federal democratic republic of ethiopia...2 table of contents acronyms 4 overview of agp2 m&e...
TRANSCRIPT
FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE
AGRICULTURAL GROWTH PROJECT II
MONITORING AND EVALUATION
MANUAL
2
Table of Contents
ACRONYMS 4
OVERVIEW OF AGP2 M&E SYSTEM 6
AGP2 M&E SYSTEM 6 AGP1 M&E LESSONS 6 PURPOSE OF THE M&E MANUAL 7 INSTITUTIONAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR M&E 8 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM 11
RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND OTHER OUTCOME INDICATORS: INDICATORS INDEX CARDS 11
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE INDICATORS 12 COMPONENT 1: AGRICULTURAL PUBLIC SUPPORT SERVICES INDICATORS 21 COMPONENT 2: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH INDICATORS 27 COMPONENT 3: SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION INDICATORS 34 COMPONENT 4: AGRICULTURE MARKETING AND VALUE CHAINS INDICATORS 42 COMPONENT 5: PROJECT MANAGEMENT, CAPACITY BUILDING AND MONITORING AND
EVALUATION INDICATORS 45
MONITORING OF INPUTS, OUTPUTS, SELECTED OUTCOMES AND PROCESSES 46
MONITORING ANNUAL AND QUARTERLY WORK PLANSAND BUDGET PROGRESS 46 TRACKING FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS ASSESSMENTS PROGRESS 47 MONITORING AND REPORTING OF SELECTED INDICATORS TO TRACK PROGRESS 47 COMPONENT 1: AGRICULTURAL PUBLIC SUPPORT SERVICES 48 COMPONENT 2: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH 51 COMPONENT 3: SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION 53 COMPONENT 4: AGRICULTURAL MARKETING AND VALUE CHAINS 54 COMPONENT 5: PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, CAPACITY BUILDING AND MONITORING AND
EVALUATION 57 SETTING, ASSESSINGAND USING INDICATORS PERFORMANCE TARGETS 58 SAFEGUARDS MONITORING 59
PROJECT EVALUATION 59
EVALUATION OF OUTCOME AND IMPACT 59 EVALUATION OF CAPACITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES AND IMPACT 61 GENDER IMPACT EVALUATION 61 LEARNING WORKSHOPS AND FORA 61 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT 62
MAINSTREAMING GENDER, NUTRITION AND CLIMATE SMART AGRICULTURE IN PLANNING AND M&E 62
CAPACITY BUILDING FOR M&E 63
ANNEX 1: FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION PLANFOR FINANCING SPECIFIC INVESTMENTS 64
3
ANNEX 2: REPORTING FORMATS 74
REPORTING ON ARDPLACS 74 REPORTING FORMAT FOR DEVELOPMENT AGENTS ON FARMING TRAINING CENTER
STATUS AND FARMING TRAINING CENTER ACTIVITIES 75 REPORTING ON DEMONSTRATIONS OF IMPROVED TECHNOLOGIES AT FARMER
TRAINING CENTER OR FARMERS PLOT OR FARMER FIELD DAYS BY DEVELOPMENT
AGENT 78 REPORTING FORMAT FOR QUEEN REARING CENTERS 80 ANIMAL PRODUCTION AND FEED RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORATE 80 REPORTING FORMAT FOR FISH HATCHERY CENTER AMHARA REGION 81 ANIMAL PRODUCTION AND FEED RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORATE 81 REPORTING FORMAT FOR HERD PERFORMANCE RECORDING AND ELECTRONIC DATA
MANAGEMENT AT SEMEN PRODUCTION CENTER 82 REPORTING FORMAT FOR ANIMAL HEALTH CLINICS 83 ANIMAL HEALTH WORKER 83 REPORTING FORMAT FOR ANIMAL HEALTH POSTS 85 ANIMAL HEALTH WORKER 85 REPORTING FORMAT FOR ANIMAL HEALTH LABORATORIES 87 REPORTING FORMAT FOR VEGETABLES AND TREE NURSERIES 88 DEVELOPMENT AGENTS/FARMERS 88 REPORTING ON BEST PRACTICES 89 MOA TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT 89 REPORTING ON SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION INFRASTRUCTURE 90 REPORTING ON WATER USERS ASSOCIATION 94 REPORTING ON COMMUNITY WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT 97 REPORTING ON ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE 100 REPORTING ON MARKET INFRASTRUCTURE 103
ANNEX 3: QUARTERLY/ANNUAL REPORTS FORMAT 106
WOREDA REPORT (TO BE DEVELOPED BY PCU) 106 REGION AND FEDERAL REPORT (TO BE DEVELOPED BY PCU) 106
ANNEX 4: FEDERAL AND REGIONAL M&E OFFICER TERMS OF REFERENCE 107
FEDERAL M&E OFFICER 107 REGIONAL M&E OFFICER 109
ANNEX 5: SELECTED INDICATORS TO TRACK PROGRESS MATRIX 111
ANNEX 6: RESULTS FRAMEWORK 112
ANNEX 7: FREGS PARTICIPATORY M&E AND LEARNING 113
ANNEX 8: CROSS FARMER GROUP MONITORING 118
ANNEX 9 ASSESSING QUALITY AND TIMELINESS OF WOREDA REPORTS 120
ACRONYMS
ADPLAC Agriculture Development Partners Linkage Advisory Council
AGP1 First Agricultural Growth Project
AGP2 Second Agricultural Growth Project
BoA Bureau of Agriculture
BoW Bureau of Water
CASCAPE Capacity Building for scaling up of evidence based best practices
in agricultural production in Ethiopia
CBSP Community Based Seeds and forage Production groups
CDSF Capacity Development Support Facility
CIG Common Interest Group
CLPP Community Level Planning Process
CSA Climate Smart Agriculture
CU Coordination Unit
DA Development Agent
DFATD Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development of
Canada
DSM Direct Seed Marketing
EIAR Ethiopian Institute of Agriculture Research
ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework
ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan
ET Ethiopian Birr
FAR-CU Federal Agricultural Research Coordination Unit
FCA Federal Cooperative Agency
FCU Federal Coordination Unit
FHH Female Headed Household
FREG Farmer Research and Extension Group
FSC Federal Steering Committee
FTC Farmer Training Center
ha Hectare
HHI Household Irrigation
IA Implementation Agency
IWUA Irrigation Water User Association
KDC Kebele Development Committee
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MHH Male Headed Household
MHIS Micro-irrigation and Household Irrigation Systems
MoA Ministry of Agriculture
MoFED Ministry of Finance and Economic Development
MTR Mid Term Review
PDO Project Development Objective
PIM Project Implementation Manual
MIS Management Information System
RAR-CU Regional Agricultural Research Coordination Unit
RCU Regional Coordination Unit
RARI Regional Agricultural Research Institute
5
RUSACCO Rural Savings and Credit Cooperative
SC Steering Committee
SMS Subject Matter Specialist
SNNPR Southern Nations, Nationalities and People’s Region
SSI Small Scale Irrigation
TC Technical Committee
THH Total Households
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VC Value Chain
WCU Woreda Coordination Unit
WDC Woreda Development Committee
WOA Woreda Office of Agriculture
WoFED Woreda Office of Finance and Economic Development
WSC Woreda Steering Committee
ZOA Zonal Office of Agriculture
OVERVIEW OF AGP2 M&E SYSTEM
AGP2 M&E SYSTEM
A robust M&E system is critical for effective management of the Agricultural Growth program 2.
The AGP2 M&E system will build on the existing AGP1 system and will have the following
characteristics:
i. It generates continuously information on progress, some processes, and performance
through the project cycle from design to end of project;
ii. The continuous flow of information generated by the M&E system is useful for project
management at all levels of the project (national, region, woreda, kebele) and external partners;
iii. It validates, analyzes and aggregates data generated at various levels to track progress,
assess if specific targets are met and monitor process quality, outputs, outcomes, program
impacts, and sustainability:
iv. It identifies implementation gaps and challenges for proactive corrective actions as well
as documents and incorporates lessons learned into program implementation.
v. It includes effective channels of communication from the field to the national level and
back to: (i) inform management decisions and ensure that corrective action are taken if necessary;
(ii) disseminates key lessons from evaluations to project implementers, beneficiaries and external
partners; and (iii) provides access to and displays project key information at all levels to enhance
transparency and accountability.
vi. It supports continuous M&E capacity building of implementers and PCU staff.
vii. It pays particular attention to the crosscutting themes (gender, nutrition and CSA).
AGP1 M&E LESSONS
Despite AGP1 Federal and Regional Coordination Unit strong commitment to M&E, there are
still deficiencies and inconsistencies in the AGP1 M&E system in terms of quality of data and
timeliness. The efficiency of the AGP1 M&E system is being particularly affected by (i) the lack
of M&E capacity of implementers and CU staff; (ii) the lack of tailored guidelines and reporting
formats for implementers; and (iii) the lack of commitment of certain IAs to reporting.
What will be different from AGP1 M&E system?
The AGP2 M&E system gives particular attention to: (i) developing tailored made simple M&E
guidelines for IAs at all level (kebele, woreda, region and Federal)based on the content of this
M&E manual; (ii) capacity building support to all actors/IAs involved in M&E activities (with a
“learning by doing” approach with DFATD capacity development support facility); (iii) more
robust triangulation of data through diverse sources and methodologies (more contracted
evaluations); (iv) enhanced monitoring and evaluation of processes and quality of implementation
of the project; (v) tailored monitoring and evaluation of cross-sectoral issues (gender, nutrition
and climate smart) from annual plan of activities to final project evaluation and (vi) clear
reporting of additional indicators outside of annual plans.
7
PURPOSE OF THE M&E MANUAL
This manual has been developed considering AGP1 lessons and the new requirements and
activities under AGP2. It is the guiding document for component leaders and M&E specialists at
FCU and RCU. This M&E manual will:
Identifies M&E roles and responsibilities for AGP2 implementers.
Provides common references for results framework indicators.
Defines the characteristics of AGP2 monitoring and tools
Identifies additional indicators to track AGP2 progress.
Guides on setting, assessing and using indicators performance targets.
Defines the purpose and type of AGP2 evaluations and studies.
Guides on mainstreaming gender, nutrition and climate smart agriculture in planning and
M&E.
This manual will be the foundation to develop user-friendly guidelines for each AGP2
implementers. AGP2 implementers requiring M&E guidelines and reporting formats tailored to
their responsibilities under the project are:
DAs.
Woreda Coordinators
Federal/Regional Agriculture Research Coordination Unit
Soil Laboratories
Bureau of Water/Focal person at woreda
Federal/Regional Cooperative Agencies
Etc.
This M&E manual is a living document and will be updated as the Project Implementation
Manual and project activities evolve.
AGP2 Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Tools
Activities Main Tools
Evaluation Evaluation of project outcome and impact (household survey)
Gender impact evaluation
Qualitative studies of extension services and adoption of technologies.
Qualitative studies of the FREGs.
Qualitative evaluation of efficiency use of water combined with
technical audit and cost benefit analysis of infrastructures.
8
Various qualitative evaluation of trainings.
Other evaluations to be determined
Monitoring of inputs,
outputs, selected outcomes
and processes
Quarterly and Annual Progress reports
Work and Budget Plan
Matrix to report on indicators
Indicators Index Cards
Feasibility studies/needs assessments progress matrix
IAs reporting formats
Internal Learning CASCAPE learning case studies
Federal and Regional workshops
Community learning fora
Cross-farmer monitoring
Selected case studies
Lessons learned
Story telling
To be determined with project knowledge management strategy
Information dissemination FTCs display board
Leaflets
To be determined with project communication strategy
INSTITUTIONAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR M&E
The responsibility for M&E of AGP2 will take place at four levels: federal, regional, woreda, and
kebele/sub-kebele. All IAs will report on performance.
Federal level. Overall M&E will be coordinated at the federal level from the CU by AGP2 M&E
Officers in collaboration with M&E Officers based at the RCU. The coordination of all M&E
activities of the AGP2 comprises overseeing data collection, analysis and reporting on the
implementation and progress of each component, sub-component, cross cutting issues, and
regions of the AGP2. It also includes managing occasional evaluations and impact evaluations
carried out by external firms and supporting M&E staff in the regions, zones, and woredas as well
as relevant directorates/departments of MoA/BoA (WAD for instance) with regard to M&E
requirements, capacity development, and M&E tools (manuals, etc). The FCU will submit
quarterly reports for review by the FSC, the World Bank, and other DPs. In addition, the content
of the quarterly M&E reports will be summarized in annual reports whose release will be timed to
coincide with the completion of the financial year. Tasks also include conducting staff trainings
(on basic M&E, reporting formats, M&E manual, etc.) and providing feedback on performance to
regional M&E Officers, woreda coordinators, etc.
Regional level. The M&E Officer at each RCU will coordinate M&E for their respective
woredas, ensuring that M&E data are collected regularly in accordance with agreed upon
procedures. The M&E Officers will compile and cross-check reports submitted by woreda. They
will also provide M&E TA and training including on how to collect and analyse data on cross
cutting issues. They will advise woredas based on inputs and outputs reported and will provide
feedback on performance to regional M&E Officers, woreda coordinators, etc. In addition, the
M&E Officers will undertake timely qualitative case studies of activities (such as beneficiary
interviews, lessons learned, and pictures of sub-projects) and a yearly qualitative analyses of
M&E data. The regional M&E Officers will receive in depth training in M&E and computer
skills. The RCU will submit quarterly reports to the FCU M&E Officer.
9
Implementation Agencies (IAs). EIAR, BoWs, Soil Fertility Laboratories, Bureaus for
Cooperative Promotion, and others IAs will report quarterly on their activities following the
required formats to the regional M&E Officers The format will be developed in a way that
progress on integration of cross cutting issues are captured.
Woreda level. The woreda AGP2 Coordinator will coordinate reporting, compiling and cross-
checking data collected by the DAs and IAs. The coordinator will also provide TA, training, and
advice based on inputs and outputs reported by DAs and IAs. Woreda AGP2 Coordinator will
work closely with SMSs and DAs and conduct regular field visits to kebeles and sub-kebeles to
engage directly with DAs and verify that M&E activities are being implemented properly. The
woreda coordinators will receive training in M&E (including reporting), facilitation, reporting,
use of reporting formats, and computer skills. The woreda coordinators will submit monthly
reports to the regional M&E Officers copied to the zone for review.
Kebele/sub-kebele level. At the kebele level, DAs will be responsible for submitting the data
collected by DAs to woreda coordinators. SMSs will ensure that information from project
implementation activities and progress is posted on FTCs’ boards. The DAs will receive training
on reporting, use of reporting formats, documentation and facilitation.DAs will collect project
information from beneficiaries using the required reporting format and submit the reports to
SMSs. In addition, DAs will create information from project activities and progress available at
FTCs. The community learning facilitator (a member of the kebele) with the support of DAs will
organize community-learning fora.
Farmers. Farmers will actively participate in community learning fora. It will be mandatory for
community learning facilitators to facilitate and ensure female farmers active engagement. This
could mean for example providing them transport and childcare.
Institutional roles and responsibilities for each results framework indicators are
further defined in each results framework indicator index card.
10
11
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
AGP2 will continue building/strengthening the MIS system launched under AGP1. It will include
assessing the equipment and staffing need in terms of MIS Officers at regional and federal level.
Significant capacity building of the MIS system will be conducted of MIS Officers, M&E
Officers and other PCU staff. Support to undertake these activities, will be provided by the
Capacity Building Facility. The updating of the MIS system for AGP2 in terms of content will
also require updating the indicators handbook once the M&E manual is finalized and indicators to
be tracked have been defined. Once the MIS is fully functional between Region CU and Federal
CU, the MIS will be piloted at the woreda level (woreda will be selected based on access to
connectivity). The MIS system will be supported by an MIS Officer at the Federal level and at the
Regional level (as need arise for the Regions).
RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND OTHER OUTCOME INDICATORS: INDICATORS INDEX CARDS
The RF design builds on the strength and weaknesses of AGP1. As such, the RF includes tailored
indicators to capture progress and results in terms of gender equality, quality of capacity
development and M&E, which have been weak under AGP1. It provides high-level attention to
these issues, quality of implementation and processes. In addition, gender equality, nutrition and
climate smart agriculture results are tracked through a consistent disaggregation across most
indicators as well as some specific indicators. The results framework is only one small part of the
overall M&E system. Significant project progress and results will be tracked through additional
outcome indicators outside the results framework (identified in section X Monitoring of inputs,
outputs, selected outcomes and processes) and studies/evaluations (quantitative, qualitative, and
quality of implementation and processes) targeting specific results.
The Results Framework is used to monitor progress towards achieving the PDO. The current
targets of the RF indicators are not final, they will be updated once a full fledge baseline is
conducted the 1st year of the program. The indicators of the results framework under the PCU
responsibility will be reported regularly and frequency of reporting on the indicators is defined in
each indicator index card.
Results framework indicators index cards contribute to increasing data quality. It ensures
that all stakeholders/implementers have a common understanding of each indicator of the RF in
terms of:
- Definition
- Justification
- Unit
- Frequency of data collection
- Data source
- Calculation and data collection Methodology.
- Baseline value, target value and current value of the indicator.
12
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE INDICATORS
The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to increase agricultural productivity and
commercialization of smallholder farmers targeted by the project contributes to dietary
diversity and consumption at HH level. Five indicators in the RF measure the PDO (see index
cards below) and some additional indicators relating to nutrition linkages with production and
consumption have been included. Progress on indicators will be tracked through contracted
evaluation, except for the indicator relating to the number of beneficiaries, which is under the
PCU responsibility (see index card 5). Some of the indicators definition will be updated based on
the methodology discussion for collecting the baseline data.
Indicator 1
PDO
Indicator
(RF)
PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN YIELD FOR SELECTED CROPS IN
TARGETED HOUSEHOLDS BENEFITING DIRECTLY FROM THE
PROJECT (Disaggregated in 2 indexes: cereals/pulses (MHH and FHH) and
vegetables/fruits (MHH and FHH))
Definition Assess agricultural productivity with yield for selected key crops in targeted
households (MHH and FHH). The proposed key crops are the following: cereals
(teff, wheat, maize, barley and sorghum), pulses (chickpea, fava bean), oil crops
(sesame), stimulants (coffee), vegetables (tomato, potato and onion) and fruits
(banana and mango).Two indexes will be developed based on the selected crops
((i) cereals and pulses and (ii) vegetables/fruits). The results are disaggregated
by male headed household (MHH) and female head of household (FHH).
Justification
This indicator allows the tracking of the productivity of male headed household
(MHH) and female head of household (FHH) in AGP2 selected crops value
chains.
Unit Percentage
Frequency
The indicator will be reported on at mid-term review and end of project. The
value of the indicator at baseline will be collected in August 2016 and indicator
targets will be defined based on baseline results. The baseline value is expressed
in quintals/hectare/HH.
Data Source
Data will be collected by CSA with the support of a consulting firm to be
contracted by AGP PCU.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Two indexes will be developed based on the selected crops ((i) cereals and
pulses and (ii) vegetables/fruits). A full fledge baseline will be conducted and
based on results targets will be set for the indicator. Data will be collected
through a household survey.
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
Total:
MHH
FHH
Current Value
Total
Total:
13
MHH
FHH
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 2
PDO
Indicator
(RF)
PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN YIELD FOR SELECTED ANIMAL
PRODUCTS IN TARGETED HOUSEHOLDS BENEFITING DIRECTLY
FROM THE PROJECT (disaggregated in MHH and FHH)
Definition Assess agricultural productivity by a proxy with yield for selected key livestock
products in targeted households (MHH and FHH). The proposed selected key
livestock products at this stage are the following: honey and cattle milk. An
index will be developed based on the selected livestock products. This indicator
definition has been updated since the PAD, as it will be too difficult to
measure cattle and shoat meat. Therefore, the project will track the number of
animal sold disaggregated per type (chicken, cattle and shoat), as it is easier to
measure. The project will also track animal mortality per household.
Justification
This indicator allows the tracking of the productivity of male-headed household
(MHH) and female head of household (FHH) in AGP2 selected livestock value
chains. The baseline will be expressed in quintal/animal/HH.
Unit Percentage
Frequency
The indicator will be reported on at mid-term review and end of project. The
value of the indicator at baseline will be collected in August 2016 and indicator
targets will be defined based on baseline results.
Data Source
Data will be collected by CSA with the support of a consulting firm to be
contracted by AGP PCU.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
An index will be developed based on the selected livestock products. A full
fledge baseline will be conducted and based on results targets will be set for the
indicator. Data will be collected through a household survey. To be further
defined.
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
Total:
MHH
FHH
Current Value
Total
MHH
FHH
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 3
PDO
Indicator
(RF)
PROPORTION PRODUCTION SOLD BY TARGETED HOUSEHOLDS
FOR SELECTED CROPS
(Disaggregated in 2 indexes: cereals/pulses (MHH and FHH) and
vegetables/fruits (MHH and FHH))
14
Definition Assess the level of commercialization of the crop production by targeted
households (MHH and FHH) for selected key crops. The proposed key crops are
the following: cereals (teff, wheat, maize, barley and sorghum), pulses
(chickpea, fava bean), oil crops (sesame), stimulants (coffee), vegetables
(tomato, potato and onion) and fruits (banana and mango). The indicator is
disaggregated by cereals/pulses and vegetables/fruits.
Justification
This indicator allows the tracking of the commercialization of male headed
household (MHH) and female head of household (FHH) in AGP2 selected crops
value chains.
Unit Percentage
Frequency
The indicator will be reported on at mid-term review and end of project. The
value of the indicator at baseline will be collected in August 2016 and indicator
targets will be defined based on baseline results. The baseline value is expressed
in quintals.
