) 890,500 950,500 661,500 2,502,500

C TRAVEL COST

C.1 Program Personnel

C.1.1 DSA and Accommodation Month 12 22,000 264,000 12 24,200 290,400 6 26,620 159,720 714,120

C.1.2 Transportation Month 12 17,000 204,000 12 18,700 224,400 6 20,570 123,420 551,820

Sub-Total Program Personnel (C.1) 468,000 514,800 283,140 1,265,940

C.2 Finance/Admin/Support Personnel

C.2.1 DSA and Accommodation Month 12 8,500 102,000 12 9,350 112,200 6 10,285 61,710 275,910

C.2.2 Transportation Month 12 8,000 96,000 12 8,800 105,600 6 9,680 58,080 259,680

Sub-Total Finance/Admin/Support Personnel(C.2) 198,000 217,800 119,790 535,590

TOTAL TRAVEL COST (C.1+C.2) 666,000 732,600 402,930 1,801,530

D HUMAN RESOURCES

D.1 Program Personnel

D.1.1 Executive Director (80%) month/person 13*1 80,653 838,791 13*1 86,299 897,507 7*1 92,340 517,102 2,253,400

D.1.2 Organizational Development Advisor

(50%)

month/person 13*1 57,505 373,783 13*1 61,530 399,947 7*1 65,837 230,431 1,004,161

D.1.3 Campaign Coordinator 50% month/person 13*1 37,620 244,530 13*1 40,253 261,647 7*1 43,071 150,749 656,926

D.1.4 Campaign Coordinator 100% month/person 13*1 32,859 427,167 13*1 35,159 457,069 7*1 37,620 263,342 1,147,578

D.1.5 PME Coordinator (60%) month/person 13*1 35,159 274,240 13*1 37,620 293,437 7*1 40,254 169,065 736,742

D.1.6 Campaign officer 100% month/person 13*2 24,611 319,943 13*2 26,334 342,339 7*2 28,177 394,480 1,056,762

Sub-Total Program Personnel (D.1) 2,478,454 2,651,946 1,725,169 6,855,568

D.2 Finance/Admin/Support Personnel

D.2.1 Admin and Finance Coordinator (50%) month/person 13*1 46,941 305,117 13*1 50,227 326,475 10*1 53,743 188,100 819,691

D.2.2 Sr. Admin and Finance Officer 100% month/person 13*1 43,071 559,923 13*1 46,086 599,118 10*1 49,312 345,184 1,504,225

D.2.3 Logistics Officer (70%) month/person 13*1 24,611 223,960 13*1 26,334 239,637 10*1 28,177 138,068 601,665

D.2.4 Office Secretary 100% month/person 13*1 16,101 209,313 13*1 17,228 223,965 10*1 18,434 129,038 562,316

D.2.5 Driver 100% month/person 13*1 17,228 223,964 13*1 18,434 239,641 10*1 19,724 138,070 601,676

D.2.6 Office Assistant 100% month/person 13*1 11,271 146,523 13*1 12,060 156,780 10*1 12,904 90,329 393,632

41

Sub-Total Finance/Admin/Support Personnel (D.2) 1,668,800 1,785,616 1,028,789 4,483,204

D.3 Staff Recruitment/Orientations

D.3.1 - - - -

D.3.2 - - - -

Sub-Total Staff Recruitment/Orientations (D.3) - - - -

TOTAL HUMAN RESOURCES (D.1+D.2+D.3) 4,147,254 4,437,561 2,753,958 11,338,773

E CAPITAL COST/EQUIPMENT

E.1 Computer Desktop NO 1 70,000 140,000 140,000

E.2 Motorbike No 1 225,000 225,000 225,000

Total CAPITAL COST/EQUIPMENT 365,000 365,000

F TOTAL COST (A+B+C+D+E) 27,758,404 28,635,403 13,539,823 69,933,630

G OVERHEAD (7% of F, The Total Cost) 1,943,088 2,004,478 947,788 4,895,354

H TOTAL PROJECT COST (F+G) 29,701,492 30,639,881 14,487,611 74,828,984

42

Detailed budget breakdown

Time Period: 16 July 2015 to 15 January 2018

A.PROJECT ACTIVITY

A. 1. OUTPUT 1 1.1 Context mapping, identification of marginalized farmers, establishment of baseline and participatory

planning

1.1.1 Baseline establishment

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Orientation Times 1 65,000 65,000

