The productive safety Net Program is the component of the larger food security program in Ethiopia. Thernprogram (PSNP) has two key objectives namely preventing household asset and creating community assetsrnthrough public works. It is practiced in the rural parts of the major regions of Ethiopia. The study wereda,rnLanforo, started to benefit from the program since 2005.rnThough there are reports for the contribution of the program to asset protection, there are also observedrnproblems particularly on the public works. These include poor quality of public works, maintenance problem,rnwork burden on female-headed households, low participation of both beneficiaries and non â€“beneficiaries inrnthe community work. Taking these problems into consideration, this paper aimed at assessing the PSNP withrnparticular emphasis on the public works.rnThis research is expected to shed some light on the PSNP particularly on the public work. It is important tornensure the effectiveness and the sustainability of the public work that is the core component of the program.rnThis can be achieved by giving input to concerned bodies who work for the improvement of the program.rnFurthermore, it can be a base for further research work.rnThe research was conducted in Lanforo wereda taking two kebeles namely Lanforo Gebaba and Tora Kikora.rnThey are taken as representative kebeles since they are located in one of the two agro- ecological zones in thernwereda. Moreover, these kebeles practice intensive public works. From these kebeles 125 sample households,rnwhich is 13% of the total beneficiaries, was taken for the study.rnThe major findings of the research include that PSNP program has contributed to the protection of assetsrn(household assets, productive asset, and livestock assets) and creating community assets. Nonetheless, the studyrnmade on the public works of the program especially on soil and water conservation practices indicated thatrnthere are challenges of the public work that can threaten the sustainability of the work. According to the surveyrnresult, most of the households were not involved during the selection of the public work. They also reported thatrnthey did not regularly participate in the maintenance work and in the community work. In addition to thernbeneficiaries, the participation of the non-beneficiaries to the community work is low.rnMost of the respondents also indicated that they face problems like lack of equipments and lack of training andrnfollow up, absence of child health care, lack of first aid service. Since there is weak support given to femaleheadedrnhouseholds, they are forced to shoulder work burden that have created problem in domestic work andrnchildcare. The study also revealed that most of the households stated payment related problems like laternpayment, low amount compared to the public work. Besides, the existing type of the payment (cash only) is alsorna problem for most of the respondents.rnIn general, the study shows that the PSNP has registered a positive result in asset protection and building.rnNonetheless, these results can be reversed unless measures are taken to solve the problems. Regarding thernpublic works, most of the works do not go in line with the principles and procedures of the programrnimplementation manual