Data Source
Data will be collected by CSA with the support of a consulting firm to be
contracted by AGP PCU.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
An index will be developed based on the selected crop products. A full fledge
baseline will be conducted and based on results targets will be set for the
indicator. Data will be collected through a household survey.
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
Total:
MHH
FHH
Current Value
Total
Total:
MHH
FHH
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 4
PDO
Indicator
(RF)
PROPORTION OF ANIMAL PRODUCTION SOLD BY TARGETED
BENEFICIARIES FOR SELECTED PRODUCTS (disaggregated by male
and female)
Definition Assess the level of commercialization of the livestock production by targeted
beneficiaries for selected key livestock products. At this stage, the livestock
products are the following: poultry (meat), honey, cattle milk (cow), dairy
products (yogurt, butter, cheese, etc.), cattle and shoats (meat) and hide and
skins. The current list of livestock products will be further defined.
Female refers to Female Headed Household and married females.
Justification
This indicator allows the tracking of the commercialization of male and female
in AGP2 selected livestock value chains.
Unit Percentage
15
Frequency
The indicator will be reported on at mid-term review and end of project. The
value of the indicator at baseline will be collected in August 2016 and indicator
targets will be defined based on baseline results. The baseline value is expressed
in kilograms
Data Source
Data will be collected by CSA with the support of a consulting firm to be
contracted by AGP PCU.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
An index will be developed based on the selected crop products. A full fledge
baseline will be conducted and based on results targets will be set for the
indicator. Data will be collected through a household survey. It might be useful
to identify products that would be produced and commercialized by women to
develop the methodology to collect this indicator for women (women
responsibilities in MHH).
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
Total:
MHH
FHH
Current Value
Total
Total:
MHH
FHH
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 5
PDO
Indicator
PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN ENERGY PRODUCED FROM NONE-
STAPLE CROP BY TARGETED HOUSEHOLD
Definition
Justification
Unit Percentage
Frequency
Data Source
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
16
Total:
MHH
FHH
Current Value
Total
Total:
MHH
FHH
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21. If there is a drought, it also
helps assessing the resilience (when there is food crisis it drops). It
also provides a nutrition point view. It looks at diversification from
staple.
Indicator 6
PDO
Indicator
PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN NUTRITIONAL YIELD BY TARGETED
HOUSEHOLD
Definition
Justification
Unit Percentage
Frequency
Data Source
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
Total:
MHH
FHH
Current Value
Total
Total:
MHH
FHH
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21. Ethiopian Institute has
identified a gap in Vitamin A and Zinc per hectare.
Indicator 5
PDO
Indicator
(RF)
NUMBER OF DIRECT PROJECT BENEFICIARIES
PERCENTAGE OF FEMALE BENEFICIARIES
Definition Direct beneficiaries are people or groups who directly derive benefits from an
17
intervention:
Men and women farmers benefiting from specific trainings at FTCs
Men and women farmers in CIGs
Men and women farmers in IWUAs
Men and women farmers in FREGs
Men and women farmers being linked to the market by the project
Men and women farmers using animal health services
Men and women farmers members of cooperatives supported by the project
Men and women farmers members directly benefiting from USAID
component
Female beneficiaries directly derive benefits from an intervention (as above)
Female refers to Female Headed Household and married females. This results
might include some level of double counting of beneficiaries.
Justification
This indicator allows the tracking of the number of direct beneficiaries and
specifically women farmers.
Unit Number
Frequency
Bi-Annually
This indicator will be reported on twice a year (2nd quarter and 4th quarter)
starting FY17 of the project (August 30rd, 2016).
DAs/SMSs will report bi-weekly to woreda coordinator.
Woredacoordinator will report on January 5th and July 5th of each year to Region
Coordination Unit and RMoA (5 days after end of quarter).
RARIs will report on January 5th and July 5th of each year to EIAR (5 days after
end of quarter).
Region Coordination Unit will report (submit to FCU and RMoA) January 25th
and July 25th each year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of
quarter).
EIAR will report (submit to FCU) January 25th and July 25th each year to
Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on February 29th and August 30th of each
year submit to World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter)
Data Source
Data will be collected by DAs/SMSs, Regional Research Centers (with the
Crop, Livestock/Forage, Soil and Water and Agriculture Implements Research
Directorates) project research component staff, Irrigation specialists from BoW.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Data will be collected using the project reporting formats and transmitted to the
coordination unit with quarterly reports. The Woreda coordinator, Region and
Federal component specialists and M&E specialists at the RPCU and FCU will
be responsible for cross-checking the quality of data and aggregating data. The
Federal M&E specialist will be calculating the indicator. The targets are
cumulative targets.
Year FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
18
Baseline
Total
Percentage
female
0
NA
Target Value
Total:
Percentage female
Need to
be
defined
Need to
be
defined
Need to
be
defined
1,597,730
Current Value
Total
Percentage female
40%
40%
40%
40%
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 7
PDO
Indicator
PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS IN PROJECT AREA
REPORTING THAT CHILDREN HAVE A MINIMALLY
ACCEPTABLE DIET
Definition This indicator measures the proportion of households with a children 6-23
months of age who receive a minimum acceptable diet (MAD), apart from
breast milk. The “minimum acceptable diet” indicator measures both the
minimum feeding frequency and minimum dietary diversity, as appropriate for
various age groups. If a child meets the minimum feeding frequency and
minimum dietary diversity for their age group and breastfeeding status, then
they are considered to receive a minimum acceptable diet.
Justification
Consumption of foods from at least 4 food groups out of 7 on the previous day
would mean that in most populations the child had a high likelihood of
consuming at least one animal-source food and at least one fruit or vegetable
that day, in addition to a staple food (grain, root or tuber).
CUT-OFF (Available)
The cut-off of at least 4 of the above 7 food groups above was selected because
it is associated with better quality diets for both breastfed and non-breastfed
children.
METHODOLOGY (Standardized): This indicator is published by a large
technical stakeholder group (WHO, UNICEF, USAID, AED, FANDA, UC
Davis, IFPRI)*.
Unit Percentage
Frequency
Baseline, midterm, end line
Data Source
HH survey (DHS, MICS, etc)
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Tabulation of the indicator requires that data on breastfeeding, dietary diversity,
number of semi-solid/solid feeds and number of milk feeds be collected for
children 6-23 months the day preceding the survey. The indicator is calculated
from the following two fractions:
19
1.“Breastfed children 6-23 months of age in the sample who had at least the
minimum dietary diversity and the minimum meal frequency during the
previous day” divided by “Breastfed children 6-23 months of age in the sample
with MAD component data”
AND
2.” Non-breastfed children 6-23 months of age who received at least 2 milk
feedings and had at least the minimum dietary diversity not including milk feeds
and the minimum meal frequency during the previous day” divided by “Non-
breastfed children 6-23 months of age in the sample with MAD component
data”
Minimum dietary diversity for breastfed children 6-23 months is defined as four
or more food groups out of the following 7 food groups (refer to the WHO
IYCF operational guidance document cited below):
1. Grains, roots and tubers2. Legumes and nuts3. Dairy products (milk,
yogurt, cheese)4. Flesh foods (meat, fish, poultry and liver/organ meats) 5.
Eggs6. Vitamin-A rich fruits and vegetables7. Other fruits and vegetables
Minimum meal frequency for breastfed children is defined as two or more
feedings of solid, semi-solid, or soft food for children 6-8 months and three or
more feedings of solid, semi-solid or soft food for children 9-23 months.
For the MAD indicator, minimum dietary diversity for non breastfed children is
defined as four or more food groups out of the following six food groups:
1. Grains, roots and tubers2. Legumes and nuts3. Flesh foods (meat, fish,
poultry and liver/organ meats) 4. Eggs5. Vitamin-A rich fruits and
vegetables6. Other fruits and vegetables
Minimum meal frequency for non breastfed children is defined as four or more
feedings of solid, semi-solid, soft food, or milk feeds for children 6-23 months.
For non-breastfed children to receive a minimum adequate diet, at least two of
these feedings must be milk feeds.
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
4.3%
Target Value
Total:
MHH
FHH
4%? 4.5% 4.7% 5.2% 5.6%
Current Value
Total
Total:
MHH
FHH
20
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21. AGP2 contributes to
improvement in consumption, which is a higher outcome.
Improvement in consumption is the combination of AGP2 activities
with the ministry of health particularly health DAs and the ENGINE
project.
Indicator 8
PDO
Indicator
PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS IN PROJECT AREA
REPORTING THAT WOMEN HAVE A MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLY
DIVERSE DIET
Definition This indicator reflects consumption of at least five of ten food groups (1. All
starchy staple foods, 2. Beans and peas, 3. Nuts and seeds, 4. Dairy, 5. Flesh
foods, 6. Eggs, 7. Vitamin A rich dark green leafy vegetables, 8. Other Vitamin
A rich vegetables, 9. Other vegetables, 10. Other fruits), and can be generated
from surveys.
Justification
Women of reproductive age (15-49 years) are at risk for multiple micronutrient
deficiencies, which can jeopardize their health and ability to care for their
children and participate in income generating activities. Maternal micronutrient
deficiencies during lactation can directly impact child growth and development
but the potential consequences of maternal micronutrient deficiencies are
especially severe during pregnancy, when there is the greatest opportunity for
nutrient deficiencies to cause long term, irreversible development consequences
for the child in-utero. Dietary diversity (assessed here as the number of food
groups consumed) is a key dimension of a high quality diet with adequate
micronutrient content; and thus, important to ensuring the health and nutrition
of both women and their children.
This indicator has been validated as an indicator of likelihood of micronutrient
adequacy among women of reproductive age. There is a recent global consensus
on this indicator as the best, most valid measure of women’s dietary diversity; it
replaces the WDDS (women’s dietary diversity score) that had been previously
developed by FAO and FANTA. Unlike former measurements, it offers a
threshold for women’s micronutrient needs.
CGIAR and USAID Feed the Future have mainstreamed the use of this
indicator in their evaluations. EU is scaling up its use.
Unit Percentage or Number (for mean dietary diversity score)
Frequency
Baseline, midterm, endline
Data Source
HH survey
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Data are collected on the foods and beverages consumed in the previous 24
hours which are aggregated into 10 distinct food groups.
CUT-OFF (Available)Women who consume foods from at least 5 out of 10
food groups have a higher likelihood of micronutrient adequacy.
Several indicators can be derived from the basic data, including (i) proportion of
HH reporting that women in the HH have minimal dietary diversity (5/10 food
groups) (ii) proportion of women who consume 5 or more food groups out of
ten, (iii) mean dietary diversity score, (iv) proportion of women consuming any
specific food group such as animal source foods.
21
A simple questionnaire could be added to the Module 9 of the AGP MTR
survey, similar to the HH dietary diversity section.
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
11.7%
Target Value
Total:
MHH
FHH
12% 12.3% 12.9% 14.0% 15.2%
Current Value
Total
Total:
MHH
FHH
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21. AGP2 contributes to
improvement in consumption, which is a higher outcome.
Improvement in consumption is the combination of AGP2 activities
with the ministry of health particularly health DAs and the ENGIN
project.
COMPONENT 1: AGRICULTURAL PUBLIC SUPPORT SERVICES INDICATORS
Component Objective: To increase access to public agricultural services for smallholder
farmers.
Indicator 6
(RF)
PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS USING PUBLIC AGRICULTURAL
SERVICES (male and female farmers)
Definition The percentage of farmers using public agricultural services (male and female)
will be analyzed per type of services: (i) extension services (through (a) farmers
training and demonstration at FTCs by DAs; (b) farmer field days; (c)
advice/demonstrations by DAs (crops, livestock, NRM) on farmers plots and
other site); (ii) animal health services (farmers using animal health clinics and
animal health posts); and (iii) farmers benefiting from insemination services for
their livestock.
Female: refers to Female Headed Household and married females.
Justification It informs on progress in terms of access and usage of public agricultural
services by male and female farmers.
Unit Percentage
Frequency
The indicator will be reported on at mid-term review and end of project. The
value of the indicator at baseline will be collected in August 2016 and indicator
targets will be defined based on baseline results.
Data Source
Data will be collected by CSA with the support of a consulting firm to be
contracted by AGP PCU.
Calculation
and
Data will be collected through household survey/ evaluation. In addition, a
qualitative study of extension services will be conducted to assess the quality of
22
Collect
Methodology
access to extension for male and female farmers. It will be conducted by
Consulting firm/university under responsibility and supervision of CU M&E
Officer and TC.
Year
Baseline
Total
Male
Female
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
Male
Female
Current Value
Total
Male
Female
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 7
(RF)
NUMBER OF GENDER SENSITIVE TECHNOLOGIES
DEMONSTRATED IN THE PROJECT AREA
Definition The term technology includes a change in practices compared to currently used
practices or technologies (seed preparation, planting time, feeding schedule,
feeding ingredients, post-harvest, storage, processing, etc). If one specific
technology is demonstrated in more than one location in the project area, it will
count as one technology. If the project introduced or promotes a technology
package in which the benefit depends on the application of the entire package
(e.g., a combination of inputs such as a new variety and advice on agronomic
practices such as soil preparation, changes in seeding time, fertilizer schedule,
plant protection, etc) – this will count as one technology.
This indicator assesses the number of gender sensitive technologies
demonstrated by the project.
Gender sensitive technologies are defined as: (i) technologies based on needs
and interest of female farmers; (ii) technologies that reduce time and labor for
women farmers; and (iii) technologies that are accessible and affordable by
women farmers.
Technologies for nutrition refer to technologies: (i) increasing production and
consumption for a range of diverse nutrient dense food; and (ii) improving post-
harvest handling, preservation and processing to improve availability of good
nutritional quality and safe food.
CSA technologies under the project refer to technologies that increase
productivity and resilience (adaptation). Not all technologies are gender
sensitive or contributing to improved nutrition or climate smart, but it is still
critical to know for the project how many are being promoted to public
extension services.
Demonstrated:Includes advice given or demonstrated by producer
organizations, cooperatives, extension service, etc. Technologies can be
demonstrated during field days, at FTCs training, on farmers’ plot, etc.
Justification
Demonstrating gender sensitive technologies increase of women adopting these
technologies. In addition, technologies reducing women farm labor and the time
that women farmers need to perform household duties could enable them to
23
devote more time to productive farm activities.
Unit Number
Frequency Annually
This indicator will be reported on once a year (4th quarter) starting FY17 of the
project (August 30rd, 2016).
DAs/SMSs will report bi-weekly to woreda coordinator.
Woredacoordinator will report on January 5th and July 5th of each year to Region
Coordination Unit and RMoA (5 days after end of quarter).
Region Coordination Unit will report (submit to FCU and RBoA) July 25th each
year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on August 30th of each year submit to
World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter)
Data Source
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Data will be collected using the project reporting formats and transmitted to the
coordination unit with quarterly reports. The Woreda coordinator, Region and
Federal component specialists and M&E specialists at the RPCU and FCU will
be responsible for cross-checking the quality of data and aggregating data. The
Federal M&E specialist will be calculating the indicator. In addition, a
qualitative study of gender sensitive technologies demonstrations will be
conducted to assess the quality of these technologies and quality of
demonstrations for female farmers. It will be conducted by Consulting
firm/university/Capacity Building Facility under responsibility and supervision
of CU M&E Officer and TC. The targets are cumulative targets.
Year
Baseline
Total
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
0
Target Value
Total
7 20 60 90
101
Current Value
Total
Comments:
Indicator 8
(RF)
PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN CROP DIVERSITY (number of HH
cultivating 3 or more crops) IN TARGETED HOUSEHOLDS BENEFITING
DIRECTLY FROM THE PROJECT Disaggregated by female head of household.
Definition The increase in crop diversity refers to the increase in production crop diversity
of households benefiting directly from AGP2. Crop diversity is based on the
Minimum Dietary Diversity – Women’s food groups. AGP2 production crop
diversity will be considered achieved if the household produces crops in at least
3 of the following food groups: (i) all starchy staple food; (ii) beans and peas;
(iii) nuts and seeds; (iv) vitamin A-rich dark green leafy vegetables; (v) other
vitamin A-rich vegetables and fruits; (vi) other vegetables and (vii) other fruits.
Justification
This indicator assesses nutritional diversity of AGP2 households cropping
system. This indicator provides an intermediate indication of AGP2 contribution
to improve production diversity and diet diversity of households within AGP2
woredas.
24
Unit Percentage
Frequency
The indicator will be reported on at mid-term review and end of project. The
value of the indicator at baseline will be collected in August 2016 and indicator
targets will be defined based on baseline results. The baseline value is in
number of households and number FHH.
Data Source
Data will be collected by CSA with the support of a consulting firm to be
contracted by AGP PCU.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
For each household data on crop cultivated will be collected. The analysis of the
crops cultivated by HH will be compared to AGP2 standards (based on
Minimum Dietary Diversity – Women’s food groups) and each household
meeting these standard will be accounted as targeted households cultivating
crops reflecting crop diversity.
Percentage HH/FHH cultivating crops reflecting crop diversity = Total
households cultivating crops reflecting crop diversity / Total households
interviewed in the sample survey.
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
Total:
MHH
FHH
Current Value
Total
Total:
MHH
FHH
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21 (2020).
Indicator 8 PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION
DIVERSITY IN TARGETED HOUSEHOLDS BENEFITING DIRECTLY
FROM THE PROJECT Disaggregated by female head of household.
Definition The increase in agricultural production diversity refers to the increase in crop
and animal production diversity of households benefiting directly from AGP2.
Production diversity is based on the Minimum Dietary Diversity – Women’s
food groups. AGP2 agricultural production diversity will be considered
achieved if the household produces in at least 5 of the following food groups:
(i) all starchy staple food; (ii) beans and peas; (iii) nuts and seeds; (iv) dairy; (v)
flesh foods; (vi) eggs; (vii) vitamin A-rich dark green leafy vegetables; (viii)
other vitamin A-rich vegetables and fruits; (ix) other vegetables and (x) other
fruits. It will require the production of at least 3 crops in the above food groups
and at least 2 animal products in the above food groups.
Justification
This indicator assesses nutritional diversity of AGP2 households agricultural
production system. This indicator provides an intermediate indication of AGP2
contribution to improve production diversity and diet diversity of households
within AGP2 woredas.
25
Unit Percentage
Frequency
The indicator will be reported on at mid-term review and end of project. The
value of the indicator at baseline will be collected in August 2016 and indicator
targets will be defined based on baseline results. The baseline value is in
number of households and number FHH.
Data Source
Data will be collected by CSA with the support of a consulting firm to be
contracted by AGP PCU.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
For each household data on crop and animal production will be collected. The
analysis of the production by HH will be compared to AGP2 standards (based
on Minimum Dietary Diversity – Women’s food groups) and each household
meeting these standard will be accounted as targeted households meeting
production diversity.
Percentage HH/FHH with crop and animal production reflecting agricultural
production diversity = Total households/FHH reflecting crop and animal
production diversity / Total households interviewed in the sample survey.
Year
Baseline
Total
MHH
FHH
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
Total:
MHH
FHH
Current Value
Total
Total:
MHH
FHH
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21 (2020).
Indicator 9
(RF) CLIENTS WHO HAVE ADOPTED AN IMPROVED AGRICULTURAL
TECHNOLOGY PROMOTED BY THE PROJECT (TOTAL)
CLIENTS WHO HAVE ADOPTED AN IMPROVED AGRICULTURAL
TECHNOLOGY PROMOTED BY THE PROJECT (FEMALE)
Definition The term technology includes a change in practices compared to currently used
practices or technologies (seed preparation, planting time, feeding schedule,
feeding ingredients, post-harvest, storage, processing, etc). If one specific
technology is demonstrated in more than one location in the project area, it will
count as one technology. If the project introduced or promotes a technology
package in which the benefit depends on the application of the entire package
(e.g., a combination of inputs such as a new variety and advice on agronomic
practices such as soil preparation, changes in seeding time, fertilizer schedule,
plant protection, etc) – this will count as one technology.
Adoption refers to a change of practice or change in use of a technology that was
26
introduced/promoted by the project.
The term technology includes a change in practices compared to currently used
practices or technologies. It will assess the proportion of technologies adopted
per type: (i) gender sensitive; (ii) nutrition; and (iii) CSA.
Female: refers to Female Headed Household and married females.
Justification
It tracks the level of adoption of technologies by male and female farmers
demonstrated by AGP2.
Unit Number
Frequency
Annually
This indicator will be reported on once a year (4th quarter) starting FY19 of the
project (August 30rd, 2018).
DAs/SMSs will report bi-weekly to woreda coordinator.
Woredacoordinator will report on January 5th and July 5th of each year to Region
Coordination Unit and RBoA (5 days after end of quarter).
Region Coordination Unit will report (submit to FCU and RBoA) July 25th each
year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on August 30th of each year submit to
World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter)
Data Source
This indicator will be reported on once a year (4th quarter) starting FY18 of the
project (August 30rd, 2017).
DAs/SMSs will report bi-weekly to woreda coordinator.
Woredacoordinator will report on January 5th and July 5th of each year to Region
Coordination Unit and RMoA (5 days after end of quarter).
Region Coordination Unit will report (submit to FCU and RMoA) July 25th each
year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on August 30th of each year submit to
World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter)
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Data will be collected using the project reporting formats and transmitted to the
coordination unit with quarterly reports. The Woreda coordinator, Region and
Federal component specialists and M&E specialists at the RPCU and FCU will
be responsible for cross-checking the quality of data and aggregating data. The
Federal M&E specialist will be calculating the indicator.In addition, a qualitative
study of technologies adopted will be conducted to assess the quality of these
technologies in general and specifically for gender (quality of technologies for
female farmers), nutrition and CSA. This evaluation will also look at the benefits
for farmers having adopted these technologies and the number of years the
technologies adopted are implemented by farmers. It will be conducted by
Consulting firm/university under responsibility and supervision of CU M&E
Officer and TC. The targets are cumulative targets.