2 Consultant Person/Days 1*30 7,500 225,000

3 District level stakeholders meeting District 7 15,000 105,000

4 Identification of marginalized farmers through participatory mapping

VDC 35 3,000 105,000

5 Food for fulltime worker Person/month 14*1 9,000 108,000

6 District level discussion District 7 15,000 105,000

7 Data entry and analysis Form 3000 35 105,000

8 Publication Copies 300 250 75,000

Total 828,000

1.1.2 Planning workshop

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 40*3 650 58,500

2 Transportation cost Person 40 2,000 80,000

3 Stationery and other management Person 40 250 10,000

Total 148,500

1.2 Strengthening and formation of LRFs on mobilization and organizing campaigns

1.2.1 Formation and strengthening VLRFs

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Register sheet Nos 2 150 300

2 Ring file Nos 2 100 200

500

1.2.2 Strengthening DLRFs

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Action Oriented Meeting of DLRF Times 4 4,000 16,000

2 Mobilization of DLRF members Days 142 400 56,800

3 Travel of DLRF members Month 12 4,000 48,000

4 Stationery Month 12 1,000 12,000

5 Communication Month 12 1,000 12,000

Total Per DLRF 144,800

1.2.3 Strengthening NLRF

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 NLRF Meeting Times 2 88,000 176,000

2 Mobilization of NLRF members Days 160 400 64,000

3 Stationery Month 12 2,000 24,000

4 Communication Month 12 2,000 24,000

5 Print and Photocopy Months 12 3,000 36,000

6 Full time Workers Person/Months 4*13 18,000 936,000

Total NLRF 1,260,000

43

1.3 Support landless/tenant and smallholder farmers to take legal action and claim land ownership and use rights

1.3.1 Training of frontline leaders and campaigners

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 30*3 700 63,000

2 Training hall Days 3 1,000 3,000

3 Resource person Days 3 7,500 22,500

4 Resource materials Person 30 150 4,500

5 Child Care Taker (10 percent of total participants) Person 5 700 3,500

6 Milk for baby ltr 20 50 1,000

7 Stationery and other management Person 30 200 6,000

Total 103,500

1.3.2 Awareness encampment

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 50*2 300 30,000

2 Hall rent Days 3 1,000 3,000

3 Resource person (Lawyer) Person/Days 2 6,000 12,000

4 Resource materials Person 50 100 5,000

5 Stationery and other management Person 50 100 5,000

Total 55,000

1.3.3 Support for scribe training and for certification

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

A.1.6.1 Support for Scribe training fees Person 1 12,000 12,000

1.3.4 Local Campaign

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Leaflet Pcs 1,000 1 1,000

2 Banner Pcs 1 750 750

3 Tea and snacks Person 200 50 10,000

4 Report Time 1 1,000 1,000

5 Management materials Ls 3,000

Total 15,750

1.3.5 District Campaign

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Leaflet Pcs 3,000 1 3,000

2 Banner Pcs 1 1,200 1,200

3 Food and accommodation Person/Days 100*5 300 150,000

4 Temporary child care centre Centre 1 5,000 5,000

5 Management and stationery materials Ls 10,000

Total 169,200

1.3.6 National Campaign

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Leaflet Pcs 3000 2 6,000

2 Banner Pcs 2 1,200 2,400

3 Food and accommodation Person/Days 215*6 300 387,000

4 Travel cost Person 200 1,000 200,000

5 Temporary child care centre Centre 1 12,000 12,000

6 Management materials Ls 100,000

Total 707,400

1.4 Support for agro-based enterprise and agriculture cooperative

44

1.4.1 Business development training as per mapping

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 30*3 650 58,500

2 Trainer Days 3 4,000 12,000

3 Child Care Taker (10 percent of total participants) Person 3 650 1,950

4 Resource materials Person 30 150 4,500

5 Travel cost Person 30 300 9,000

6 Stationery and other management Person 30 150 4,500

Total 90,450

1.4.2 Support to community initiatives

A.1.3.2 Support to community initiatives, detailed plan will be developed based on community discussions

