Rwanda programs / ASPAP
Rwanda's goat industry has increased nearly 100% over the past 10-15 years, with the goat population now totalling about 1.9 million. DEC abstract (PN-ABJ-958)
Key prj:6960126
28 facts shown; 3 unconfirmed links; 0 support mechanisms (not programs); 34 documents cite this program.
The one-paragraph answer: years, implementer, funder and purpose, each from document metadata.
The program is a four-year project sponsored jointly by USAID and the government of Rwanda.1 The ultimate goal of the program is to develop a self-sustaining institutional capability within the Rwandan government.1 The program was authorized on August 28, 1986, with a five-year life of project.2 The program was established to improve policy formulation for the rural economy.3
Source: generated from documents. Each number opens the page it was written from.
Operated in: Rwanda.
Districts, regions and facilities the program's own documents name, with what the document says it did there. Source: sentences in the program's documents
not in the map yet: no district, region or facility is named for this program yet; only Malawi and Guatemala have place data so far
No district, region or facility is named in this program's documents yet. Place dots exist for Malawi and Guatemala only so far. Towns and natural features are not drawn.
Countries where this program operated, set by the countries its documents name most often. Countries only tagged on documents are listed apart. Source: document tags, scope rule
Operated in Rwanda, 1987 to 1992 34 sources
Scope: country: Rwanda. The award code belongs to this country's mission. High confidence.
How sure we are: 0.9.
When the program ran, from its start year to the latest document year. A hatched bar means the start is our estimate. Source: award and document years
Axis: award years, end from years in documents. The start year comes from award fiscal year; the end is the latest document year, so the program may have run longer.
Who started the program, and which administration it began under. Timing only; it does not say who started it. Source: initiative records, start year
Organizations that ran this program, from award records and document authors. Prime and sub roles are not split yet. Source: award and document records
Named as an institutional author on documents; whether prime, sub or consortium member is not recorded. Basis: read from a record field
| Name | Role | Years | Basis | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI) | implementer | 1989 to 1992 | Stated in a document | 14 sources |
| Michigan State University. Dept. of Sociology | implementer | 1989 to 1992 | Stated in a document | 10 sources |
Identifiers of the awards and the organizations that funded it. Amounts are under Money. Source: award records
Basis: read from a record field
| Name | Years | Basis | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 696-0126-C-7777 (contract, fiscal year not recorded) | 1989 to 1992 | Stated in a document | 20 sources |
| DAN-1190-A-4092 (cooperative agreement, fiscal year not recorded) | 1988 to 1991 | Stated in a document | 3 sources |
Basis: read from a record field
Labels on the program's documents, not a description of what the program did. Source: DEC document tags
Sector profile (computed): Agriculture: policy, land tenure and land reform 26%; Economic opportunity (microenterprise, jobs, skills, poverty reduction) 13%; Macroeconomic foundation for growth 10%
DEC topic and subject tags. They describe the documents, not what the program was. Each tag opens its evidence in the drawer.
Programs worth reading next, by topic, implementer, country and years. Similar by facets (topic, implementer, country, years) and, when available, description. It says the programs look alike, not how they are related in time. Source: catalog facets
Looking for similar programs.
Studies that assessed this program, and the lessons taken from them. Source: linked evaluation documents
| Title | Year | Document | Why listed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rwanda, agricultural surveys and policy analysis project (696-0126) : mid-term evaluation | 1989 | PD-AAZ-717 | linked as an evaluation of this program |
| Agriculture surveys and policy analysis | 1990 | PD-ABA-257 | evaluation-stage document (eval midterm, weak classifier) |
| Evaluation qualitative des donnees en rapport avec le secteur rural du Rwanda | 1991 | PN-ABH-842 | evaluation-stage document (eval other, weak classifier) |
Not recorded yet: support mechanisms, money rows. A missing record is not a finding. USAspending records start in FY2007; earlier obligations are missing, not zero.
Every document that cites this program, grouped by a stage label from a weak classifier. Source: document library
| Michigan State University | implementer | 1989 to 1991 | Stated in a document | 3 sources |
| Michigan State University. Dept. of Agricultural Economics | implementer | 1988 to 1991 | Stated in a document | 3 sources |
None recorded. Evaluation studies linked to this program are listed under Evaluations and lessons.
Basis: basis not stated; shown as likely, not confirmed
| Name | Role | Years | Basis | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rwanda. Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Forests. Agricultural Statistics Div. | lead ministry | 1989 to 1992 | Likely, not confirmed | 22 sources |
| Rwanda. Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Forests. Agricultural Statistics Service | lead ministry | 1989 | Likely, not confirmed | 16 sources |
| Rwanda. Ministry of Plan | lead ministry | 1990 | Likely, not confirmed | 1 source |
| Name | Years | Basis | Evidence |
|---|
| USAID. Mission to Rwanda | 1987 to 1992 | Stated in a document | 31 sources |
| USAID. Mission to Rwanda | 1990 to 1991 | Stated in a document | 2 sources |
| Name | Years | Basis | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rwanda | 1987 to 1992 | Stated in a document read from a record field | 34 sources |
| 1992 |
| PD-ABD-909 |
| linked as an evaluation of this program |
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.
No quote: this fact comes from a metadata field, shown as stored.