Year
Baseline
Total:
Female:
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
0
0
Target Value
Total:
Female:
700,000
300,000
1,400,000
500,000
1,530,000
608,800
Current Value
Total:
Female:
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
27
COMPONENT 2: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH INDICATORS
Component Objective: To increase the supply of demand-driven agricultural technologies,
which directly link to the other components.
Indicator 10
(RF)
NUMBER OF TECHNOLOGIES PROMOTED TO PUBLIC
EXTENSION SERVICES (total and disaggregated by gender sensitive,
nutrition and Climate Smart Agriculture)
Definition Technologies developed: are defined as technologies, which have
successfully been validated, tested by research and are ready to be promoted
to extension services. The technologies developed include both new and
improved technologies. Only technologies financed/supported by the project
funds are accounted for.
Total technologies includes: (i) multi-purpose technologies (that cannot
easily be categorized as gender, nutrition or Climate Smart Agriculture but
contribute overall to the project objective.); (ii) gender sensitive
technologies; (iii) nutrition technologies; and (iv) Climate Smart Agriculture
technologies.
Gender sensitive technologies: are defined as (i) technologies based on needs
and interest of female farmers; (ii) technologies that reduce time and labor
for women farmers; and (iii) technologies that are accessible and affordable
by women farmers.
Technologies for nutrition: refer to technologies (i) increasing production and
consumption for a range of diverse nutrient dense food; and (ii) improving
post- harvest handling, preservation and processing to improve availability of
good nutritional quality and safe food.
CSA technologies under the project refer: to technologies that increase
productivity and resilience (adaptation).
Not all technologies are gender sensitive or contributing to improved
nutrition or climate smart, but it is still critical to know for the project how
many are being promoted to public extension services.
Technologies will be disaggregated by major type: (i) gender sensitive
technologies; (ii) technologies for nutrition; and (iii) climate smart
agriculture technologies.
Justification
Assesses if technologies developed by research reach the stage of being
promoted to public extension services.
- If gender sensitive technologies are developed by research reach the stage
of being promoted it is assumed that it would contribute to adoption of
technologies by women.
- If technologies for nutrition are developed by research reach the stage of
being promoted it is assumed that it would contribute to adoption of
technologies for nutrition by farmers.
- If CSA technologies are developed by research reach the stage of being
promoted it is assumed that it would contribute to adoption of CSA
technologies by farmers.
Unit Number
28
Frequency
Bi-annually, starting year 2
This indicator will be reported on twice a year (2nd quarter and 4th quarter)
starting FY17 of the project (August 30rd, 2016).
Regional Agriculture Research Institutes will report on January 5th and July
5th of each year to Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute (5 days after end
of quarter).
Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute will report (submit to FCU and
RMoA) January 25th and July 25th each year to Federal Coordination Unit (25
days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on February 29th and August 30th of
each year and submit to World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter).
Data Source
Data will be collected the Regional Research Centers (with the Crop,
Livestock/Forage, Soil and Water and Agriculture Implements Research
Directorates) project research component staff and National Research
Institute project research component staff (with the Crop, Livestock/Forage,
Soil and Water and Agriculture Implements Research Directorate). Data will
be collected based on the list of technologies validated provided by the
centers and using the reporting formats developed by the project.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Data will be collected at National and Regional level using the project
Reporting formats and transmitted to the coordination unit with quarterly
reports. The regional research centers reporting data are only the research
centers supported by the project to develop technologies under the project.
The expert of the coordination unit at the National Research Institute in
charge of the research component of the project will be responsible for cross-
checking the quality of data coming from the Regional Research Centers,
collecting data from the National Research Institute, aggregating (National
and Regional data) and calculating the indicator.
The targets are cumulative targets. For the disaggregation in terms of gender,
nutrition and CSA, it is possible to have double counting of some
technologies as some technologies might contribute to both gender and
nutrition or gender and CSA. Some technologies won’t fit in any of the
disaggregation.
Year
Baseline
Total
Gender
Nutrition
CSA
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
0
0
0
0
Target Value
Total
Gender
Nutrition
CSA
20
7
7
4
50
20
15
10
120
60
50
14
240
90
80
16
280
101
80
20
Current Value
Total
Gender
29
Nutrition
CSA
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 11
(RF)
NUMBER OF DEMAND-DRIVEN IMPROVED AGRICULTURAL
TECHNOLOGIES UNDER RESEARCH (total and disaggregated by
gender sensitive, nutrition and Climate Smart Agriculture technologies)
Definition The terms technology includes a change in practices compared to currently
used practices or technologies.
The terms demand-driven and improved refers to the quality of the processes
to have the technology under research: (i) the identification of technologies
under research is demand-driven: based on farmers, extension services and
other actors demand to address specific issues; (ii) the technologies under
research contributes to productivity and commercialization; (iii) the choice of
technologies under research take into account mainstreaming of gender,
nutrition, and climate smart; and (iv) the choice of technologies under
research is in line with the VC commodities of the project.
The Value Chain commodities of the project are the following:
1. Cereals: Teff, Wheat, Maize, Barley and Sorghum.
2. Pulses: Chickpea and Faba Bean.
3. Oil crops: Sesame.
4. Stimulants: Coffee.
5. Vegetables: Tomato, Potato and Onion.
6. Fruits: Banana and Mango.
7. Dairy products: Milk.
8. Meat/live animals: Poultry, Cattle and Shoats,
9. Other products: Hide and Skin, and Honey
Break-down by technology type is as below:
Total technologies includes: (i) multi-purpose technologies (that cannot easily
be categorized as gender, nutrition or Climate Smart Agriculture but contribute
overall to the project objective.); (ii) gender sensitive technologies; (iii)
nutrition technologies; and (iv) Climate Smart Agriculture technologies.
Gender sensitive technologies: are defined as (i) technologies based on needs
and interest of female farmers; (ii) technologies that reduce time and labor for
women farmers; and (iii) technologies that are accessible and affordable by
women farmers.
Technologies for nutrition: refer to technologies (i) increasing production and
consumption for a range of diverse nutrient dense food; and (ii) improving
30
post- harvest handling, preservation and processing to improve availability of
good nutritional quality and safe food.
CSA technologies under the project refer: to technologies that increase
productivity and resilience (adaptation).
Not all technologies are gender sensitive or contributing to improved nutrition
or climate smart, but it is still critical to know for the project how many are
being promoted to public extension services.
Technologies will be disaggregated by major type: (i) gender sensitive
technologies; (ii) technologies for nutrition; and (iii) climate smart
agriculture technologies.
Justification
It is an indicator to assess the quality of the processes that led to the selection
of technologies under research.
Unit Number
Frequency
Annually
This indicator will be reported on once a year (4th quarter) starting FY17 of the
project (August 30rd, 2016).
Regional Agriculture Research Institutes will report on July 5th of each year to
Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute (5 days after end of quarter).
Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute will report (submit to FCU and
RMoA) July 25th each year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of
quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on August 30th of each year submit to
World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter).
Data Source
The indicator will be tracked through a Qualitative study/Desk review. It will
assess process and potential impact. It will be conducted under the leadership
of EIAR AGP2 implementing staff, RARIs AGP2 implementing staff, AGP2
M&E Officers, with the technical support and in collaboration with AGP2
Technical Committee.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
The list and number of improved agricultural technologies under research
(total and disaggregated by gender sensitive, nutrition and Climate Smart
Agriculture technologies) will be compiled by RARIs(research component
implementers/Crop, Livestock/Forage, Soil and Water and Agriculture
Implements Research Directorates) and EIAR (research component
implementers/ Crop, Livestock/Forage, Soil and Water and Agriculture
Implements Research Directorate).Then, a qualitative study/desk review of the
list will focus on the process of identification of agriculture technologies, their
potential impact (including in terms of gender, nutrition and CSA).This review
will be conducted by: (i) EIAR research component implementers; (ii) RARIs
research component implementers; (iii) support from PCU M&E Officers and
AGP2 Gender working group; and (iii) with Technical Support from AGP2
Technical Committee. Detailed terms of reference will be developed to
conduct this assessment including the methodology of the review. It will also
be approached as overall learning exercise among partners.
The targets are cumulative targets. For the disaggregation in terms of gender,
nutrition and CSA, it is possible to have double counting of some technologies
as some technologies might contribute to both gender and nutrition or gender
and CSA. Some technologies won’t fit in any of the disaggregation.
Year FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
31
Baseline
Total
Gender
Nutrition
CSA
0
0
0
0
Target Value
Total
Gender
Nutrition
CSA
20
3
3
3
60
10
10
10
110
30
30
30
140
40
40
40
Current Value
Total
Gender
Nutrition
CSA
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 12
(RF)
COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH SUB-PROJECTS UNDER
IMPLEMENTATION/COMPLETED (Disaggregated by total FREGs and
women FREGs)
- COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH SUB-PROJECTS - UNDER
IMPLEMENTATION (Disaggregated by total FREGs and women FREGs)
- COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH SUB-PROJECTS - COMPLETED
(Disaggregated by total FREGs and women FREGs)
Definition Collaborative research sub-projects refers to the Farmer Research Extension
Groups (FREGs)
Under implementation is defined as a FREG supported by AGP2 for which a
contractual arrangement has been established between research, the farmer
groups and extension services.
Completed is defined as a FREG that has achieved its intended benefit/objective
and does not require further support from the project.
Total FREG includes:(i) FREGs with only male farmers; (ii) mixed FREGs with
women and male farmers; and (iii) women FREGs.
Women FREGs: is defined as FREGs only composed of women farmers
(women farmers refers to Female Headed Household and married females).
40% of the FREGs should be women FREGS
Justification
This indicator shows the growth in formal collaboration among the public
research, extension services and farmers.
It is a World Bank core sector indicator.
Unit Number
Frequency
Bi-annually This indicator will be reported on twice a year (2nd quarter and 4th quarter)
starting FY17 of the project (August 30rd, 2016).
Regional Agriculture Research Institutes will report on January 5th and July 5th
32
of each year to Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute (5 days after end of
quarter).
Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute will report (submit to FCU and
RMoA) January 25th and July 25th each year to Federal Coordination Unit (25
days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on February 29th and August 30th of each
year and submit to World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter).
Data Source
Data will be collected by the Regional Research Centers project research
component staff and National Research Institute project research component
staff. Data will be collected based on the list of technologies validated provided
by the centers and using the reporting formats developed by the project.
At MTR and end evaluation the tracking of the indicator will be complemented
by qualitative studies undertaken by a consulting firm/university under
responsibility and supervision of PCU M&E Officer and Technical Committee.
The consulting firm/university will be contracted by the PCU.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Data will be collected at National and Regional level using the project
Reporting formats and transmitted to the coordination unit with quarterly
reports. The regional research centers reporting data are only the research
centers supported by the project to develop technologies under the project.
The expert of the coordination unit at the National Research Institute in charge
of the research component of the project will be responsible for cross-checking
the quality of data coming from the Regional Research Centers, collecting data
from the National Research Institute, aggregating (National and Regional data)
and calculating the indicator. The targets for FREGs completed are cumulative.
The targets for FREGs under implementation are not cumulative targets. Being
under implementation is not a static stage, therefore FREGs move out of this
status. A FREG can only be in one category either implemented or either
completed to avoid double counting.
Year
Baseline
FREGs under
implementation/
completed
Total FREGs:
Total Women:
FREGs under
implementation
Total FREGs:
Total Women:
FREGs
completed
Total FREGs:
Total Women:
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
0
0
0
0
0
0
33
Target Value
FREGs under
implementation/
completed
Total FREGs:
Total Women FREGs:
FREGs under
implementation
Total FREGs:
Total Women FREGs:
FREGs completed
Total FREGs:
Total Women FREGs:
200
100
450
200
600
240
700
280
700
280
150
75
250
100
150
40
100
40
0
0
50
25
200
100
450
200
600
240
700
280
Current Value
FREGs under
implementation/
completed
Total FREGs:
Total Women:
FREGs under
implementation
Total FREGs:
Total Women:
FREGs completed
Total FREGs:
Total Women:
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 13
(RF)
VOLUME OF BREEDER SEEDS AND PRE-BASIC SEEDS PRODUCED
FOR CROPS BY RESEARCH CENTERS
Definition Breeder seeds and pre-basic seeds production by research centers refers to
production financed by the project
The breeder seeds and pre-basic seeds produced are in the value chain
commodities selected for the AGP2: Teff, Wheat, Maize, Barley, Sorghum,
Chickpea, Faba Bean, Sesame, Tomato, Potato and Onion. It also includes
fodder.
Justification This indicator assesses the capacity of research centers to provide breeder seeds
34
and pre-basic seeds.
Unit Quintals
Frequency
Annually This indicator will be reported on once a year (4th quarter) starting FY17 of the
project (August 30rd, 2016).
Regional Agriculture Research Institutes will report on July 5th of each year to
Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute (5 days after end of quarter).
Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute will report (submit to FCU and
RMoA) July 25th each year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of
quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on August 30th of each year submit to
World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter).
Data Source
Data will be collected the Regional Research Centers project research
component staff and National Research Institute project research component
staff. Data will be collected based on the list of technologies validated provided
by the centers and using the reporting formats developed by the project.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Data will be collected at National and Regional level using the project
Reporting formats and transmitted to the coordination unit with quarterly
reports. The regional research centers reporting data are only the research
centers supported by the project to develop technologies under the project.
The expert of the coordination unit at the National Research Institute in charge
of the research component of the project will be responsible for cross-checking
the quality of data coming from the Regional Research Centers, collecting data
from the National Research Institute, aggregating (National and Regional data)
and calculating the indicator. The targets are cumulative targets.
Year
Baseline
Total
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
0
Target Value
Total:
1,258
2,516
3,774
5,032
6,290
Current Value
Total
Total:
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
COMPONENT 3: SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION INDICATORS
Component Objective: To increase the access to and efficient utilization of irrigation water
by smallholder farmers.
Indicator 14
(RF)
NUMBER OF WATER USERS PROVIDED WITH NEW/IMPROVED
IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE SERVICES
NUMBER OF FEMALE WATER USERS PROVIDED WITH IRRIGATION
AND DRAINAGE SERVICES
Definition Water users: refer to male and female farmers who are recipient of irrigation
35
and drainage services from the project. Female refers to Female Headed
Household and married females.
New irrigation and drainage services: refers to the provision of irrigation and
drainage services in an area that has not had these services before.
Improved irrigation and drainage services: refers to the upgrading,
rehabilitation, and/or modernization of irrigation and drainage services in an
area with existing irrigation and drainage services.
Irrigation and drainage services: includes small-scale irrigation and household
irrigation.
Water users are only accounted for when the new/improved irrigation and
drainage services is functional.
Functional irrigation schemes: are defined as schemes, which are finalized,
have a functional water user associations (see definition in water user
association) and the scheme is delivering the intended benefits to the
beneficiaries.
Functional IWUAs refer to an association with: (i) registered with supervising
body (to be designated by each national regional states); (ii) trained
members(water management, dispute resolution, irrigation farming methods,
new irrigation technologies, maintenance of infrastructure, book keeping,
financial management, leadership assertiveness, negotiation specifically
targeted at female members etc.); (iii) has bylaws (rules for consumption of
irrigation water and collect fees); (iv) collect fees; and (v) 30 percent women
members (if sufficient women have land use right in the specific irrigation
scheme). If they are women 50% of women should be in the IWUAs
management committee.
Justification
This indicator assesses the expansion in access to irrigation and drainage of
male and female farmers.
Unit Number
Frequency
Bi-annually This indicator will be reported on twice a year (2nd quarter and 4th quarter)
starting FY17 of the project (August 30rd, 2016).
This indicator will be reported on twice a year (2nd quarter and 4th quarter)
starting year 2 of the project.
Woreda will report on January 5th and July 5th of each year to Region
Coordination Unit and RMoA (5 days after end of quarter).
Region will report (submit to FCU and RMoA) January 25th and July 25th each
year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on February 29th and August 30th of each
year submit to World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter)
Data Source
1) For HHI:
In Oromia:Data will be collected by NRM DAs at the kebele level. DAs will
transmit data to the Irrigation Office at Woreda level, which will check the data
for quality and transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator and WoA. The
Woreda Coordinator will aggregate the data of various kebele and transmit to
the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data, aggregate
woreda data and provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The
FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
In Amhara and SNNPR: Data will be collected by NRM DAs at the kebele
level. DAs will transmit data directly to Woreda Coordinator and WoA. The
Woreda Coordinator will check the data for quality aggregate the data of
36
various kebele and transmit to the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will
review the data, aggregate woreda data and provide comments on progress and
transmit data to FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
In Tigray: Data will be collected by irrigation DAs at the kebele level. DAs will
transmit data to the Water Office at Woreda level, which will check the data for
quality and transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator and WoA. The Woreda
Coordinator will aggregate the data of various kebele and transmit to the
Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data, aggregate woreda
data and provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The FCU
will check the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
2) For Rehabilitated SSI and Micro-irrigation: In Oromia: The irrigation officer of the Irrigation Development Authority at
Woreda level is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator, who will aggregate the
data of various kebele and transmit to the Regional Irrigation Development
Authority. The RIDA will check data quality and transmit to the Regional
Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data, aggregate woreda data and
provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The FCU will check
the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
In Amhara and SNNPR: The SMS of the Woreda Agriculture Office is
responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The SMS will transmit the
data to the Woreda Coordinator, who will aggregate the data of various kebele
and transmit to the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data
and provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The FCU will
check the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
In Tigray: The Water Specialist of the Bureau of Water at Woreda level is
responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The Water Specialist will
transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator, who will aggregate the data of
various kebele and transmit to the Regional Bureau of Water. The RBW will
check data quality and transmit to the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU
will review the data, aggregate woreda data and provide comments on progress
and transmit data to FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and
aggregate Region data.
3) For New Small Scale Irrigation:
In Oromia: The irrigation officer of the Regional Irrigation Development
Authority is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will check data and transmit the data to the RCU. The RCU will
aggregate the data of various kebele and woreda, provide comments and
transmit to the FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
In Amhara and SNNPR: The irrigation officer of the Regional Bureau of
Agriculture is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will check data and transmit the data to the RCU. The RCU will
aggregate the data of various kebele and woreda, provide comments and
transmit to the FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
In Tigray: The irrigation officer of the Regional Irrigation Development
Authority is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will check data and transmit the data to the RCU. The RCU will
aggregate the data of various kebele and woreda, provide comments and
37
transmit to the FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Data will be collected using the project reporting formats and transmitted to the
coordination unit with quarterly reports. The irrigation specialists and M&E
specialists at the RPCU and FCU will be responsible for cross-checking the
quality of data, aggregating data and calculating the indicator. The targets are
cumulative targets.
Year
Baseline
Total
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
0
Target Value
Total:
Female:
20,000
8,000
86,000
36,400
172,000
80,553
190,000
71,000
190,000
78,000
Current Value
Total
Total:
Female:
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 15
(RF)
PERCENTAGE OF FUNCTIONAL IRRIGATION WATER USER
ASSOCIATIONS (IWUAS) MANAGING EFFECTIVELY IRRIGATION
AND DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURES
Definition Functional IWUAs refer to an association with: (i) registered with supervising
body (to be designated by each national regional states); (ii) trained
members(water management, dispute resolution, irrigation farming methods,
new irrigation technologies, maintenance of infrastructure, book keeping,
financial management, leadership assertiveness, negotiation specifically
targeted at female members etc.); (iii) has bylaws (rules for consumption of
irrigation water and collect fees); (iv) collect fees; and (v) 30 percent women
members (if sufficient women have land use right in the specific irrigation
scheme). If they are women 50% of women should be in the IWUAs
management committee.
Managing effectively refers: to (i) effective maintenance and operation of the
irrigation and drainage system; (ii) development of specific scheduling of water
delivery; (iii) delivery of water to farmers plots in the right quantity and at an
appropriate time; and (iv) the anticipated additional use of the water (drinking,
washing, cattle trough).
Justification
This indicator assesses the functionality IWUAs and their effective management
of irrigation and drainage infrastructures of the project—as a proxy for
measuring their efficient use of irrigation water
Unit Percentage
Frequency
Bi-annually This indicator will be reported on twice a year (2nd quarter and 4th quarter)
starting FY18 of the project (August 30rd, 2017).
Woreda will report on January 5th and July 5th of each year to Region
Coordination Unit and RMoA (5 days after end of quarter).