initiatives 1

85,000

85,000

1.4.3 Cooperative development training

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 30/3 650 58,500

2 Training hall Days 3 1,000 3,000

3 Resource person Days 3 4,000 12,000

4 Resource materials Person 30 200 6,000

5 Stationery and other management Person 30 150 4,500

6 Child Care Taker (10 percent of total participants) Person 3 650 1,950

Total 85,950

1.5 Full time worker/community facilitator

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Fulltime worker/community facilitator Person/Month 1*13 12,500 162,500

2 District Coordinator Person/Month 1*13 17,200 223,600

Total 386,100

OUTPUT 2

2.1 Collaborate with parliamentarians, political parties, MoLRM, DDCs and VDCs to organize dialogue and discussion sessions at VDC to national levels for acts and policy formulation and implementation

2.1.1 Dialogue / discussions with local government officials

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Snacks Person/Days 25*1 200 8,000

2 Travel cost Person 25 200 5,000

3 Resource materials Person 25 150 3,750

4 Other management Lumsum 3,000

Total 19,750

2.1.2 Dialogue/discussions and lobby with policy makers and government officials

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Hi-Tea Person/Days 40*1 650 26,000

2 Travel cost Person 40 500 20,000

3 Resource materials Person 40 200 8,000

4 Other management Lumsum 5,000

Total 59,000

2.1.3 Working with government, politicians and academic institutions to take initiatives/actions on specific theme

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Meeting cost Meeting 10 6,000 60,000

2 Travel cost Person 50 500 25,000

3 Vehicle hire Days 2 10,000 20,000

45

3 Other management Days 2 3,000 6,000

Total 111,000

2.1.4 Media Partnership

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Field visit for story collection Person/Days 3*5 2,000 70,000

2 Vehicle hire Days 5 8,000 40,000

3 Other management Days 5 3,000 15,000

Total 125,000

2.2 Policies review and policy recommendation paper

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Consultant Person/Days 1*7 6,000 42,000

2 Discussion meeting with close group Person/Times 10*1 6,000 6,000

3 Printing cost Nos 500 75 37,500

Total 85,500

OUTPUT 3

3.1 Organize awareness on women’s right to land, and mobilize and support families to obtain the couple's joint of women's independent ownership of land

3.1.1 Awareness encampment on JLO

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 50*1 300 30,000

2 Travel cost of participants Person 50 200 10,000

4 Stationery and other management Person 50 100 5,000

Total 45,000

3.1.2 Develop and mobilize women’s frontline leaders

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Communication Person 1 600 600

2 Bag Person 1 1,200 1,200

3 Diary Person 1 200 200

Total 1,800

3.1.3 Support for joint/individual ownership certificates

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Form and photocopy Family 1 100 100

2 Travel cost Family 1 400 400

Total 500

3.2 Organize discussion sessions involving representatives of VDC, DDC, CSOs, DLRO and local political leaders

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food Person/Days 40*1 550 22,000

2 Travel cost Person 40 200 8,000

3 Resource materials Person 40 150 6,000

4 Other management Lump sum 6,000

Total 42,000

3.3 GBV Prevention and response

3.3.1 Roving Case Manager

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Roving Case Manager Person/months 1*13 23000 299000

3.3.2 Special support to female through (health, psychosocial and legal support)

46

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Support as per case Person/case 1 10000 10,000

OUTPUT 4

4.1 Orientation and detail planning of project

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 20*1 1,500 30,000

2 Travel cost Person 20 1,000 20,000

4 Resource materials ls 5,000 5,000

Total 55,000

4.2 Organize training, workshops and exposure visits

4.2.1 In-house training on HRBA+

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 30*5 750 112,500

2 Travel cost Person 30 1,000 30,000

3 Facilitator cost Days 5 7,500 37,500

4 Resource materials Person 30 400 12,000

Total 192,000

4.2.2 Support for staff and members as per needs assessment

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Support for training/Training fees Person 1 20,000 20,000