Region will report (submit to FCU and RMoA) January 25th and July 25th each
38
year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on February 29th and August 30th of each
year submit to World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter)
Data Source
1) For HHI:
In Oromia:Data will be collected by NRM DAs at the kebele level. DAs will
transmit data to the Irrigation Office at Woreda level, which will check the data
for quality and transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator and WoA. The
Woreda Coordinator will aggregate the data of various kebele and transmit to
the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data, aggregate
woreda data and provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The
FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
In Amhara and SNNPR: Data will be collected by NRM DAs at the kebele
level. DAs will transmit data directly to Woreda Coordinator and WoA. The
Woreda Coordinator will check the data for quality aggregate the data of
various kebele and transmit to the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will
review the data, aggregate woreda data and provide comments on progress and
transmit data to FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
In Tigray: Data will be collected by irrigation DAs at the kebele level. DAs will
transmit data to the Water Office at Woreda level, which will check the data for
quality and transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator and WoA. The Woreda
Coordinator will aggregate the data of various kebele and transmit to the
Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data, aggregate woreda
data and provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The FCU
will check the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
2) For Rehabilitated SSI and Micro-irrigation: In Oromia: The irrigation officer of the Irrigation Development Authority at
Woreda level is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator, who will aggregate the
data of various kebele and transmit to the Regional Irrigation Development
Authority. The RIDA will check data quality and transmit to the Regional
Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data, aggregate woreda data and
provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The FCU will check
the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
In Amhara and SNNPR: The SMS of the Woreda Agriculture Office is
responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The SMS will transmit the
data to the Woreda Coordinator, who will aggregate the data of various kebele
and transmit to the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data
and provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The FCU will
check the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
In Tigray: The Water Specialist of the Bureau of Water at Woreda level is
responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The Water Specialist will
transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator, who will aggregate the data of
various kebele and transmit to the Regional Bureau of Water. The RBW will
check data quality and transmit to the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU
will review the data, aggregate woreda data and provide comments on progress
and transmit data to FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and
aggregate Region data.
3) For New Small Scale Irrigation:
In Oromia: The irrigation officer of the Regional Irrigation Development
Authority is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
39
officer will check data and transmit the data to the RCU. The RCU will
aggregate the data of various kebele and woreda, provide comments and
transmit to the FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
In Amhara and SNNPR: The irrigation officer of the Regional Bureau of
Agriculture is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will check data and transmit the data to the RCU. The RCU will
aggregate the data of various kebele and woreda, provide comments and
transmit to the FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
In Tigray: The irrigation officer of the Regional Irrigation Development
Authority is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will check data and transmit the data to the RCU. The RCU will
aggregate the data of various kebele and woreda, provide comments and
transmit to the FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Data will be collected using the project reporting formats and transmitted to the
coordination unit with quarterly reports. The irrigation specialists and M&E
specialists at the RPCU and FCU will be responsible for cross-checking the
quality of data, aggregating data and calculating the indicator.
Year
Baseline
Total
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
NA
Target Value
Total:
--
40%
50%
60%
70%
Current Value
Total
Total:
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 16
(RF)
AREA PROVIDED WITH IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE SERVICES
(HA)
(Disaggregated by small-scale irrigation, micro-irrigation, and household
irrigation)
- AREA PROVIDED WITH IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE SERVICES
(HA) NEW
(Disaggregated by small-scale irrigation, micro-irrigation, and household
irrigation)
- AREA PROVIDED WITH IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE SERVICES -
IMPROVED (HA)
(only small-scale irrigation is improved)
Definition This indicator measures the total area of land provided with irrigation and
drainage services under the project. It includes the area provided with new
irrigation and drainage services, and (ii) the area provided with improved
irrigation and drainage services.
40
Area: refers to area provided with new and improved irrigation and drainage
services. It includes small-scale irrigation, micro-irrigation and household
irrigation.
Irrigation and drainage services: refers to the better delivery of water to, and
drainage of water from, arable land, including better timing, quantity, quality,
and cost-effectiveness for the water users. Irrigation and drainage services
include small-scale irrigation, household irrigation, and micro-irrigation
system).
Small-scale irrigation: refers to an area greater than or equal to 20 hectares
owned and managed by smallholder farmers.
Household Irrigation Systems: refers to an area of less than 5 hectares and a plot
with less than ten households.
Micro-Irrigation Systems: refers to an area of less than 20 ha and a plot with
more or equal to ten households.
New:refers to the provision of irrigation and drainage services in an area that
has not had these services before. The area is not necessarily newly cropped or
newly productive land, but is newly provided with irrigation and drainage
services, and may have been rainfed land before.
Improved: refers to the upgrading, rehabilitation, and/or modernization of
irrigation and drainage services in an area with existing irrigation and
drainageservices.
Justification
Data are disaggregated by small-scale irrigation, micro-irrigation, and
household irrigation; HHI is particularly important as women farmers are
usually the main beneficiaries of HHI.
Unit Hectares
Frequency
Bi-annually This indicator will be reported on twice a year (2nd quarter and 4th quarter)
starting FY17 of the project (August 30rd, 2016).
Woreda will report on January 5th and July 5th of each year to Region
Coordination Unit and RMoA (5 days after end of quarter).
Region will report (submit to FCU and RMoA) January 25th and July 25th each
year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on February 29th and August 30th of each
year submit to World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter)
Data Source
1) For HHI:
In Oromia:Data will be collected by NRM DAs at the kebele level. DAs will
transmit data to the Irrigation Office at Woreda level, which will check the data
for quality and transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator and WoA. The
Woreda Coordinator will aggregate the data of various kebele and transmit to
the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data, aggregate
woreda data and provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The
FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
In Amhara and SNNPR: Data will be collected by NRM DAs at the kebele
level. DAs will transmit data directly to Woreda Coordinator and WoA. The
Woreda Coordinator will check the data for quality aggregate the data of
various kebele and transmit to the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will
review the data, aggregate woreda data and provide comments on progress and
transmit data to FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
In Tigray: Data will be collected by irrigation DAs at the kebele level. DAs will
41
transmit data to the Water Office at Woreda level, which will check the data for
quality and transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator and WoA. The Woreda
Coordinator will aggregate the data of various kebele and transmit to the
Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data, aggregate woreda
data and provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The FCU
will check the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
2) For Rehabilitated SSI and Micro-irrigation: In Oromia: The irrigation officer of the Irrigation Development Authority at
Woreda level is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator, who will aggregate the
data of various kebele and transmit to the Regional Irrigation Development
Authority. The RIDA will check data quality and transmit to the Regional
Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data, aggregate woreda data and
provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The FCU will check
the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
In Amhara and SNNPR: The SMS of the Woreda Agriculture Office is
responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The SMS will transmit the
data to the Woreda Coordinator, who will aggregate the data of various kebele
and transmit to the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU will review the data
and provide comments on progress and transmit data to FCU. The FCU will
check the data for quality and aggregate Region data.
In Tigray: The Water Specialist of the Bureau of Water at Woreda level is
responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The Water Specialist will
transmit the data to the Woreda Coordinator, who will aggregate the data of
various kebele and transmit to the Regional Bureau of Water. The RBW will
check data quality and transmit to the Regional Coordination Unit. The RCU
will review the data, aggregate woreda data and provide comments on progress
and transmit data to FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and
aggregate Region data.
3) For New Small Scale Irrigation:
In Oromia: The irrigation officer of the Regional Irrigation Development
Authority is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will check data and transmit the data to the RCU. The RCU will
aggregate the data of various kebele and woreda, provide comments and
transmit to the FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
In Amhara and SNNPR: The irrigation officer of the Regional Bureau of
Agriculture is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will check data and transmit the data to the RCU. The RCU will
aggregate the data of various kebele and woreda, provide comments and
transmit to the FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
In Tigray: The irrigation officer of the Regional Irrigation Development
Authority is responsible for data collection at the kebele level. The irrigation
officer will check data and transmit the data to the RCU. The RCU will
aggregate the data of various kebele and woreda, provide comments and
transmit to the FCU. The FCU will check the data for quality and aggregate
Region data.
Calculation
and
Collect
Data will be collected using the project reporting formats and transmitted to the
coordination unit with quarterly reports. The irrigation specialists and M&E
specialists at the RPCU and FCU will be responsible for cross-checking the
42
Methodology
quality of data, aggregating data and calculating the indicator. The targets are
cumulative targets.
Year
Baseline
- Total
- Small-Scale
Irrigation
(rehab/new)
- Micro irrigation
and Household
Irrigation (new)
Total New:
Total
Rehabilitated:
Baseline FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Target Value
- Total
- Small-Scale Irrigation
(rehab/new)
- Micro irrigation and
Household Irrigation
(new)
Total New:
Total Rehabilitated:
--
--
--
--
14,000
9,000
5,000
10,000
4,000
33,000
18,000
15,000
25,000
8,000
50,000
25,000
25,000
40,000
10,000
55,000
30,000
25,000
45,000
10,000
Current Value
- Total
- Small-Scale Irrigation
(rehab/new)
- Micro irrigation and
Household Irrigation
(new)
Total New:
Total Rehabilitated:
--
--
--
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
COMPONENT 4: AGRICULTURE MARKETING AND VALUE CHAINS INDICATORS
Component Objective: To commercialize smallholder farmers through increased access to
input and output markets.
Indicator 17 PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN VOLUME OF SEEDS SUPPLIED
THROUGH DIVERSIFIED CHANNELS (disaggregated per supplier)
Definition This indicator measures the percentage increase in volume of seeds supplied per
value chains per type of channels.
The channels are defined as: private agents, farmers groups and cooperatives.
43
The value chains: are grain crops specifically ???
The seeds can be supplied to farmers, cooperatives, etc???
To be further defined with USAID.
Justification
It assesses the increase in volume of seeds supplied per VCs and the level of
diversification of channels to commercialize seeds to farmers.
Unit Percentage
Frequency
Annually
This indicator will be reported on twice a year (2nd quarter and 4th quarter)
starting FY18 of the project (August 30rd, 2018).
Data Source
This indicator will be collected by the USAID implementers of component 4
and transmitted to theFCU M&E Officer.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
This indicator will be reported on once a year (4th quarter) starting FY18 of the
project (August 30rd, 2018).
USAID implementers will report (submit to FCU and RMoA) July 25th each
year to Federal Coordination Unit (25 days after end of quarter).
Federal Coordination Unit will report on August 30th of each year submit to
World Bank and MoA (60 days after end of quarter)
Year
Baseline
- Total
- Private agents
- Farmers Groups
- Cooperatives
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Target Value
- Total
- Private agents
- Farmers Groups
- Cooperatives
Current Value
- Total
- Private agents
- Farmers Groups
- Cooperatives
Comments:
Indicator 23 NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL PARTNERSHIPS OR MARKET
CONTRACTS SIGNED BETWEEN PRODUCER GROUPS OR
COOPERATIVES (supported by the project) AND
DOMESTIC/INTERNATIONAL AGRIBUSINESS ACTORS (processors,
wholesalers, retailers, exporters, etc.) FOR SELECTED VALUE CHAINS
Definition This indicator assesses the effectiveness of component 4 at improving market
access and establishing commercial linkages between farmer groups or
cooperatives and domestic, regional and international agribusiness actors such
as processors, wholesalers, retailers, exporters, etc.
Producer groups: are defined as CIGs.
Justification
This indicator assesses the effectiveness of component 4 at improving market
access and establishing commercial linkages between farmer groups or
cooperatives and domestic, regional and international agribusiness actors such
44
as processors, wholesalers, retailers, exporters, etc.
Unit Percentage
Frequency
At MTR (FY19) and End of project (FY21)
Data Source
USAID and CU M&E Officer
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Year
Baseline
- Total
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
0
Target Value
- Total
-- -- 23 -- 45
Current Value
- Total
-- -- --
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 24 PERCENTAGE OF CIGS UNDERTAKING A VIABLE BUSINESS
ACTIVITY
Definition This indicator assesses the sustainability of the business for the Common
Interest Groups supported by AGP2.
The sustainability of the business is defined as: (i) the members make profit
with the activity they undertake as an individual in the CIG; (ii) the CIG itself
makes profit; and (iii) the reserves of the group are increased until they are
sufficient to cover the costs of a full business cycle.
The results are disaggregated by youth CIGs and female CIGs.
Female refers to Female Headed Household and married females.
Justification
It assesses the sustainability of business activities undertaken by CIGs.
Unit Percentage
Frequency
Annually
Data Source
USAID and CU M&E Officer
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Year FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
45
Baseline
Female CIGs
Youth CIGs
NA
NA
Target Value
Female CIGs
Youth CIGs
--
--
50%
35%
60%
40%
65%
50%
Current Value
Female CIGs
Youth CIGs
--
--
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
COMPONENT 5: PROJECT MANAGEMENT, CAPACITY BUILDING AND MONITORING AND EVALUATION INDICATORS
Component Objective: To ensure project implementation, effective monitoring and
evaluation (M&E) of results and a consistent and effective approach to capacity
development.
Indicator 25 PERCENTAGE OF TRAININGS DELIVERED USING AGP2 AGREED
CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT APPROACH
Definition This indicator measures the quality of the capacity building under the project.
The definition of capacity development approach will be defined once AGP2
has developed a detailed capacity development approach for the overall project.
Justification
Tremendous level of capacity building is required under AGP2 and the quality
of capacity building is critical for the project to reach its objective.
Unit Percentage
Frequency
Annually
Data Source
DFATD, AGP2 Federal and Region capacity building officers
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Sample of trainings will be reviewed/assessed by DFATD capacity development
facility in collaboration with AGP2 Federal and Regional capacity building
officers. Methodology to be developed.
Year
Baseline
- Total
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
NA
Target Value
- Total
70% 80% 85% 90%
Current Value
- Total
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
Indicator 26 ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORTS MEETS WORLD BANK QUALITY AND
TIMELY DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS
46
Definition This indicator measures whether or not the M&E system is achieving its basic
function of providing quality and timely data.
Quality requirements refer to the agreed format for reporting (data, analysis,
recommendations, etc.), the required data (such as results framework and other
critical indicators/data agreed upon in the M&E manual) and the timely
availability of data for decision-making, identification of issues, etc.
Justification
This indicator measures whether or not the M&E system is achieving its basic
function of providing quality and timely data.
Unit Yes/No
Frequency
Annually
Data Source
Federal M&E Officers will send annual reports to the World Bank team for
review.
Calculation
and
Collect
Methodology
Review of annual report by the World Bank Team in collaboration with PCU
M&E Officers. Based on agreed quality requirements of AGP2 quarterly and
annual reports, the reports will be reviewed to assess if they meet the project
requirements.
Year
Baseline
FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
NA
Target Value
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Current Value
Comments: Project will close October 10th of FY21.
MONITORING OF INPUTS, OUTPUTS, SELECTED OUTCOMES AND PROCESSES
Monitoring can be defined as a continuing function that uses systematic collection of data on
specified indicators to provide management and the main stakeholders of an ongoing
development intervention with indications of the extent of progress and achievement of objectives
and progress in the use of allocated funds.
The project will still focus on keeping the monitoring system simple and interactive allowing
regular reporting and learning by stakeholders at all levels. All implementing agencies (through
their focal persons) will report on performance. Nevertheless, the Federal and Regional PCUs as
well as woreda focal persons will be responsible for the overall monitoring of the project.
MONITORING ANNUAL AND QUARTERLY WORK PLANSAND BUDGET PROGRESS
Regular monitoring of inputs, activities and some outputs in annual plans will be conducted by
implementers at all levels (kebele, woreda, region and Federal). Monitoring of inputs, activities
and some outputs will focus on the analysis of implementation progress against stated annual
work plans and budgets.
47
TRACKING FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS ASSESSMENTS PROGRESS
Why tracking feasibility studies/needs assessments progress?
AGP2 is a framework project with a large number of activities/sub-components requiring a
feasibility study or a need assessment to decide if the activity should be financed and/or how
it should be financed.
Therefore, it is critical for the project coordinator and component leaders to closely track
the status of each feasibility study/need assessment on a quarterly basis. It supports the CU
to track progress and plan ahead for activities that will need financing/procuring based on
the feasibility study/need assessment results. The Feasibility Studies and Needs Assessments
Progress Matrix below will be updated quarterly to track progress. The matrix with the
identified feasibility studies and needs assessments is in Annex 1.
Feasibility Studies and Needs Assessments Progress Matrix: FEASIBILITY
STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION
PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
COMPONENT 1: AGRICULTURAL PUBLIC SUPPORT SERVICES
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
Definition of feasibility studies/needs assessment different stages: ☐TOR : Terms of reference are finalized.
☐Bidding: The bidding process is on-going (if there is a need for a bid)
☐On-going: The need assessment/feasibility study is on-going.
☐Draft: A draft need assessment/feasibility study findings has been submitted to PCU and World Bank.
☐Finalized: The need assessment/feasibility study is finalized.
☐Under implementation: The results of need assessment/feasibility study are being used and the activity
is implemented based on these results and recommendations.
The complete Feasibility Studies and Needs Assessments Progress Matrix(Annex x) will be
updated every quarter and included in every quarterly and annual reports of the CU at Federal
level and Region level based on on-going feasibility studies/needs assessments.
MONITORING AND REPORTING OF SELECTED INDICATORS TO TRACK PROGRESS
Indicators:
Indicators should be needed and useful.
Indicators should have a technical merit
Indicators should be fully defined.
48
Indicators should be feasible to measure.
Why track additional indicators outside ofthe results framework and the annual plans
(input, activities and some outputs)?
The annual plan and the Results Framework are insufficient to create a real results chain to
track progress, identify issues and assess performance of components/sub-components.The
result chains helps to create clear causal linkages (between inputs, activities, outputs and
outcomes) to track project progress towards results.
Some additional indicators are needed to track the quality of some of AGP2 implementation
processes.
Some additional indicators are needed to ensure gender, nutrition and CSA are addressed
along the results chain.
Some additional indicators are needed to track the other AGP2 outcome that the Results
Framework does not include.
CAUTION: Due to implementers’ capacity constraints, the results chain cannot be too
complex. The number of selected indicators needs to be limited not to overwhelm
implementers. Too many indicators might lower the quality and timeliness of data collected. In
addition, the indicators should be simple and not too complex to measure.
The list of indicators below per component is under the responsibility of implementers (none of
the indicators require an evaluation or a household survey). They will be integrated within the
MIS system and in the indicator handbook (where it will be clearly defined in terms of definition,
justification, etc.).The complete Selected Indicators Matrix (Annex 5) with all indicators below
agreed upon (see following section and section: Setting, Assessing and Using Indicators
Performance Targets) will be updated every quarter and included in every quarterly and annual
reports of the CU at Federal level and Region level based on on-going feasibility studies/needs
assessments. This Matrix won’t be mixed with the annual plan, which was a big issue under
AGP1 and deterred the whole purpose of the tool; under AGP2 it will be an independent tool
separate from the annual plan.
COMPONENT 1: AGRICULTURAL PUBLIC SUPPORT SERVICES
SUB-COMPONENT 1.1 INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING AND DEVELOPMENT
Establishing and strengthening ARDPLACs
Number of ARDPLACs meeting held at woreda level (the woreda coordinator has to collect it
from the extension) Number of ARDPLACs meeting held at zonal level
Number of ARDPLACs meeting held at regional level (the regional coordinator has to collect
it from the zonal extension process owner )
Number of ARDPLACs meeting held at federal level
Additional qualitative data will be collected to assess the quality and effectiveness of ARDPLACs
meetings (see reporting formats).
49
Agriculture Extension Services
Clients who have adopted an improved agricultural technology promoted by the project(Results
Framework indicator) ( All DA’s collect and the SMS take it to Woreda coordinator Clients who adopted an improved agricultural technology promoted by project – female(Results
Framework indicator) Number of FTCs supported by AGP2 (cumulative)
Number of FTCs functional at basic level (level refers to government requirements (defined in the
PIM))
Number of FTCs functional at intermediate level (level refers to government requirements
(defined in the PIM))
Number of FTCs functional at advanced level (level refers to government requirements (defined
in the PIM))
Number of FTCs with cooking facilities and providing cooking classes to women farmers.
Number of farmers trained at FTCs on improved technologies (disaggregated by type of training
crop, livestock and NRM)
Number of female farmers trained at FTCs on improved technologies (disaggregated by type of
training crop, livestock and NRM)
Number of farmers trained on farmers plot by DAs or model farmers on improved technologies
(disaggregated by type of training crop, livestock and NRM)
Number of female farmers trained on farmers plot by DAs or model farmers on improved
technologies (disaggregated by type of training crop, livestock and NRM)
Number female farmers trained on gender sensitive improved technologies
Number farmers trained on CSA improved technologies (disaggregated by gender)
Number farmers trained on nutrition improved technologies (disaggregated by gender)
Number of improved technologies demonstrated (disaggregated by type of training crop,
livestock and NRM)
Number of gender sensitive technologies demonstrated (Results Framework indicator)
Number of CSA technologies demonstrated
Number of nutrition sensitive technologies demonstrated
Support Animal Production Services
Number of farmers trained in modern queen rearing (disaggregated by gender)
Number of modern queen rearing trainings conducted at training centers
Volume of fingerlings harvested and distributed for pond fish farmers
Volume of fingerlings harvested
Fish hatchery center fully functional
Number of dairy farms with a functional dairy herd performance recording.
Number of functional electronic data management system at semen production centers.
Number of animal health laboratories fully functional (checklist, equipped, staff trained, O&M
for maintenance of equipment, etc.)
Number of vaccination (disaggregated per type of disease and animals)
50
Number of disease outbreak (disaggregated per type of disease and animals)
Number of animal death (disaggregated per type of disease and animals)
Number of farmers’ visits at the animal health clinics/posts
Number of women farmers’ visits at the animal health clinics/posts
Number of animal treated at animal health clinic (disaggregated per type of visit and animals)
Number of animal health clinics/posts fully functional (checklist staff trained, equipped, drugs,
etc)
Video taking into account gender into animal health extension services finalized and
disseminated.
Manual taking into account gender into animal health extension services finalized and
disseminated.
Number of samples tested and diagnostic carried out by NAHDIC in collaboration with NAIC
Molecular biology laboratory functional (what does that mean functional in that case, need more
discussion and details)
Poultry health strategy developed
Standard poultry diagnostic manual to carry out full fledge operation developed and implemented
Crop Production and Health Services
Number of good agronomic practices identified, compiled and disseminated to regional bureaus
Number of gender sensitive good agronomic practices identified, compiled and disseminated to
regional bureaus
Number of CSA good agronomic practices identified, compiled and disseminated to regional
bureaus
Number of nutrition good agronomic practices identified, compiled and disseminated to regional
bureaus
Number of seedling planted
Number of vegetables seedlings produced
Number of vegetables nurseries producing vegetables seedlings
Number of farmers producing vegetables seedlings
Number of women farmers producing vegetables seedlings
Number of tree seedlings produced
Number of tree nurseries producing tree seedlings
Number of farmers producing tree seedlings
Number of women farmers producing tree seedlings
Data-base on pre and post harvest losses developed and in use
International standard pesticide laboratory functional (what do they do?)
Number of community land use plans developed
Number of soil sample tested.
Soil mapping completed and used.
51
SUB-COMPONENT 1.2: SCALING UP OF BEST PRACTICES
Total number male farmers adopting best practices (contribute to calculating results framework
indicator)
Total number male farmers adopting best practices (contribute to calculating results framework
indicator)
Number of best practices identified and validated by CASCAPE
Number of male farmers adopting nutrition best practices
Number of female farmers adopting nutrition best practices
Number of male farmers adopting CSA best practices
Number of female farmers adopting CSA best practices
Number of female farmers adopting irrigation best practices (linked to irrigation component)
Total number of best practices adopted
Number of nutrition best practices adopted
Number of CSA best practices adopted
Number of gender sensitive best practices
COMPONENT 2: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
SUB-COMPONENT 2.1: TECHNOLOGY ADAPTATION/GENERATION
Number of technologies promoted to public extension services (total and disaggregated by
gender sensitive, nutrition and Climate Smart Agriculture) (Results Framework indicator)
Number of demand-driven improved agricultural technologies under research (total and
disaggregated by gender sensitive, nutrition and Climate Smart Agriculture technologies)
(Results Framework indicator)
Accelerated Release of Agricultural Technologies from End Stage Verification Trials
Total number of candidate technologies in the list of potential end/verification stage crop,
livestock, soil and water management and farm implement activities
Number of gender sensitive candidate technologies in the list of potential end/verification
stage crop, livestock, soil and water management and farm implement activities.
Number of nutrition candidate technologies in the list of potential end/verification stage
crop, livestock, soil and water management and farm implement activities.
Number of CSA candidate technologies in the list of potential end/verification stage crop,
livestock, soil and water management and farm implement activities.
Total number of candidate technologies under evaluation in AGP2 woredas.
Number of gender sensitive candidate technologies under evaluation in AGP2 woredas.
Number of nutrition candidate technologies under evaluation in AGP2 woredas.
Number of CSA candidate technologies under evaluation in AGP2 woredas.
Number of technologies pre-demonstrated on FTCs and farmers’ plots in collaboration with other
implementers.
52
Number of gender sensitive technologies pre-demonstrated on FTCs and farmers’ plots in
collaboration with other implementers.
Number of nutrition technologies pre-demonstrated on FTCs and farmers’ plots in
collaboration with other implementers.
Number of CSA technologies pre-demonstrated on FTCs and farmers’ plots in
collaboration with other implementers.
Adaptation/Generation of Demand Driven Agricultural Technologies
Total number of demand driven research themes to alleviate the agricultural problems identified.
Number of gender specific research themes to alleviate the agricultural problems
identified.
Number of nutrition research themes to alleviate the agricultural problems identified.
Number of CSA research themes to alleviate the agricultural problems identified.
SUB-COMPONENT 2.2: PRE-EXTENSION DEMONSTRATION OF TECHNOLOGIES AND ESTABLISHMENT OF FREGs
Total number of farmers identified and trained for pre-extension demonstrations (including in
FREGs and regular pre-extension demonstrations).
Number of female farmers identified and trained for pre-extension demonstrations (including in
FREGs and regular pre-extension demonstrations).
Total number of technology packages prepared and demonstrated (including in FREGs and
regular pre-extension demonstrations).
Number of gender sensitive technology packages prepared and demonstrated (including
in FREGs and regular pre-extension demonstrations).
Number of nutrition technology packages prepared and demonstrated (including in
FREGs and regular pre-extension demonstrations).
Number of CSA technology packages prepared and demonstrated (including in FREGs
and regular pre-extension demonstrations).
Collaborative research sub-projects under implementation/completed (Disaggregated by total
FREGs and women FREGs) (Results Framework indicator)
Collaborative research sub-projects - under implementation (Disaggregated by total FREGs and
women FREGs) (Results Framework indicator)
Collaborative research sub-projects - completed (number) (Disaggregated by total FREGs and
women FREGs) (Results Framework indicator)
SUB-COMPONENT 2.3: SUPPORT TO SOURCE TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTION FOR CROP, LIVESTOCK/FORAGE, SOIL AND WATER AND FARM IMPLEMENTS
Volume of breeder seeds and pre-basic seeds produced for crops by research centers (Results
Framework indicator)
53
Total number of farmers supplied with breeder and pre-basic seed to multiply
Number of women farmers supplied with breeder and pre-basic seed to multiply
Volume of tissue cultural materials produced
Total number of farmers supplied with cultural materials to multiply
Number of women farmers supplied with cultural materials to multiply
SUB-COMPONENT 2.4: CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT (PHYSICAL AND HUMAN)
Number of laboratories/research centers need assessment completed and validated
(physical/human).
Number of laboratories/research capacity development plans (physical/human) completed
validated.
COMPONENT 3: SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION
SUB-COMPONENT 3.1: SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT
Area provided with irrigation and drainage services (ha) (Disaggregated by small-scale irrigation,
micro-irrigation, and household irrigation) (Results Framework indicator)
Area provided with irrigation and drainage services (ha) New (Disaggregated by small-scale
irrigation, micro-irrigation, and household irrigation) (Results Framework indicator)
Area provided with irrigation and drainage services - Improved (ha) (only small-scale irrigation is
improved) (Results Framework indicator)
Number of irrigation infrastructures feasibility studies on-going (disaggregated by SSI, MI, HHI).
Number of irrigation infrastructures feasibility studies finalized (disaggregated by SSI, MI, HHI).
Number of irrigation infrastructures construction on-going (disaggregated by SSI, MI, HHI).
Number of irrigation infrastructures finalized and functional (disaggregated by SSI, MI, HHI).
Number of irrigation infrastructures functional with drinking water. (to be collected by woreda
coordinator with support of women’s affairs)
Number of irrigation infrastructures functional with livestock drinking water. (to be collected by
woreda coordinator)
Number of irrigation infrastructures functional with a washing basin. (to be collected by woreda
coordinator with support of women’s affairs)
Number of irrigation infrastructures feasibility studies finalized with drinking water. (to be
collected by woreda coordinator with support of women’s affairs)
Number of irrigation infrastructures feasibility studies finalized with livestock drinking water. (to
be collected by woreda coordinator)
Number of irrigation infrastructures feasibility studies finalized with a washing basin. (to be
collected by woreda coordinator with support of women’s affairs)
Km of roads built.
Number of direct beneficiaries of irrigation infrastructures.
Number of women direct beneficiaries of irrigation infrastructures.
Number of beneficiaries having access to drinking water through irrigation infrastructures. . (to be
collected by woreda coordinator with support of women’s affairs).
54
SUB-COMPONENT 3.2: INTEGRATED CROP AND WATER MANAGEMENT (ICWM) FOR IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE
Number of Irrigation Water User Associations established.
Number of members in Irrigation Water User Associations established.
Number of women members in Irrigation Water User Associations established.
Percentage of functional Irrigation Water User Associations (IWUAs) managing effectively
irrigation and drainage infrastructures.(Results Framework indicator)
Number of farmers trained on water lifting technologies, low cost drilling technologies and water
saving technologies.
Number of women farmers trained on water lifting technologies, low cost drilling technologies
and water saving technologies.
COMPONENT 4: AGRICULTURAL MARKETING AND VALUE CHAINS
Percentage of CIGs undertaking a viable business activity (disaggregated youth CIGs and female
CIGs)(Results Framework indicator)
SUB-COMPONENT 4.1: SUPPORTING AGRICULTURAL INPUT SUPPLY SYSTEM
Support to promotion and distribution of improved agricultural inputs
Volume of seeds produced by CBSPs certified
Volume of seeds produced by CBSPs (disaggregated by crop and fodder)
Number of CBSPs in a partnership/contract with private sector, public seed enterprise and/or
cooperatives
Total number of farmers in CBSPs (CBSPs is referring to CBSPs that are functional defined as
currently producing seeds)
Total female farmers in in CBSPs (CBSPs is referring to CBSPs that are functional defined as
currently producing seeds)
Number of total farmers trained in seed production techniques and distribution
Number of female farmers trained in seed production techniques and distribution
Number of total farmers benefiting from new parent stock chick
Number of female farmers benefiting from new parent stock chick
Number of new parent stock chick distributed to farmers
Number of new parent stock chick produced
Number of liquid nitrogen production plants functional (to be defined: fully equipped, staff
trained, distribution is taking place, etc)
Number of woredas with IT based input tracking system functional (Annex definition/checklist:
information are reaching the directorate in a timely basis, etc…)
Volume of seed marketed through direct seed marketing
Volume of fertilizer marketed through direct marketing (will only start 3rd year)
Volume of crop protection chemicals marketed through direct marketing (will only start 3rd year)
Volume of farm implements marketed through direct marketing (will only start 3rd year)
Number of contracts signed for direct marketing (disaggregated per type: seeds, fertilizers, etc.)
55
Number of updated input/output regulations and certification systems approved and enforced by
government/concerned institutions (disaggregated per type).
Regulatory guidelines for agricultural mechanization technology imports, manufacturing and
distribution approved and enforced by government
Honey residue monitoring plan finalized
SUB-COMPONENT 4.2: SUPPORT TO FARMERS’ ORGANIZATIONS
Establishing and strengthening of common interest group (CIGs)
Number of women CIGs established
Number of youth CIG established
Definition of established: all the following actions have taken place: CIGs are formed and
organized, business area has been identified and feasibility study has been conducted, all the
necessary trainings have been conducted and a code of conduct and by laws for grouo members
have been established. Only when all these actions have taken place the CIG can be accounted for
as established. (make checklist in Annex for DAs so it is easier)
Total number of CIGs established and strengthened (based on PIM steps/criteria define training,
updated business plan, etc)(needed to calculate results framework indicator)
Total number of CIGs undertaking a viable business activity(needed to calculate results
framework indicator)
Number of women CIGs established and strengthened (based on PIM steps/criteria define
training, updated business plan, etc)
Number of women CIGs undertaking a viable business activity (needed to calculate results
framework indicator) Number of youth CIGs established and strengthened (based on PIM steps/criteria define training,
updated business plan, etc)
Number of youth CIGs undertaking a viable business activity(needed to calculate results
framework indicator) Total youth beneficiaries in CIGs with a viable business activity.
Total women beneficiaries in CIGs with a viable business activity.
Establishing and strengthening of primary cooperative and cooperative federation
Number of newly primary cooperatives established
Number of total farmers in newly primary cooperatives established
Number of women farmers in newly primary cooperatives established
Number of women CIGs transformed in primary cooperative
Number of youth CIGs transformed in primary cooperative
National Agricultural Cooperative Federation established
(by laws and business plans prepare, etc, went through all the steps described in the PIM)
Number of MoU signed between cooperatives, RUSACCOs and MFIs
Number of board of directors, union managers and employees trained at Federal level
(disaggregated by gender)
56
Number of board of directors, union managers and employees trained at Zonal level
(disaggregated by gender)
Number of board of directors, union managers and employees trained at woreda level
(disaggregated by gender)
Number of local experience sharing visits conducted
Number of cooperative members participating in local experience sharing visits
Number of women cooperative members participating in local experience sharing visits
Number of agricultural cooperative staff trained at Federal level (disaggregated by gender)
Number of agricultural cooperative staff trained at Zonal level (disaggregated by gender)
Number of agricultural cooperative staff trained at woreda level (disaggregated by gender)
Number of local experience sharing visits conducted
Number of agricultural cooperative staff participating in local experience sharing visits
Number of women agricultural cooperative staff participating in local experience sharing visits
Number of platforms and forums organized to oversee cooperative activities for AGP
Number of monitoring and evaluation review meeting conducted by FCA to review AGP
activities conducted for cooperatives
Number of participants and type of participants to M&E review meetings (attendance sheet)
SUB-COMPONENT 4.3: SUPPORT AGRIBUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
Number of commercial partnerships or market contracts signed between producer groups or
cooperatives (supported by the project) and domestic/international agribusiness actors
(processors, wholesalers, retailers, exporters, etc.) for selected VCs (Results Framework
indicator collected by USAID contractor)
SUB-COMPONENT 4.4: SUPPORT MARKET INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
Construction and Modernizing Management of Market Centers
Number of market centers fully functional (Annex checklist+definition)
Management committee functional, market includes latrine, cf government standards, etc.
Number of market centers committee fully functional (check list) (established with a composition
of 30% women, trained, meet regularly, conduct maintenance as need arise, )
Number of market shed fully functional (Annex checklist+ definition) (committee fully
functional, construction finalized, include latrines/water, activity is taking place products are
being sold, etc.)
Volume of vegetables and fruits sold
Number of market shed users (source of info list of beneficiaries reviewed by MC to avoid double
counting)
Number of market shed women users
Volume of milk sold at milk collection centers
Volume of milk processed product sold (yoghurt, butter, etc.)
Volume of honey sold
Volume of processed honey sold
57
Number of market shed users (source of info list of beneficiaries reviewed by MC to avoid double
counting)
Number of market shed women users
Support to construction of warehouse infrastructure
Volume of commodities stored and sold in AGP2 supported warehouse infrastructures.
Volume of inputs stored and distributed to the farmers from AGP2 supported warehouse
infrastructures.
Number of warehouses fully functional (checklist annex, coop trained, O&M, etc.)
COMPONENT 5: PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, CAPACITY BUILDING AND MONITORING AND EVALUATION
SUB-COMPONENT 5.1: PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
Number of Federal SC meeting conducted
Number of Regional SC meeting conducted
Number of Woreda SC meeting conducted
Number of Federal TC meeting conducted
Number of Regional TC meeting conducted
Number of Zonal TC meeting conducted
Number of Woreda TC meeting conducted
Number of environmental Management Plan’s and final subprojects designs cleared by Bureau of
Environmental Protection and Land Use Administration
Number of resettlement Action Plans that have been fully executed before physical displacement
of people
Number of gender taskforce meetings conducted
AGP Staff/ Focal Person in place at Zonal.
AGP Staff/ Focal Person in place at Woreda.
SUB-COMPONENT 5.2: MONITORING AND EVALUATION
MIS system fully functional at Federal level and in all regions.
SUB-COMPONENT 5.3: CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT FACILITY
Reporting on Trainings (to be defined with capacity building facility)
Capacity Development support facility in place and functional in all regions.
58
SETTING, ASSESSINGAND USING INDICATORS PERFORMANCE TARGETS
Setting Targets for Indicators
Targets are set for all indicators along the results chain. They are particularly difficult to set at the
outcome level compared to the output level. One of the main difficulties is to balance between
reality and the ambition of the project team and government. Several methods can be used to set
targets at the outcome level, below are some of the main methods examples1:
• Past performance analysis and/or historical trend analysis can be used if the project is a
second phase or if similar project/component interventions have been undertaken in the past. It
can help forecast future targets based on previous experiences.
• Strategy analysis and analysis of implementation planning is a review of the theory of
change and it takes into account the level of budget allocation, the implementation plan of the
project, the level, allocation and sequencing of activities of the project and the implementation
capacity of the project staff and IAs to set targets.
• Analysis of applied research & evaluation findings is about using latest research
informing setting targets.
• Expert opinions from IAs or the sector on specific indicators can inform setting targets.
Most of these methods have some overlap and can also be used in a complementary manner. It is
also particularly important to conduct a contextual analysis, which will identify factors affecting
the progression towards targets such as specific policies, current government sector strategies and
reforms, potential synergies with other government and/or donor projects, etc.
Assessing Indicators Performance Targets
Typically, each indicator is assigned a performance target, which are useful to highlight issues or
successes in the project that need to be further analyzed to understand results. However, targets
do not provide information on why a project fails or succeeds and they do not give a complete
picture of progress and achievements2. They can trigger the following questions:
• Why were some targets not met and how can the program address these issues?;
• Are the results chain/theory of change, planning and sequencing of activities and outputs
adequate to reach the current targets?;
• Why some targets were missed or overpassed and is it affecting other parts of the project
and is it related to the quality of planning of the project? ;
• Do targets need to be adjusted?; and
• What are the lessons learned and recommendations to achieve the project goals?
• Should a specific evaluation or study be conducted to investigate the issues identified?
Matrix to Report on Selected Indicators Progress*
Indicators Unit Annual Target
This Quarter Achieved until this Quarter
(%) of Annual Target
End of Project Target
Achieved until this Quarter (%) of End of Project Target
Planned Achieved Performance(%)
Component 1 Agricultural Production and Commercialization
1M&E Insights: Setting Targets ,USAID
2M&E Insights: Setting Targets ,USAID
59
*The matrix will be followed by comments (when needed) explaining why were some targets
not met and how can the program address these issues.
To enhance the effectiveness of the monitoring process, AGP-2 will hold bi-annual assessments
of data quality (within reports of a sample of DAs, woreda focal persons and RPCUs) combined
with mentoring and re-training as necessary to help address issues related to data quality as
identified by the assessments.3
SAFEGUARDS MONITORING
Throughout implementation, AGP2 is required to carry out safeguard monitoring to ensure that
the program brings intended benefits, while ensuring that potential adverse environmental and
social impacts are avoided or minimized. Safeguard monitoring will include environmental and
social performance reviews by a local consultant contracted to visit a sample of AGP-2 woredas
each year to assess compliance with safeguard instruments, determine lessons learnt and provide
guidance for improving future performance.
PROJECT EVALUATION
EVALUATION OF OUTCOME AND IMPACT
Achievement and progress towards AGP2 results will be measured by indicators of the Results
Framework, additional outcome indicators (list above section)and various studies/evaluation. To
capture outcomes and impact a comprehensive baseline household surveyis planned for the first
year of AGP-2 and will be followed by a midterm evaluation in early FY19 and a final survey and
evaluation in FY21. This household survey will also be an opportunity to assess the impact of the
project beyond productivity and commercialization such as household nutrition (diet diversity of
women and children), women overall livelihood, etc.
The evaluations of AGP2 will also include: (i) household surveys of direct beneficiaries; (ii)
qualitative studies of extension services and adoption of technologies (impact, including
crosscutting issues: gender, nutrition and climate smart, etc.); (iii) qualitative studies of research
processes (including process, product and potential impact); (iv) qualitative studies of the FREGs;
(v) qualitative evaluation of efficiency use of water combined with technical audit and cost
benefit analysis of infrastructures; and (vi) qualitative evaluation of a sample of trainings. In
addition, CASCAPE will be conducting learning case studies. Additional evaluations will be
undertaken through USAID parallel funding (TBD). In addition, evaluations will be
complemented by yearly thematic assessments (taking into account cross-sectoral issues: gender,
nutrition and climate smart) as need arise and taking into account the need to be informed. The
assessments will be agreed at the Federal SC at the outset of each fiscal year.AGP-2 will also
oversee gender evaluations to study the effectiveness of the program’s gender mainstreaming.
In addition, further qualitative surveys will be conducted as required, for example this could
include studies on the adoption and impact of agricultural technologies promoted by the program,
nutritional impacts in terms of household dietary consumption, profitability and rates of return on
3Together with regional M&E officers, tool to evaluate the quality of reports has already been developed under AGP-1
and being used Oromiya and SNNPR. The results are used to give feedback to woreda administrators on the strength of
reports.
60
investments by CIGs, and qualitative studies on changes in service delivery (extension, animal
health, plant health, soil health).
Other Examples of evaluation
The qualitative assessment of farmers’ satisfaction (male and female) with extension services
(trainings/demonstration/other DA support (TBD in the detailed methodology such as access to
inputs, credit, etc.). The consultants will conduct focus groups (male and female) and interview of
farmers to assess the access, reliability and quality of extension services they have received by: (i)
DAs at FTCs; (ii) DAs on farmers demonstration plot; and (iii) by model farmers on farmers plot;
(iv) during farmers field days. It can also encompass the content of trainings/demonstrations,
appropriateness of technologies introduced, effectiveness of the DA, etc. The results will be
disaggregated by type of category of trainings/demonstration (crop, livestock, NRM) and male
farmers and women farmers.
The qualitative assessment of the functioning of FTCs and quality of FTCs activities supported by
AGP will be evaluated. The functioning of FTCs will look at the level of equipment and how
operational are FTCs (see Annex 1) and sustainability of AGP support/interventions. The review
of the quality of FTCs activities will include: type of demonstration/training provided to farmers
for the past 2 years, type of practices disseminated, innovations introduced, gender sensitive
technologies, FTC management committees, etc. It is expected that a larger sample of FTCs
would be visited by the consultant team just to assess its functioning that for the qualitative
assessment of farmers’ satisfaction with extension services.
The evaluation of extension services impact on farmers (male and female). It includes assessing
the following possible impacts/changes in: (i) knowledge, attitudes, skills; sustainable agricultural
practices; (ii) aspiration, self-image, perspectives; (iii) farming practices; (iv) cropping intensity,
cropping pattern, crop diversification, yield; (v) the revenue, the income, nutrition, household
welfare, etc. It will also be important to assess the sustainability of the benefits/impact identified.