Total 20,000

4.3 Carryout research, develop and update position papers, resource materials, module and web page

4.3.1 Research on specific land rights issues

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Consultant Person/Days 2*25 7,500 375,000

2 Vehicle hire Days 10 7,000 70,000

3 DSA Days 10 500 5,000

4 Accommodation Days 10 1,000 10,000

5 Data collection Person/Days 10*20 1,000 200,000

6 Publication cost Copies 1000 200 200,000

7 Validation and Dissemination cost ls 50,000

Total 910,000

4.3.2 Develop policy brief

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Consultant Person/Days 1*10 7,500 75,000

2 Meeting on policy briefs Meeting 3 7,000 21,000

3 Publication cost Copies 200 100 20,000

Total 116,000

4.3.3 Monitoring and documentation of ESC rights

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 20*1 1,500 30,000

2 Travel cost Person 20 1,000 20,000

3 Regular monitoring land rights violations and system development

System 1 110,000 110,000

Total 160,000

4.3.4 Publication learning document of CSRC

47

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Consultant Person/Days 2*25 7,500 375,000

2 Publication cost Copies 2000 200 400,000

Total 775,000

4.3.5 Other Regular Publication

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Bhumi Adhikar Bulletin Issues/Nos 4*2000 70,000 280,000

2 Book or report Issue/Nos 1*1000 150 150,000

Total 430,000

4.4 Build network, collaboration, partnership and alliances

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Meeting cost Meeting 1 10,000 10,000

2 Learning Sharing in different forums Forum 1 7,000 7,000

Total 17,000

B. REVIEW, MONITORING &EVALUATION

B.1 PRRP in district level

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/days 30*2 250 15,000

2 Travel cost Person 30 150 4,500

3 Stationery and other management LS 2,500 2,500

Total 22,000

B.2 Social Audit (District Level)

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food Person/days 70*1 300 21,000

2 Stationery and other management Person 70 100 7,000

Total 28,000

B.3 Social Audit National Level

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/days 150*1 1,500 225,000

2 Travel cost Person 50 2,000 100,000

3 Stationery and other management Person 150 150 22,500

4 Report printing Pcs 500 100 50,000

Total 397,500

B.4 Midterm Review

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Consultant Person/Days 20 7,500 150,000

2 Vehicle hire Days 10 7,000 70,000

3 DSA Days 10 500 5,000

4 Accommodation Days 10 1,000 10,000

Total 235,000

B.5 Final Evaluation

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Consultant Person/Days 30 7,500 225,000

2 Vehicle hire Days 10 7,000 70,000

3 DSA Days 10 500 5,000

4 Accommodation Days 10 1,000 10,000

Total 310,000

B.6 Strengthening of results based M&E

48

B.6.1 PME Training

S.N. Particulars Unit type Unit Unit Cost Total cost

1 Food and accommodation Person/Days 30*4 750 90,000

2 Travel cost Person 30 2,000 60,000

3 DSA Person/Days 30*2 500 30,000

4 Stationery, resource materials and other management Person 30 300 9,000

Total 189,000

49

Summary budget

Time Period: 16 July 2015 to 15 January 2018

Amount in NRs

S.No. DESCRIPTIONS Total Total Total TOTAL

%

Output-1 (A.1) 15,705,650 15,933,012 7,117,631 38,756,292 51.79

Output-2 (A.2) 1,241,000 1,303,050 810,613 3,354,663 4.48

Output-3 (A.3) 2,597,000 2,985,330 924,554 6,506,884 8.70

Output-4 (A.4) 2,146,000 2,293,350 868,638 5,307,988 7.09

TOTAL REVIEW,

MONITORING &

EVALUATION (B)

890,500 950,500 661,500 2,502,500 3.34

TOTAL TRAVEL COST

(C.1+C.2) 666,000 732,600 402,930 1,801,530 2.41

TOTAL HUMAN

RESOURCES

(D.1+D.2+D.3)

4,147,254 4,437,561 2,753,958 11,338,773 15.15

Total CAPITAL

COST/EQUIPMENT 365,000 - - 365,000 0.49

Overhead cost 1,943,088 2,004,478 947,788 4,895,354 6.54

Total Project Cost 29,701,492 30,639,881 14,487,611 74,828,984 100.00

50

Annex 5: Primary and secondary beneficiaries of the project, their role and benefits