Evaluation of impact of irrigation infrastructures looking at the development of irrigated area, the
number of beneficiaries (disaggregated by gender), the quality of water user associations, the
linkages with extension services and input markets to allow higher value crops to be grown, the
change in farming practices, the cropping intensity, cropping pattern, the yield, the revenue, the
income, the crop diversification, nutrition, livelihood, the sustainability of the benefits/impact on
yield/farming practices/diversification, beneficiaries ownership of the infrastructure, etc.
The technical audit of infrastructures will assess the quality of infrastructures construction by: (i)
assessing the quality of works in the field (using detailed inspection checklist), comparing the
quality of infrastructures built to actual technical design documents, technical drawings, planned
budget and to government sector set standards; (ii) identifying change from original drawings or
budget, looking at unit cost data, etc.
The assessment of the quality of construction/rehabilitation processes implemented will evaluate
the quality of processes from identification to hand over of the infrastructures to
kebele/infrastructures management committee/water user association. It includes evaluating:
identification of infrastructures, standard technical management procedures, technical documents
availability, construction time period, beneficiaries opportunities for employment, inspection of
design, environmental impact, acquisition of land and other assets(land required for
infrastructure: no land required/donated in accordance with procedure/donated not in accordance
with procedures/experienced serious compensation conflicts), hand over of works, etc.
61
The evaluation of infrastructures functioning and benefits to beneficiarieswill assess with gender
lenses: (i) the level of functioning of infrastructures (assess whether infrastructures functions
completely, does not function in parts, had functioned, but now damage and never functioned)
functioning water user associations/infrastructures committee management maintenance of
infrastructures (including if they are formed and active, formed but less active and never formed);
(ii) maintenance of infrastructures (maintenance activities, maintenance plans, maintenance
meetings (meeting held, attendance, etc)); (iii) determination of maintenance needs; (iv)
monitoring of maintenance; (v) responsibility for maintenance; (vi) sustainability of the
infrastructures; (vii) benefits from infrastructures to direct beneficiaries (nutrition, livelihood,
etc.); (viii)sustainability of the benefits to direct beneficiaries; (ix)usage of infrastructures; (x)
cost-benefit analysis, etc.
Evaluation of the quality of planning of woreda plans (as such community investments sub-
projects and farmers common interest groups sub-projects). Reviewing the quality of planning
implies evaluating if it is demand-driven, participatory, transparent, market driven and if there is
ownership and sustainability. The scope of the assignment will also include taking into account
the level of collaboration with Implementing Agencies and partner projects such as AGP-AMD
and CASCAP for planning and implementing work plans at the local level. The report will also
provide lessons learned and recommendations to enhance the CLPP manual if required. The
evaluation will pay particular attention to women involvement in the planning process.It will also
assess if planning occurs as described in the CLPP manual.
EVALUATION OF CAPACITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES AND IMPACT
To be updated with the Capacity Building Facility.
GENDER IMPACT EVALUATION
Waiting for Niklas Impact Evaluation note
LEARNING WORKSHOPS AND FORA
Workshop will be organized on bi-annual basis at federal level and regional level to share lesson
(obtained on reporting, field supervision, and studies) and give direction to improve performance.
These workshops will include PCUs and all relevant implementers. Mobilization of issues for the
workshop will be generated focusing on program implementation progress. Facilitation is the
responsibility of program coordination units.
AGP2 will promote internal learning by organizing learning forum in combination with kebele
meetings, during which farmers will discuss results achieved with AGP2 activities, progress on
intended objectives and implementation problems and/or best practices following simple visual
formats. The kebele chairperson will be chairing the meetings and other KDC members will
facilitate discussion. The learning forum will be attended by as many kebele community members
as possible. Those issues requiring help from woreda will be raised to the woreda coordinator.
Success stories, innovations and lessons identified will be shared within the community and with
the woreda coordinator and implementing agencies. Local learning activities will also include
62
cross-farmer monitoring (farmers monitor other farmers’ activities/sub-projects) so as to take
advantage of the opportunities that this provides for learning from each other.
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT
For project closure, an independent consultant will be contracted to prepare the project final
evaluation of the program. The consultant will conduct this overall evaluation of the program
evaluation based on project reports, evaluations, case studies, staff interviews, etc.
MAINSTREAMING GENDER, NUTRITION AND CLIMATE SMART AGRICULTURE IN PLANNING AND M&E
Ensure that the project staffing and project capacity development plan reflects M&E, gender,
nutrition and CSA needs. An effective M&E for gender, nutrition and CSA relies on a strong
collaboration between project gender experts, M&E officers, nutrition experts, CSA experts and
other project staff and implementing agencies (IAs). Terms of Reference for the project staff and
project capacity development plan should include M&E, gender, nutrition and CSA.
Link the routine monitoring systems of gender, nutrition and CSA to the planning processes
(work plan and budget). As such, gender, nutrition and CSA activities will be identified in the
project annual/quarterly plans, as if it is not in the plan little progress will materialize in terms of
gender, nutrition, CSA outputs and outcome of the project. In addition, when planning ensure that
the target for the number of beneficiaries of a specific activity is disaggregated by gender.
Monitor progress of gender in CSA through annual plan progress and quarterly/annual
reports. Quarterly/annual reports will also include outputs and outcome results based on an
agreed format, which is gender, nutrition and CSA informed.
Ensure commitment from various Implementing Agencies to report on gender, nutrition and
CSA by supporting continuous sensitizing, trainings and refresher trainings on gender,
nutrition and CSA.
Integrate gender, nutrition, CSA in supervision of activities to review the M&E system. It
should be included in the review of progress, issues and recommendations. Supervision check list
per component could be developed. Based on supervision, provide gender, nutrition, CSA and/or
M&E technical assistance based on issues identified.
Assess if the priorities identified by men and women in the planning phase have been met.
Ensure there is an opportunity for all groups to voice their views.
Conduct qualitative and quantitative evaluations to assess progress and results. Identify
bottlenecks and draw lessons learned for gender, nutrition and CSA. Focus on who has benefited
from the project, quality of women benefits from CSA and nutrition, which barriers may have
arisen to the uptake of CSA or nutrition practices and how men’ and women’s time-use has
changed, etc. Ensure that final evaluation reports’ highlight the findings of the various gender
evaluations, the sex-disaggregated and gender-sensitive indicators, nutrition and CSA evaluations
conducted under the project. Important areas to highlight may include the gender-based division
63
of labour, changes in capacity of men and women as a result of the project, and equitable
distribution of benefits.
Disseminate lessons learned, material and results on gender, nutrition, CSA within the project
and outside stakeholders. The dissemination of lessons learned can be under various formats for
example: women farmers’ nutrition storytelling, case studies on women farmers and CSA
livestock technologies, best practice on CSA extension services innovation impact on men and
women farmers, fliers on nutrition lessons learned, etc.
Important Definitions
Women farmers:it refersto Female Head of Household and married women in Male Headed
Household.
Gender sensitive technologies: are defined as (i) technologies based on needs and interest of
female farmers; (ii) technologies that reduce time and labor for women farmers; and (iii)
technologies that are accessible and affordable by women farmers.
Technologies for nutrition: refer to technologies (i) increasing production and consumption for a
range of diverse nutrient dense food; and (ii) improving post- harvest handling, preservation and
processing to improve availability of good nutritional quality and safe food.
CSA technologiesunder the project refer: to technologies that increase productivity and resilience
(adaptation).
CAPACITY BUILDING FOR M&E
The capacity Development Support Facility (CDSF) financed by DFATD will provide significant
technical support for M&E at all levels and throughout the project in order to (i) improve the
quality of M&E capacity development interventions; and (ii) strengthen the M&E institutional
capacity of Implementation Agencies (IAs). The Development Support Facility will also track its
own set of indicators, which will be included in the M&E manual and be reported on once it is
developed.
64
ANNEX 1: FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION PLANFOR FINANCING SPECIFIC INVESTMENTS
A significant number of AGP2 activities requires a feasibility study or need assessment to decide if the activity should be financed and/or
how it should be financed. Therefore, it is critical to closely track the status of each feasibility study or need assessment on a quarterly basis.
The matrix below will be updated quarterly to track progress.
Definition of feasibility studies/needs assessment different stages: ☐TOR : Terms of reference are finalized.
☐Bidding: The bidding process is on-going (if there is a need for a bid)
☐On-going: The need assessment/feasibility study is on-going.
☐Draft: A draft need assessment/feasibility study has been submitted to PCU and World Bank.
☐Finalized: The need assessment/feasibility study is finalized.
☐Under implementation: The results of need assessment/feasibility study are being used and the activity is implemented based on these results.
Matrix to be updated based on Ibrahim Assessment
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
COMPONENT 1: AGRICULTURAL PUBLIC SUPPORT SERVICES 1. Needs assessment (physical and human)
and detailed implementation plan for
capacity development of extension
services.
Capacity development of extension services
(physical and human).
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
January, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
2. Feasibility and management plan
prerequisitefor establishment of small-
scale modern bee queen rearing
Establishment of small-scale modern bee
queen rearing demonstration and training
centers.
Consultants/PCU/MoA Feasibility and
management plan
finalized by March,
2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
65
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
demonstration and training centers ☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
3. Feasibility and management plan
prerequisite to assist the National
Artificial Insemination Center (NAIC) to
develop a milk performance recording
system in order to allow the identification
of superior dairy sires to be selected for
semen collection and breed improvement
Assist National Artificial Insemination
Center (NAIC) to develop a milk
performance recording system.
Consultants/PCU/MoA Feasibility and
management plan
finalized by March,
2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
4. Feasibility and management plan
prerequisite for the establishment of a fish
hatchery center in the Amhara region.
Establishment of a fish hatchery center in
the Amhara region.
Consultants/PCU/MoA Feasibility and
management plan
finalized by March,
2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
5. Needs assessmentof Animal Health
Services (physical and human (capacity
building and staffing)) and detailed
implementation plan to provide detailed
plans for how facilities and equipment
would be operated, managed and
maintained and, in relation to this, clear
staffing plans, including a commitment of
the public “owner” to provide resources for
staffing, and if necessary a plan for human
capacity development.
1. National & regional laboratories for:
(i) improving poultry disease diagnostic
capacities;
(ii) strengthening the Central Veterinary
Drug and Feed Quality Control Laboratory;
(iii) strengthening the diagnostic and analysis
capacities of the National Tsetse and
Trypanosomiasis Control Institute; and
(iv) strengtheningdiagnostic capacities of the
NAIC to ensure appropriate testing of the
quality of semen according to the
recommendations of the World Organization
of Animal Health.
2. Regional animal health laboratories,
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
66
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
clinics and health posts forthe provision
of essential equipment.
3. Disease surveillance for supporting costs
associated with the disease information
system for major transboundary, zoonotic
diseases would be covered.
4. Human resources and physical capacity
development for:
(i) training of trainers on animal production
and product processing, animal disease
surveillance and health management, animal
health climate adaptation and mitigation
practices, good manufacturing and control
practices of veterinary drugs and animal feed,
machines and equipment maintenance (e.g.,
maintenance of semen and liquid nitrogen
equipment);
(ii) short term trainings, experience sharing
and study tours (abroad), and workshops on
adapting production’s quality to market
requirements;
(iii) production of training manuals and the
production of video film for extension
services.
6. Needs assessmentof Plant Health
Services (physical and human (capacity
building and staffing)) and detailed
implementation plan for how facilities
and equipment would be operated,
managed and maintained and, in relation to
1. Establishment of plant quarantine
stations, plant health clinics and the
supply of critical equipment;
2. Support to the establishment of crop
loss data-base through the provision of
consultancy services for the establishment
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
67
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
this, clear staffing plans, including a
commitment of the public “owner” to
provide resources for staffing, and if
necessary a plan for human capacity
development.
of the data base in the Plant Health
Regulatory Directorate;
3. Purchase of critical laboratory
equipment and supplies for the
establishment of an International
Standard Pesticide Laboratory;
4. Strengthen the Federal Plant Protection
Laboratory and regional plant health
clinics through the provision of the critical
equipment and supplies;
5. Support to the national seeds quality
analysis laboratory through the provision
of the critical equipment and supplies.
7. Needs/Gap assessmentof Soil Fertility
Management (physical and human) and
detailed implementation plan for how
facilities and equipment would be
operated, managed and maintained and, in
relation to this, clear staffing plans,
including a commitment of the public
“owner” to provide resources for staffing,
and if necessary a plan for human capacity
development.
The need assessment might consider:
(i) strengthening Soil Testing Laboratories
(critical equipment and supplies, technical
support, and skill development);
(ii) strengthening soil mapping capacities;
(TA, critical equipment, IT and software,
network); (iii) promoting acid soil
Activities financed based on need assessment
type:
(i) strengthening Soil Testing Laboratories
(critical equipment and supplies, technical
support, and skill development);
(ii) strengthening soil mapping capacities;
(TA, critical equipment, IT and software,
network);
(iii) promoting acid soil management
(promotion of lime production); and
(iv) promotion of bio-fertilizer production
(promotion of rhizobia inoculates).
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
68
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
management (promotion of lime
production); and (iv) promotion of bio-
fertilizer production (promotion of rhizobia
inoculates).
8. Needs assessmentof natural resources
management and soil fertility
management at the community level
(physical and human) and detailed
recommendations for local communities
On the basis of the recommendation of a
needs’ assessment, the project will support
capacity building interventions to local
communities in natural resources management
through different combinations of the
following activities: (a) awareness creation
and training;
(b) provision of field and office equipment
and critical supplies; and
(c) provision of extension services such as
demonstrations, field days, ‘hands-on’
exercises, exposure visits and study tours.
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
COMPONENT 2: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH 9. Needs assessmentof research institutions
(physical and human (capacity building and
staffing)) and detailed implementation
plan for how facilities and equipment
would be operated, managed and
maintained and, in relation to this, clear
staffing plans, including a commitment of
the public “owner” to provide resources for
staffing, and if necessary a plan for human
capacity development.
It would take into account other initiatives
On the basis of the recommendation of a
needs’ assessment, the project could finance:
Physical capacity including, mobility and
machineries such as farm machineries (tillage,
planting,
harvesting),development/rehabilitation of
irrigation facilities (pivot, drip, pump
borehole), and establishing/strengthening of
cold stores.
Critical equipment and facilities for thecrop
protection and quarantine laboratories, the soil
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
69
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
supporting similar activities to avoid overlap.
Possible investment that could be considered
within the needs’ assessment could include for
example:
a) Physical capacity
b) Critical equipment and facilities
c) Human capacity development
analysis laboratory, the agronomy-
physiology/seed laboratory, the post-harvest
and quality laboratories, the animal health and
nutrition laboratory, the biotechnology/tissue
culture laboratory, the Geographic Information
System and remote sensing laboratory, the
establishment of automatic agro-
meteorological stations, and cold stores, green,
net and lath houses.
Human capacity development including
short term trainings for researchers and
technical assistants, workshops and knowledge
sharing activities, trainings of trainers to
strengthen links between research and
extension.
COMPONENT 3: SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION 10. Needs assessment of BoW/Irrigation
Development Authority at regional, zonal
and woreda offices (physical and human)
and detailed implementation plan
On the basis of the needs’ assessment, the
project could finance:
(i) critical equipment such as office
equipment and facilities, field equipment,
vehicles, technical books, etc.;
(ii) preparation, multiplication and
diffusion of technical training materials on
irrigation design and management;
(iii) training, knowledge and skill
development at all levels including
technicians and smallholder farmers;
(iv) experience sharing tours; and
(v) short-term overseas study tours.
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
11. Needs assessment (human Capacity building activities that could be Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment ☐ TOR
70
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
resources/skills gap) in water
management and agronomic practices of
farmers, DAs and SMSs at woreda,
zonal, regional, and federal levels.
considered to be financed under the project
could include:
(i) training of farmers, DAs, and SMSs at
the woreda, zonal, regional, and federal
levels in improved irrigation water
management and agronomic practices;
(ii) training of IWUA committees on
improved methods of managing available
water resources, settle disputes over water,
and keep proper records; and
(iii) practical training and experience
sharing tours to experts and farmers.
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
COMPONENT 4: AGRICULTURE MARKETING AND VALUE CHAINS 12. Detailed study to assess current capacity
of liquid nitrogen production in the
country, needs of liquid nitrogen for
artificial insemination and distribution
capacity.
Rehabilitating of existing liquid nitrogen
machines and/or purchase of new ones for
the semen collection centers located in the
project’s woredas.
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
13. Feasibility/needs assessment of input and
output regulation and certification.
On the basis of the feasibility/need assessment:
(i) development of regulatory guidelines for
agricultural mechanization technology
imports, manufacturing and distribution;
and
(ii) preparation of residue monitoring plan
for honey.
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
14. Needs assessment (human resources) for
input supply to inform the capacity
development activities to be undertaken.
(i) training of regional SMS on improved
crop and forage seed production technology,
and planting material multiplication;
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
71
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
(ii) TA, advisory services and experience
sharing visits for formal farmer’s
organization, involved in seed production and
distribution; and
(iii) training and regional/zonal workshops
on inputs tracking.
March, 2016 ☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
15. Needs assessment for federal, regional,
zonal, and district cooperative promotion
agencies to increase their capacity.
Trainings Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
16. Feasibility study of the establishment of
National Cooperative Federation.
Establishment of NCF, preparation of
bylaws and a business plan for the NCF.
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
17. Needs assessment (physical and human)
of cooperative unions and agricultural
cooperatives support services.
Regular technical and managerial trainings
and experience sharing of board of
directors, union managers, and cooperatives
members.
Preparation of training modules and
materials, workshops and consultative
forum, exchange visits, awareness and
trainings on nutrition and CSA, and regular
trainings on agriculture gender
mainstreaming and leadership to support
inclusion of women in the leadership
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
72
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
position of farmers’ organizations.
18. Feasibility studies and business plans for
regulated primary markets. Design and construction of the selected
markets, preparation of guidelines on the
utilization and management of the market
centers and provision of technical support
such as advisory services and short term
trainings to promote effective use and
management of market centers.
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
19. Detailed analytical work in order to
assess the feasibility of warehouses,
storage and grading facilities as a public
intervention and evaluation of the pilot
to draw lessons learned. This work would
include an evidence-based justification for
public investment (e.g., market failure),
define clear modalities for support under
the project which would not crowd out
private investment; and describe a clearly
stated exit strategy. It would evaluate the
pilot supported under AGP1 to draw
lessons. In addition, proposals would
include a detailed plan for how facilities
and equipment would be operated, managed
and maintained; and in relation to this, a
clear staffing plan needs to be prepared,
including commitment of the public
“owner” to provide resources for staffing,
and if necessary a plan for human capacity
development
Construction and management of
warehouses, storage and grading facilities
Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ TOR
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
20. Diagnostic study of existing market Providing technical support to design, test Consultants/PCU/MoA Needs assessment ☐ TOR
73
FEASIBILITY STUDIES/NEEDS
ASSESMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TO POTENTIALLY FINANCE
WHAT?
RESPONSABILITY TIMEFRAME STAGE
information status, ownership, efficiency
and gaps.
21. Review of capacities and gaps of
institutions that are engaged in collection
and dissemination of market
information.
and implementation of market information
system.
and implementation
plan finalized by
March, 2016
☐ Bidding
☐ On-going
☐ Draft
☐ Finalized
☐ Under
implementation
74
ANNEX 2: REPORTING FORMATS
REPORTING ON ARDPLACs
(To be submitted each quarter to staff responsible for Agriculture Public Services component of
AGP2 and M&E for AGP2 at the Region level and AGP2 Woreda Coordinator)
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Region:……………. Zone:…………… Woreda:………………
Status of ARDPLACs: Formed: ☐ Strengthened: ☐
Number of ARDPLACs meetings:……………..
ARDPLACs institutions composition:………………….
ARDPLACs MEETINGS
Topics/Issues, Achievements/Success and Gender/Nutrition/CSA (to be reported yearly)
1. Most frequent
topics/issues for discussion
during ARDPLACs
meeting in the past year?
(Review agenda for
discussion, 5 most
recurrent topics)
2. State 5 major
achievements / success
(results) of ARDPLACs
contribution (solutions
provided based on
topics/issues discussed)
3. State specific
gender/nutrition/CSA
topics/ discussed during
ARDPLACs meetings in
the past year? If any.
4. State specific gender and
youth achievements
/success (results) of
ARDPLACs contribution
(solutions provided based
on topics/issues discussed)
If any.
5. State 3 major
implementation problems
that affects the proper
functioning of ARDPLAC
(from high to low priority
order)
75
REPORTING FORMAT FOR DEVELOPMENT AGENTS ON FARMING TRAINING CENTER STATUS AND FARMING TRAINING CENTER ACTIVITIES
(To be submitted each quarter to staff responsible for Agriculture Public Services component of
AGP2 and M&E for AGP2 at the Region level and AGP2 Woreda Coordinator)
Do not forget to disaggregate by gender (female refers to Female Head of Household and
married female)
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
FTC Name:…..……………………………..
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele:………………
Name of DAs:………………………………………………………………………………………
Female DA: ☐ Yes ☐ No
Name of SMS supporting DAs:…………………………………………………………………….