Beneficiaries How they are selected Engagement in project Benefits

Primary beneficiaries

Landless agriculture

labourers who

never attended

land rights

campaign nor are

the member of LRF

Identified by the local level stakeholders as the

victims of land

deprivation, human rights

violation, and food and

shelter insecurity

Awareness raising, land-related legal education, mobilization,

cooperative, legal initiatives,

volunteerism, agro-based

initiatives to enhance

productivity, use of public land

and natural resources

Rights awareness Land use, leasing and/or ownership rights

Enhanced productivity

Access to local resources and public service

Representation and participation in local public

forums

Landless

agriculture

labourers who already are

members of LRFs

Identified by the local

level stakeholders as the

victims of land deprivation, human rights

violation, and food and shelter insecurity

Land-related legal education,

mobilization, facilitation,

cooperative, legal initiatives, volunteerism, agro-based

initiatives to enhance productivity, use of public land

and natural resources

Strengthened rights awareness

Land use, leasing and/or ownership rights

Enhanced productivity Access to local resources and public service

Representation and participation in local public forums

Unregistered

landless tenants

Identified by the local

level stakeholders as the victims of deprivation

from tenancy and land

ownership rights, human

rights violation, and food

and shelter insecurity

Land-related legal education,

mobilization, facilitation, cooperative, legal initiatives,

volunteerism, agro-based

initiatives to enhance

productivity, use of public land

and natural resources

Strengthened rights awareness

Secure land use, leasing, tenancy and/or ownership rights

Enhanced productivity

Access to local resources and public service

Representation and participation in local public

forums

Registered tenants Identified by the local level stakeholders as the

victims of deprivation

from land ownership

rights, human rights

violation, and food and

shelter insecurity

Land-related legal education, mobilization, facilitation,

cooperative, legal initiatives,

volunteerism, agro-based

initiatives to enhance

productivity, use of public land

and natural resources

Strengthened rights awareness Secure land use, leasing and/or ownership rights

Enhanced productivity

Access to local resources and public service

Representation and participation in local public

forums

Smallholders Identified by the local

level stakeholders as the

victims of deprivation

from land ownership rights, human rights

violation, and food and

shelter insecurity

Land-related legal education,

mobilization, facilitation,

cooperative, legal initiatives,

volunteerism, agro-based initiatives to enhance

productivity, use of public land

and natural resources

Strengthened rights awareness

Secure land use and/or leasing rights

Enhanced productivity

Access to local resources and public service Representation and participation in local public

forums

Secondary beneficiaries

Politicians Potential contribution to

influence the formation

of land acts and policies

Policy dialogues, interaction with

beneficiaries/victims, partnership

to formulate acts and policies

Awareness and gain knowledge of land rights

issues, enhanced political credibility, trust and

recognition

MoLRM, DoLRM,

DLRO and DLRO

Direct duty bearers

related to land

governance

Policy dialogues, interaction with

beneficiaries/victims, partnership

in drafting acts and policies,

bureaucratic support

Awareness and gain knowledge of land rights

related issues, enhanced capacity in land

governance, exposure to good land governance

practices

DDC, VDC,

District

Agriculture Office,

local leaders

Direct local level land

and/or agriculture sector

public service providers

Support to landless or land poor

farmers in securing their

land/tenancy and/or use rights,

facilitate farmers in their

campaigns and access to relevant

services

Awareness and gain knowledge of land rights

related issues, enhanced capacity to deliver

land-related public services

Local elites and

landlords

Their stake in land

ownership dispute and

the resulting possible conflict

Nonviolent engagement in

dialogues, community mediations,

negotiations and legal actions

Peaceful co-existence with the tilling farmers

and tenants

CSOs and NHRC. Collaborators and allies

to take the agenda of land

rights campaign forward

Sharing information on rights

violation, human rights practices,

resources and knowledge

products.

Partnership, common beneficiaries, access to

CSRC-produced knowledge products and

resources, coordination, synergy and enhanced

impact