FARMER TRAINING CENTERS
FTC need assessment conducted: ☐ Yes ☐ No
FTC level objective: ☐ Basic ☐ Intermediate ☐ Advanced
FTC level achieved so far: ☐ Basic ☐ Intermediate ☐ Advanced
Status of FTC to reach level (tick boxes accordingly):
Basic Intermediate Advanced
☐ At least 3 DAs
☐ Moderately furnished FTC
building
• ☐ Demonstration area of less
than 2.5 ha
• ☐ FTC management
committee
• ☐ Active community
management structure
• ☐ Adequate level of
facilities/equipment in place for
FTC training and demonstrations
• ☐ At least 3 FTC trainings and
demonstrations conducted
• ☐ FTC trainings sufficiently
linked to demonstrations of 2.5 ha
• ☐ FTC training materials,
manuals and guidelines
• ☐ Provide competence based
training
• ☐ Revenue generation from
multiple crop and livestock
enterprises for self-sufficiency
• ☐ Active linkage with
cooperatives, MFIs, research
centers and ATVETs
• ☐ Handle training of level 1,
2 and 3
• ☐ Operational resource
centers (connectivity,
information)
FTC with cooking facility and providing cooking classes: ☐ Yes ☐ No
DEMONSTRATION
76
Improved Technologies at FTC
Total number of improved technology demonstration conducted at FTC: ……..
- Number for crop:…… - Number for livestock:…… - Number for NRM:……
Number of gender sensitive improved technology demonstration conducted at FTC: …….
Number of nutrition improved technology demonstration conducted at FTC: …….
Number of CSA improved technology demonstration conducted at FTC: …….
Number of cooking classes conducted:………
Farmers’ trained on Improved Technologies at FTC
Number of farmers trained at FTCs on improved technologies:……….
- Number for crop:…… - Number for livestock:…… - Number for NRM:……
Number of female farmers trained at FTCs on improved technologies
- Number for crop:…… - Number for livestock:…… - Number for NRM:……
Farmers’trained on plot
Number of farmers trained on farmers plot by DAs or model farmers on improved technologies -
Number for crop:…… - Number for livestock:…… - Number for NRM:……
Number of female farmers trained on farmers plot by DAs or model farmers on improved
technologies - Number for crop:…… - Number for livestock:…… - Number for
NRM:……
Number female farmers trained on gender sensitive improved technologies:……….
Total number farmers trained on CSA improved technologies: …….. Female: ……
Number farmers trained on nutrition improved technologies: …….. Female: ……
Overall (At FTC and on Plot)
Number of improved technologies demonstrated Number for crop:…… - Number for
livestock:…… - Number for NRM:……
Number of gender sensitive technologies demonstrated:……….
Number of CSA technologies demonstrated:……………
Number of nutrition sensitive technologies demonstrated:…………..
Definition: Gender sensitive technologies: are defined as (i) technologies based on needs and interest of female
farmers; (ii) technologies that reduce time and labor for women farmers; and (iii) technologies that are
accessible and affordable by women farmers.
Technologies for nutrition: refer to technologies (i) increasing production and consumption for a range of
diverse nutrient dense food; and (ii) improving post- harvest handling, preservation and processing to
improve availability of good nutritional quality and safe food.
CSA technologies under the project refer: to technologies that increase productivity and resilience
(adaptation).
Not all technologies are gender sensitive or contributing to improved nutrition or climate smart, but it is
still critical to know for the project how many are being promoted through FTCs/DAs and AGP2 . Some
technologies can contribute to both gender and nutrition For the disaggregation in terms of gender,
nutrition and CSA, it is possible to have double counting of some technologies as some technologies might
contribute to both gender and nutrition or gender and CSA. Some technologies won’t fit in any of the
disaggregation.
ADOPTION
Total farmers who have adopted an improved agricultural technology promoted by the
project:……. Female: ……….
77
Total women farmers who have adopted an improved gender sensitive technology promoted by
the project:…….
Total farmers who have adopted an improved technology for nutrition promoted by the
project:……. Female: ……….
Total farmers who have adopted an improved CSA technology promoted by the project:…….
Female: ……….
The term technology includes a change in practices compared to currently used practices or
technologies (seed preparation, planting time, feeding schedule, feeding ingredients, post-harvest,
storage, processing, etc). If one specific technology is demonstrated in more than one location in
the project area, it will count as one technology. If the project introduced or promotes a
technology package in which the benefit depends on the application of the entire package (e.g., a
combination of inputs such as a new variety and advice on agronomic practices such as soil
preparation, changes in seeding time, fertilizer schedule, plant protection, etc) – this will count as
one technology.
This indicator assesses the number of gender sensitive technologies demonstrated by the project.
Demonstrated: Includes advice given or demonstrated by producer organizations, cooperatives,
extension service, etc. Technologies can be demonstrated during field days, at FTCs training, on
farmers’ plot, etc.
Adoption refers to a change of practice or change in use of a technology that was
introduced/promoted by the project
78
REPORTING ON DEMONSTRATIONS OF IMPROVED TECHNOLOGIES AT FARMER TRAINING CENTER OR FARMERS PLOT OR FARMER FIELD DAYS BY
DEVELOPMENT AGENT
Do not forget to disaggregate by gender (female refers to Female Head of Household and
married female)
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
FTC Name:…..……………………………..
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele:………………
Name of DAs:………………………………………………………………………………………
Female DA: ☐ Yes ☐ No
Name of SMS supporting DAs:…………………………………………………………………….
Purpose of Demonstration: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………… (Example of purpose: increase productivity of teff with improved raw planter, introduction of a new crop,
introduction of labor saving technology for women, etc.)
DISSEMINATION TYPE
☐ FTC demonstration ☐ On farmers plot demonstration ☐ Farmer field days
TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY PROMOTED
Type of technology demonstrated (describe):
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Is this a technology gender sensitive? Yes ☐ No ☐
Is this a technology for nutrition? Yes ☐ No ☐
Is this technology climate smart? Yes ☐ No ☐ Gender sensitive technologies: are defined as (i) technologies based on needs and interest of female
farmers; (ii) technologies that reduce time and labor for women farmers; and (iii) technologies that are
accessible and affordable by women farmers.
Technologies for nutrition: refer to technologies (i) increasing production and consumption for a range of
diverse nutrient dense food; and (ii) improving post- harvest handling, preservation and processing to
improve availability of good nutritional quality and safe food.
CSA technologies under the project refer: to technologies that increase productivity and resilience
(adaptation).
79
Not all technologies are gender sensitive or contributing to improved nutrition or climate smart, but it is
still critical to know for the project how many are being promoted through FREGs and AGP2 . Some
technologies can contribute to both gender and nutrition For the disaggregation in terms of gender,
nutrition and CSA, it is possible to have double counting of some technologies as some technologies might
contribute to both gender and nutrition or gender and CSA. Some technologies won’t fit in any of the
disaggregation.
Total number of farmers who have been trained/participated in the improved agricultural
technology demonstration: ………….. Number of female farmers: …………
Total number of farmers who have adopted the improved agricultural technology demonstrated:
………….. Number of female farmers: …………
80
REPORTING FORMAT FOR QUEEN REARING CENTERS
ANIMAL PRODUCTION AND FEED RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORATE
Do not forget to disaggregate by gender (female refers to Female Head of Household and
married female)
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period:……………….
Queen Rearing Center Name:…..……………………………..
Region:…………….
Name of Officer:……………………
Female: ☐ Yes ☐ No
TRAINING CENTER
Status: ☐ Constructed ☐ Equipped ☐ Functional
Comments:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
TRAININGS
Number of farmers trained in modern queen rearing:…….. Female: …….
Number of modern queen rearing trainings conducted at training centers:……….
Type of trainings conducted:
- …………………………..
- …………………………..
- …………………………..
- …………………………..
- …………………………..
- …………………………..
81
REPORTING FORMAT FOR FISH HATCHERY CENTER AMHARA REGION
ANIMAL PRODUCTION AND FEED RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORATE
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Name of Officer:……………………
Female: ☐ Yes ☐ No
FISH HATCHERY CENTER
Status: ☐ Constructed ☐ Equipped and Stocked ☐ Fully Functional
Comments:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Volume of fingerlings harvested: …………………
Volume of fingerlings harvested and distributed for pond fish farmers: …………………
82
REPORTING FORMAT FOR HERD PERFORMANCE RECORDING AND ELECTRONIC DATA MANAGEMENT AT SEMEN PRODUCTION CENTER
NATIONAL ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION CENTER
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Name of Officer:……………………
Female: ☐ Yes ☐ No
Number of staff trained on dairy herd performance recording: …………. Female: ………..
Number of dairy farms with a functional dairy herd performance recording: ……
☐ Oromiya ☐ Tigray ☐ Amhara ☐ SNNP
Number of functional electronic data management system at semen production centers: ……
☐ Kaliti ☐ Nekemte ☐ Bahirdar ☐ Mekele ☐ Hawassa
83
REPORTING FORMAT FOR ANIMAL HEALTH CLINICS
ANIMAL HEALTH WORKER
Do not forget to disaggregate by gender (female refers to Female Head of Household and
married female)
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Animal Health Clinic Name:…..……………………………..
Region:……………. Woreda:………………
Name of animal health workers:…………………………………………………………………
Female: ☐ Yes ☐ No
ANIMAL HEALTH CENTER
Animal health clinic need assessment conducted: ☐ Yes ☐ No
Animal health clinic fully functional: ☐ Yes ☐ No
☐ Staff trained ☐ Equipment ☐ Drugs availability
☐ Vaccine availability with cold storage
ANIMAL HEALTH CENTER
Number of animal death for cow/bull:………
Number of animal death for sheep:………
Number of animal death for goat:………
Number of animal death for chicken:………
Number of disease outbreak:………….
Type of disease outbreak:………….
Number of farmers’ visits at the animal health clinic:………
Number of women farmers’ visits at the animal health clinics: …….
Number of animal treated at animal health clinics (other than vaccination): ………
Number of cow/bull:………..Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: …………….. Number
of chicken: ………..
Purpose of visit: ……….
VACCINATION
1) Type of vaccination: ………….
84
Number of animal vaccinated:
Number of cow/bull:……….. Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: ……………..
2) Type of vaccination: ………….
Number of animal vaccinated:
Number of cow/bull:……….. Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: ……………..
3) Type of vaccination: ………….
Number of animal vaccinated:
Number of cow/bull:……….. Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: ……………..
4) Type of vaccination: ………….
Number of animal vaccinated:
Number of cow/bull:……….. Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: ……………..
DISEASE OUTBREAK
1) Type of disease outbreak: ………….
Number of outbreak
2) Type of disease outbreak: ………….
Number of outbreak
3) Type of disease outbreak: ………….
Number of outbreak
4) Type of disease outbreak: ………….
Number of outbreak
TRAININGS
1) Type of training: ………….
Number of female farmers trained:
Number of male farmers trained:
2) Type of training: ………….
Number of female farmers trained:
Number of male farmers trained:
3) Type of training: ………….
Number of female farmers trained:
Number of male farmers trained:
85
REPORTING FORMAT FOR ANIMAL HEALTH POSTS
ANIMAL HEALTH WORKER
Do not forget to disaggregate by gender (female refers to Female Head of Household and
married female)
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Animal Health Clinic Name:…..……………………………..
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele: ………………
Name of animal health workers:…………………………………………………………………
Female: ☐ Yes ☐ No
ANIMAL HEALTH POST
Animal health post need assessment conducted: ☐ Yes ☐ No
Animal health post fully functional: ☐ Yes ☐ No
☐ Staff trained ☐ Equipment ☐ Drugs availability
☐ Vaccine availability with cold storage
ANIMAL HEALTH POST VISITS AND TREATMENT
Number of farmers’ visits at the animal health clinic:………
Number of women farmers’ visits at the animal health clinics: …….
Number of animal treated at animal health clinics (other than vaccination): ………
Number of cow/bull:………..Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: …………….. Number
of chicken: ………..
Type of treatments: ……………..
VACCINATION
1) Type of vaccination: ………….
Number of animal vaccinated:
Number of cow/bull:……….. Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: ……………..
2) Type of vaccination: ………….
Number of animal vaccinated:
Number of cow/bull:……….. Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: ……………..
3) Type of vaccination: ………….
86
Number of animal vaccinated:
Number of cow/bull:……….. Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: ……………..
4) Type of vaccination: ………….
Number of animal vaccinated:
Number of cow/bull:……….. Number of sheep:……….. Number of goat: ……………..
DISEASE OUTBREAK
1) Type of disease outbreak: ………….
Number of outbreak
2) Type of disease outbreak: ………….
Number of outbreak
3) Type of disease outbreak: ………….
Number of outbreak:
4) Type of disease outbreak: ………….
Number of outbreak:
TRAININGS
1) Type of training: ………….
Number of female farmers trained:
Number of male farmers trained:
2) Type of training: ………….
Number of female farmers trained:…..
Number of male farmers trained:
3) Type of training: ………….
Number of female farmers trained:
Number of male farmers trained:
87
REPORTING FORMAT FOR ANIMAL HEALTH LABORATORIES
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Animal Health Laboratories Name:…..……………………………..
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele: ………………
Name of laboratory worker:…………………………………………………………………
ANIMAL HEALTH LABORATORIES
Animal health post need assessment conducted: ☐ Yes ☐ No
Animal health post fully functional (conducting diagnostic, quality control, etc.): ☐ Yes ☐ No
☐ Staff trained ☐ Equipment required available ☐ O&M for maintenance and
equipment allocated
88
REPORTING FORMAT FOR VEGETABLES AND TREE NURSERIES
DEVELOPMENT AGENTS/FARMERS
Do not forget to disaggregate by gender (female refers to Female Head of Household and
married female)
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
FTC Name:…..……………………………..
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele:………………
Name of DAs:………………………………………………………………………………………
Female DA: ☐ Yes ☐ No
Name of SMS supporting DAs:…………………………………………………………………….
NURSERY MEMBERS
(will be updated regularly to take into account drop out or new members joining the group)
Number members:…….. Female:………….
Number members trained:…….. Female:………….
SEEDLINGS
Number of seedling planted:…..
Number of vegetables seedlings produced :…..
Number of tree seedlings produced:……
Number of vegetables seedlings produced :…..
Number of tree seedlings produced:……
Number of vegetables seedlings sold :…..
Number of tree seedlings sold:……
Total revenue from the overall sale:……
89
REPORTING ON BEST PRACTICES
MOA TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT
Do not forget to disaggregate by gender (female refers to Female Head of Household and
married female)
Reporting period: ………………………
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele:………………
Name :………………………………………………………………………………………
Female: ☐ Yes ☐ No
MoA Department in Charge:…………………………………………………………………….
Purpose of best practice: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………… (Example of purpose: increase productivity of a specific crop, improve post-harvest losses, introduction of
labor saving technology for women, etc.)
TYPE OF BEST PRACTICE PROMOTED
Type of best practice implemented (describe):
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Is this a technology gender sensitive? Yes ☐ No ☐
Is this a technology for nutrition? Yes ☐ No ☐
Is this technology climate smart? Yes ☐ No ☐ Gender sensitive technologies: are defined as (i) technologies based on needs and interest of female
farmers; (ii) technologies that reduce time and labor for women farmers; and (iii) technologies that are
accessible and affordable by women farmers.
Technologies for nutrition: refer to technologies (i) increasing production and consumption for a range of
diverse nutrient dense food; and (ii) improving post- harvest handling, preservation and processing to
improve availability of good nutritional quality and safe food.
CSA technologies under the project refer: to technologies that increase productivity and resilience
(adaptation).
Not all technologies are gender sensitive or contributing to improved nutrition or climate smart, but it is
still critical to know for the project how many are being promoted through FREGs and AGP2 . Some
technologies can contribute to both gender and nutrition For the disaggregation in terms of gender,
nutrition and CSA, it is possible to have double counting of some technologies as some technologies might
contribute to both gender and nutrition or gender and CSA. Some technologies won’t fit in any of the
disaggregation.
ADOPTION OF BEST PRACTICE
Number of farmers adopting this best practice:………….. Female:……….
90
REPORTING ON SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION INFRASTRUCTURE
Do not forget to disaggregate by gender (female refers to Female Head of Household and married female)
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele:………………
Site Name: ................................... Scheme number: ……..
GPS for head work Easting (UMT): …………………… Northing (UMT):…………
Name of irrigation specialist:………………………………………………………………………
Name of DAs:………………………………………………………………………………………
Name of SMS supporting DAs:…………………………………………………………………….
Type of water source: …………………
Water abstraction means/method: …………………….
Type of irrigation: ☐ small-scale irrigation ☐ micro-irrigation ☐ household irrigation
☐ rehabilitation /improved ☐ new scheme
Irrigation work including: ☐ drinking water ☐ livestock drinking water ☐ washing basin
CA (ha):…………….. GCA (ha):………………. NCA (ha):………………
Date the construction started:……………. Date construction ended:………………….
Engineering estimate (million Birr):……… Contract amount (million Birr):…….. Final project construction cost (million Birr):………
91
Irrigation infrastructure status: ☐ feasibility studies on-going ☐ feasibility studies finalized ☐ construction on-going
☐ construction finalized ☐ infrastructure operational (including drinking water when applicable)
Total number of direct beneficiaries from irrigation infrastructure: ……….. Female:……….
(be careful not household but beneficiaries)
Total number of direct beneficiaries from drinking water infrastructure through irrigation infrastructure (if applicable): ………. Female:……….
(be careful not household but beneficiaries)
SSI IMPLEMENTATION STATUS (Site preparation and construction)
(Ticking the box identify the activity/process as being fully completed)
S. No Description of activities Status Dates when applicable/Remark/Comments
Planning and Project Preparation Phase
1 Conception stage completed ☐
Promotional Conference conducted ☐
IWUC Established and trained ☐
MOU signed among stakeholders ☐
Modality selected (FA or outsource) ☐
2 Identification completed ☐
3 Study and design started ☐
3.1 Study and design started FA ☐
3.2 Study and design started – consultant ☐
Bid document prepared ☐
Bid advertised ☐
Consultant selected and contract awarded ☐
Modality of supervision selected ☐
Supervisor assigned ☐
Contract signed ☐
Study and design started ☐
92
4 Study and design completed ☐
FA ☐
consultant ☐
Implementation Phase ☐
5 Construction work ☐
5.1 Tender document prepared ☐
5.2 Bid advertized ☐
5.3 Bid evaluation completed ☐
5.4 Contract Agreement signed ☐
5.5 Site Reconnaissance surveys made by Supervising
Consultant/Engineer ☐
5.5 Site handing-over/certificate of site possession completed ☐
5.6 Camping and mobilization completed ☐
5.7 Construction status
<25% ☐
26-50% ☐
51-75% ☐
76-99% ☐
Construction completed ☐
Completion Phase ☐
6 Commissioning and Handing-over ☐
6.1 As-built O&M Manual prepared ☐
6.2 As-built drawing prepared ☐
6.3 Commissioning completed ☐
6.4 Handing over completed ☐
6.5 O&M started ☐
Operation and Maintenance Phase ☐
7 Sustainability follow up ☐
O&M Plan prepared ☐
Inspection conducted ☐
93
O&M fund collected ☐
Performance assessment conducted ☐
8 IWUA ☐
8.1 IWUA established ☐
8.2 IWUA Formed/Legally registered ☐
8.3 Training and experience sharing to IWUA ☐
WATER HARVESTING AND MICRO-IRRIGATION IMPLEMENTATION STATUS
(Ticking the box identify the activity/process as being fully completed)
S. No Type of schemes on-going Status Dates when applicable/Remark/Comments
Community ponds (CP) ☐
Community Shallow Hand Dug Wells (CSHDW) ☐
Community Shallow Tube Wells (CSTW) ☐
Check Dams (CD) ☐
Mobile Pump Irrigation Projects (MPIPs) ☐
Type of schemes finalized
Community ponds (CP) ☐
Community Shallow Hand Dug Wells (CSHDW) ☐
Community Shallow Tube Wells (CSTW) ☐
Check Dams (CD) ☐
Mobile Pump Irrigation Projects (MPIPs) ☐
Type of schemes functional
Community ponds (CP) ☐
Community Shallow Hand Dug Wells (CSHDW) ☐
Community Shallow Tube Wells (CSTW) ☐
Check Dams (CD) ☐
Mobile Pump Irrigation Projects (MPIPs) ☐
94
REPORTING ON WATER USERS ASSOCIATION
Do not forget to disaggregate by gender (female refers to Female Head of Household and married female)
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele:………………
Site Name: ................................... Scheme number: ……..
GPS for head work Easting (UMT): …………………… Northing (UMT):…………
Name of irrigation specialist:………………………………………………………………………
Name of DAs:………………………………………………………………………………………
Name of SMS supporting DAs:…………………………………………………………………….
Type of irrigation: ☐ small-scale irrigation ☐ micro-irrigation ☐ household irrigation
☐ rehabilitation /improved ☐ new scheme
Irrigation work including: ☐ drinking water ☐ livestock drinking water ☐ washing basin
CA (ha):…………….. GCA (ha):………………. NCA (ha):………………
Date the construction started:……………. Date construction ended:………………….
New Irrigation Water Users Association: ☐ Yes ☐ No
Total IWUA members:……… Female:………
(be careful not household but beneficiaries)
95
Total IWUA management committee members: …….. Female (50% of women if there are women beneficiaries of the scheme):……..
(be careful not household but beneficiaries)
No Description Status Dates when Applicable/Remark/Comments
1 Formation of Irrigation Water Users
Association (IWUA)
1.1 Establishment of New IWUA
Registered with supervising body (to be designated by each national regional states)
☐
By laws developed (rules for consumption of irrigation water and collect fees)
☐
2 Training of Irrigation Water Users
Association (IWUA)
☐
2.1 Training of IWUA Committee members on (dispute resolution, maintenance of infrastructure, book keeping, financial management, leadership assertiveness, negotiation specifically targeted at female members etc.)
☐ Total number of participants:………. Female:……..
2.2 Training on irrigation water management,
new irrigation technologies, and irrigation
farming methods to IWUA committee
members
☐
Total number of participants:………. Female:……..
2.3 Exposure visit to IWUAs ☐
Total number of participants:………. Female:……..
2.4 Training on irrigated agriculture to
beneficiaries
☐
Total number of participants:………. Female:……..
2.5 Orientation forum to Community and its
representatives
☐
Total number of participants:………. Female:……..
3 Community Contribution mobilized ☐
3.1 In kind (local material) ☐ Million Birr:
96
3.2 In labor ☐ Million Birr:
3.3 In cash ☐ Million Birr:
3.3.
1
Open IWUA Bank Account for contribution
(separate from IWUA main account)
☐
4. Functioning of Schemes ☐ User Fees collected ☐ Effective maintenance and operation of the
irrigation and drainage system conducted ☐
Specific scheduling of water delivery developed
☐
Water to farmers plots delivered in the right quantity and at an appropriate time
☐
Additional use of the water (drinking, washing, cattle trough) anticipated
☐
97
REPORTING ON COMMUNITY WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele:………………
Site Name: ................................... Scheme number: ……..
GPS for head work Easting (UMT): …………………… Northing (UMT):…………
Name of irrigation specialist:………………………………………………………………………
Name of DAs:………………………………………………………………………………………
Name of SMS supporting DAs:…………………………………………………………………….
98
No Description Unit Size On-
going
Dates when
Applicable/Remark/Comments
Finalized Dates when
Applicable/Remark/Comments
1 Community watersheds supported ☐ ☐
1.1 # of AGP supported watersheds # ☐ ☐
1.2 Area of watersheds Ha ☐ ☐
2 Implementation of Community
Watershed Development
☐ ☐
2.1 Farm Land Development within
the micro-watersheds
Ha ☐ ☐
Stone bund construction Ha ☐ ☐
Soil bund construction Ha ☐ ☐
Fanyajuu bund construction Ha ☐ ☐
Stone faced soil bund construction Ha ☐ ☐
Bund stabilization with vegetation KM ☐ ☐
Homestead plantation Million ☐ ☐
2.2 Communal land development
within the watershed
Ha ☐ ☐
2.2.1 Terracing and Drainage ☐ ☐
Hillside terracing Ha/KM ☐ ☐
Hillside terrace with trench Ha/KM ☐ ☐
Bench terrace Ha/KM ☐ ☐
Cut-off drains construction KM/M3 ☐ ☐
Artificial Water ways construction KM/M3 ☐ ☐
2.2.2 Gully Treatment ☐ ☐
Stone Check dam construction M3 ☐ ☐
Gabion check dam M3 ☐ ☐
Gully Reshaping and filling M3 ☐ ☐
Gully Re-vegetation Ha ☐ ☐
2.2.3 Moisture Harvesting ☐ ☐
Trenches # ☐ ☐
Percolation pond # ☐ ☐
Percolation pits, Half moon, Herring
bone and eye brow basin
# ☐ ☐
2.2.4 Participatory Forest Management
and Plantation of Multipurpose
Trees
☐
99
Area closure Ha ☐ ☐
Collection and Supply of
multipurpose seed(tree, forage, grass)
for nursery
Quintal ☐ ☐
Community nursery establishment # ☐ ☐
Multipurpose trees Seedlings
production Million ☐ ☐
Plantation pit/site preparation Million/
Ha
☐ ☐
Plantation of multipurpose trees Million/
Ha
☐ ☐
Participatory forest management Ha ☐ ☐
100
REPORTING ON ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele:………………
Site Name: ................................... Length of the road Km:…….. Linking to:………….
GPS for head work Easting (UMT): …………………… Northing (UMT):…………
Name of infrastructure specialist:………………………………………………………………………
Name of DAs:………………………………………………………………………………………
Name of SMS supporting DAs:…………………………………………………………………….
Date the construction started:……………. Date construction ended:………………….
Engineering estimate (million Birr):……… Final project construction cost (million Birr):………
Infrastructure status: ☐ feasibility studies on-going ☐ feasibility studies finalized ☐ construction on-going
☐ construction finalized ☐ infrastructure operational
Total number of HH beneficiaries from road infrastructure: ……….. Female Head of Household:……….
FEEDER ROAD IMPLEMENTATION STATUS (Site preparation and construction)
(Ticking the box identify the activity/process as being fully completed)
S. No Description of activities Status Dates when Applicable/Remark/Comments
Planning and Project Preparation Phase
1 Conception stage completed ☐
101
Consultation with communities conducted ☐
RRMC Established and trained ☐
Modality selected (FA or outsource) ☐
2 Identification completed ☐
3 Study and design started ☐
3.1 Study and design started FA ☐
3.2 Study and design started – consultant ☐
Bid document prepared ☐
Bid advertised ☐
Consultant selected and contract awarded ☐
Modality of supervision selected ☐
Supervisor assigned ☐
Contract signed ☐
Study and design started ☐
4 Study and design completed ☐
FA ☐
consultant ☐
Implementation Phase ☐
5 Construction work ☐
5.1 Tender document prepared ☐
5.2 Bid advertized ☐
5.3 Bid evaluation completed ☐
5.4 Contract Agreement signed ☐
5.5 Site Reconnaissance surveys made by Supervising
Consultant/Engineer ☐
5.5 Site handing-over/certificate of site possession completed ☐
5.6 Camping and mobilization completed ☐
5.7 Construction status
<25% ☐
26-50% ☐
51-75% ☐
102
76-99% ☐
Construction completed ☐
Completion Phase ☐
6 Commissioning and Handing-over ☐
6.1 As-built O&M Manual prepared ☐
6.2 As-built drawing prepared ☐
6.3 Commissioning completed ☐
6.4 Handing over completed ☐
6.5 O&M started ☐
Operation and Maintenance Phase ☐
7 Sustainability follow up ☐
O&M Plan prepared ☐
Inspection conducted ☐
O&M fund collected ☐
Performance assessment conducted ☐
8 RRMC ☐
8.1 RRMC established ☐
8.2 RRMC Formed/Legally registered ☐
8.3 Training and experience sharing to RRMC ☐
103
REPORTING ON MARKET INFRASTRUCTURE
BASIC INFORMATION
Reporting period: ………………………
Region:……………. Woreda:………………
Site Name: ................................... Market Center Size:…….. Size of Warehouse (m2, Qt):………….
GPS for head work Easting (UMT): …………………… Northing (UMT):…………
Infrastructure will include: ☐ Latrine/Water ☐ Storage for women
Name of infrastructure specialist:………………………………………………………………………
Date the construction started:……………. Date construction ended:………………….
Engineering estimate (million Birr):……… Contract amount (million Birr):…….. Final project construction cost (million
Birr):………
Infrastructure status: ☐ feasibility studies on-going ☐ feasibility studies finalized ☐ construction on-going
☐ construction finalized ☐ infrastructure operational
Total number of beneficiaries from market infrastructure: ……….. Female:……….
(be careful not household but beneficiaries)
104
MARKET IMPLEMENTATION STATUS (Site preparation and construction)
(Ticking the box identify the activity/process as being fully completed)
S. No Description of activities Status Dates when applicable/Remark/Comments
Planning and Project Preparation Phase ☐
1 Conception stage ☐
Community consultation conducted ☐
MC established and trained ☐
2 Identification completed ☐
3 Site/land use plan and design started ☐
3.1 Site/land use plan prepared ☐
3.2 Structural design started ☐
3.3 Structural design completed ☐
Implementation Phase ☐
5 Construction work ☐
5.1 Tender document prepared ☐
5.2 Bid advertized ☐
5.3 Bid evaluation completed ☐
5.4 Contractor selected and contract awarded ☐
5.5 Site Reconnaissance surveys made by Supervising
Consultant/Engineer ☐
5.5 Site handing-over/certificate of site possession
completed ☐
5.6 Camping and mobilization completed ☐
5.7 Construction status ☐
<25% ☐
26-50% ☐
51-75% ☐
105
S. No Description of activities Status Dates when applicable/Remark/Comments
76-100% ☐
Construction completed ☐
Completion Phase ☐
6 Commissioning and Handing-over ☐
6.1 As-built O&M Manual prepared ☐
6.2 As-built drawing prepared ☐
6.3 Commissioning completed ☐
6.4 Handing over completed ☐
6.5 O&M started ☐
Operation and Maintenance Phase ☐
7 Sustainability follow up ☐
O&M Plan prepared ☐
Inspection conducted ☐
O&M fund collected ☐
Performance assessment conducted ☐
8 MCMC ☐
8.1 MCMC Formed/Established ☐
8.2 Training and experience sharing to MCMC ☐
106
ANNEX 3: QUARTERLY/ANNUAL REPORTS FORMAT
Woreda Report (To be developed by PCU)
Region and Federal Report (To be developed by PCU)
107
ANNEX 4: FEDERAL AND REGIONAL M&E OFFICER TERMS OF REFERENCE
FEDERAL M&E OFFICER
The M&E Officers would be responsible for coordinating all Monitoring, Evaluation and
Learning activities conducted as part of the Agricultural Growth Project 2. This includes
overseeing data collection, analysis, and reporting on the implementation and progress of AGP.
He/she would provide feedback and advice to the Project Coordinator/Component
Leaders/Implementers on the effectiveness of project implementation and steps needed to achieve
anticipated project outputs and outcomes. He/she would provide technical backstopping to project
staff within the PCU and the regions on ME&L requirements, including capacity development
and knowledge dissemination and learning at various levels.
Specific Terms of Reference
Coordinate the creation and review of M&E system documentation.
Draft TOR for evaluations and studies (need based and in collaboration with component
leaders and other partners (World Bank and CIDA).
Manage and supervise the ME&L staff.
Manage the M&E system (i.e., provide technical oversight).
Coordinate M&E plan costing and annual review.
Play a key role in coordinating the planning, implementation and dissemination of
findings of M&E system.
Develop and oversee M&E capacity building plan, accompanying activities, and play a
key role in mobilizing resources and coordinating with the Capacity Building Facility
M&E Officer and other partners.
Coordinate and act on supervision and data auditing report results.
Prepare quarterly and annual Progress reports in collaboration with component leaders
and share to the relevant stakeholders
Oversee all data dissemination and feedback processes to all levels (EIAR, IAs, Woreda
Coordinator, Region AGP2 CU, etc.).
Monitor the status and progress of project implementation based on the different
reporting formats, various reports, relevant Results Framework indicator, results chain
and evaluations.
Assess the adequacy of the proposed project inputs, activities, and outputs in delivering
desired project objectives/outcomes.
Liaise with and agree with stakeholders in each sub-component, within each region the
respective reporting, monitoring and data collection needs and obligations.
Update as required data collection and reporting formats in collaboration with project
counterparts at the different levels, and provide training to required staff on their use.
Analyze data, information and reports from different levels and assess the status of
selected indicators and provide feedback to project management and project counterparts
at the different levels on the progress of implementation and of any need to modify
schedules, strategies and objectives.
Take responsibility for other M&E related tasks assigned by the Project Coordinator.
108
Ensure the collaboration and support to M&E activities from all members of project
coordination unit members.
Capacity development of staff on M&E (not limited to M&E Officers)
Organize and facilitate supervision missions
Qualifications
The M&E Specialist will have an academic background in agronomy, agricultural research,
agricultural economics, project management or closely related fields, with specialized training in
monitoring and evaluation. Minimum requirements would be an MSc with 8 years experience, or
a B.Sc. with 12 years experience, of which at least 5 years should be spent on monitoring and
evaluation of projects/ programs. Familiarity with results-based Monitoring Evaluation and
Learning and advanced ICT knowledge are essential.
Reporting The M&E Officer will report to the AGP Coordinator.
109
REGIONAL M&E OFFICER
The M&E Officers would be responsible for coordinating all Monitoring, Evaluation and
Learning activities conducted as part of the Agricultural Growth Project 2. This includes
overseeing data collection, analysis, and reporting on the implementation and progress of AGP.
He/she would provide feedback and advice to the Project Coordinator/Component
Leaders/Implementers on the effectiveness of project implementation and steps needed to achieve
anticipated project outputs and outcomes. He/she would provide technical backstopping to project
staff within the PCU and the woreda on ME&L requirements, including capacity development
and knowledge dissemination and learning at various levels.
Specific Terms of Reference
Contribute to the review of M&E system documentation.
Manage the M&E system (i.e., provide technical oversight).
Coordinate M&E plan costing and annual review.
Play a key role in coordinating the planning, implementation and dissemination of
findings of M&E system.
Develop and oversee M&E capacity building plan, accompanying activities, and play a
key role in mobilizing resources and coordinating with the Capacity Building Facility
M&E Officer and other partners.
Coordinate and act on supervision and data auditing report results.
Prepare quarterly and annual Progress reports in collaboration with component leaders
and share to the relevant stakeholders
Oversee all data dissemination and feedback processes to all levels (IAs, Woreda
Coordinator, Region AGP2 CU, etc.).
Monitor the status and progress of project implementation based on the different
reporting formats, various reports, relevant Results Framework indicator, results chain
and evaluations.
Assess the adequacy of the proposed project inputs, activities, and outputs in delivering
desired project objectives/outcomes.
Liaise with and agree with stakeholders in each sub-component, within each region the
respective reporting, monitoring and data collection needs and obligations.
Update as required data collection and reporting formats in collaboration with project
counterparts at the different levels, and provide training to required staff on their use.
Analyze data, information and reports from different levels and assess the status of
selected indicators and provide feedback to project management and project counterparts
at the different levels on the progress of implementation and of any need to modify
schedules, strategies and objectives.
Take responsibility for other M&E related tasks assigned by the Project Coordinator.
Ensure the collaboration and support to M&E activities from all members of project
coordination unit members.
Capacity development of staff on M&E (IAs, woreda coordinators, component leaders,
etc.)
Organize and facilitate supervision missions
110
Qualifications
The M&E Specialist will have an academic background in agronomy, agricultural research,
agricultural economics, project management or closely related fields, with specialized training in
monitoring and evaluation. Minimum requirements would be an MSc with 8 years experience, or
a B.Sc. with 12 years experience, of which at least 5 years should be spent on monitoring and
evaluation of projects/ programs. Familiarity with results-based Monitoring Evaluation and
Learning and advanced ICT knowledge are essential.
Reporting The M&E Officer will report to the AGP Coordinator.
111
ANNEX 5: SELECTED INDICATORS TO TRACK PROGRESS MATRIX
THIS MATRIX WILL APPEAR IN ALL REPORTS (QUARTERLY AND ANNUAL) Federal and Region.
This matrix will be developed by PCU once all indicators have been reviewed and agreed upon.
112
ANNEX 6: RESULTS FRAMEWORK
The results framework and its targets will be updated once the full fledge baseline has been collected.
113
Annex 7: FREGs PARTICIPATORY M&E AND LEARNING
Farmers Research Extension Groups (FREGs) are designed to make agricultural research and
extension client-oriented. It thereby develops informal, collaborative relationships and
partnership, which will enhance the impact of research and extension activities. FREGs activities
include: (i) undertaking situation analysis and identification of needs; (ii) selection of FREG
member farmers; (iii) selection of FREG leader/management committee members; (iv) activity
planning; (v) implementation of planned activities; (vi) capacity building; (vii) participatory
monitoring & evaluation; and (viii) sharing experiences with other FREGs and farmers.
It is critical to strengthen learning within FREGs but also learning linkages between FREGs
members (male and female) and none-FREGs members (male and female) within the kebele and
woreda. FREGs self-monitoring and evaluation, learning and information dissemination provides
opportunities for internal learning at FREGs and learning within Kebele and Woreda. FREGs’
participatory M&E strengthens members understanding of their own progress and increases their
empowerment. Learning is also about developing awareness and interest from none-FREGs
members for FREGs. Community learning fora will contribute to disseminate FREGs knowledge
to community members. FREGs will be a learning site, where community members can observe
and ask questions to FREGs members. Strong facilitation will be critical for higher probability of
FREGs’ innovations to be adopted by none-FREGs members.
FREGs Participatory M&E and Learning Activities and Responsibilities
EIAR Staff Responsibilities Conduct training of DAs and RRCUs staff on participatory M&E, use of reporting formats and facilitation skills for learning activities. Review FREGs progress quarterly and provide support if needed to RRCUs staff and DAs Conduct field supervision of FREGs progress and conduct data auditing Identify with RRCUs staff FREGs considered as best practices Document and disseminate FREGs best practices
RRCUs’ Staff Supporting FREGs Steps in FREGs Cycle Responsibilities
FREGs formation and identification of FREGs members
Support with DAs, the establishment of M&E Committee for each established FREG (3 FREG members among which at least one is a woman) responsible for regular reporting on FREG progress/issues/impact
Training of FREGs members
Conduct with DAs, training of FREGs M&E Committee members on reporting formats for participatory M&E and learning
During Implementation of FREGs
Conduct with DAs supportive supervision of FREGs regarding participatory M&E (assess participatory M&E, retrain if needed (learning by doing), etc.) Report quarterly with DAs on FREGs indicators/progress/activities/issues to woreda coordinator and RRCCU. Organize with DAs, FREGs field visits for none FREGs members and facilitate discussions/learning at FREGs site between FREGs members and FREGs none members. Paying particular attention to women
114
participating, making sure they benefit equally from these activities. FREGs become learning sites, where community members can observe and ask questions to FREGs members. Ensure that FREGs progress/issues/impact/lessons learned are displayed at FTCs level on a display board for FREGs members and none FREGs members to see and learn from. Organize with DAs FREGs knowledge exchange across woreda (if relevant). FREGs can visit other FREGs (field visit) with similar activities and can also conduct an evaluation of other FREGs.
During Kebele Learning Fora (usually organized yearly for overall AGP2 activities)
Develop awareness and interest with DAs by organizing discussion between none-FREG members and FREG members/DAs/Research Support DAs to plan and agree on time of FREGs site visit by none FREGs members Share FREGs progress/issues/impact/lessons learned
At FREGs completion Support DAs to identify lessons learned and display lessons learned at FTCs and share lessons during kebele learning for a. Lessons learned can be about the technology introduced, how issues were solved, how FREGs were tailored to women needs and capacity to implement activities, etc. Collect lessons learned with DAs and share with woreda coordinator, WoA, other RRCCUs and EIAR
DAs’ Supporting FREGs Steps in FREGs Cycle Responsibilities
FREGs formation and identification of FREGs members
Support with RRCU’s staff, the establishment of M&E Committee for each established FREG (3 FREG members among which at least one is a woman) responsible for regular reporting on FREG progress/issues/impact
Training of FREGs members
Conduct with RRCU’s staff, training of FREGs M&E Committee members on reporting formats for participatory M&E and learning
During Implementation of FREGs
Conduct with RRCU’s staff supportive supervision of FREGs regarding participatory M&E (assess participatory M&E, retrain if needed (learning by doing), etc.) Report with RRCU’s staff on FREGs indicators/progress/activities/issues to woreda coordinator and RRCCU. Organize with RRCU’s staff , FREGs field visits for none FREGs members and facilitate discussions/learning at FREGs site between FREGs members and FREGs none members. Paying particular attention to women participating, making sure they benefit equally from these activities. FREGs become learning sites, where community members can observe and ask questions to FREGs members. Display FREGs progress/issues/impact/lessons learned at FTCs level on a display board for FREGs members and none FREGs members to see and learn from Organize with RRCU’s staff FREGs field visits for none FREGs members and facilitate discussions/learning at FREGs site between FREGs members and FREGs none members. Paying particular attention to women participating, making sure they benefit equally from these activities. FREGs become learning sites, where community members can observe and ask questions to FREGs members. Organize with RRCU’s staff FREGs knowledge exchange across woreda (if relevant). FREGs can visit other FREGs (field visit) with similar
115
REPORTING FOR FREGs RESPONSIBILITY OF DA and RESEARCH STAFF SUPPORTING FREG
(To be submitted each quarter to staff responsible for M&E for the Regional Research Center
concerned and AGP2 Woreda Coordinator)
BASIC INFORMATION
FREG Name:…..……………………………..
Region:……………. Woreda:……………… Kebele:………………
Purpose of FREG: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………… (Example of purpose: increase productivity of a specific crop, introduction of a new crop, etc.)
Name of FREG Supervisor from Research:…………………………………………………………
Research Center:…………………………………………………………………………………….
Name of FREG Supervisor DA:…………………………………………………………………….
Total FREG members: Total men: Total women: Women farmers/FREG members refer to Female Head of Household and married women in Male Headed
Household.
Is it a women only FREG? Yes ☐ No ☐
Is it a mixed FREG? Yes ☐ No ☐
Is it a male FREG? Yes ☐ No ☐
TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY PROMOTED
Type of technology demonstrated (describe):
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Is this a technology gender sensitive? Yes ☐ No ☐
Is this a technology for nutrition? Yes ☐ No ☐
Is this technology climate smart? Yes ☐ No ☐
activities and can also conduct an evaluation of other FREGs. During Kebele Learning Fora (usually organized yearly for overall AGP2 activities)
Develop awareness and interest with RRCU’s staff by organizing discussion between none-FREG members and FREG members/DAs/Research Plan and agree on time of FREGs site visit by none FREGs members Share FREGs progress/issues/impact/lessons learned
At FREGs completion Identify lessons learned and display lessons learned at FTCs and share lessons during kebele learning for a. Lessons learned can be about the technology introduced, how issues were solved, how FREGs were tailored to women needs and capacity to implement activities, etc. Collect lessons learned and share with woreda coordinator and WoA.
116
Gender sensitive technologies: are defined as (i) technologies based on needs and interest of female
farmers; (ii) technologies that reduce time and labor for women farmers; and (iii) technologies that are
accessible and affordable by women farmers.
Technologies for nutrition: refer to technologies (i) increasing production and consumption for a range of
diverse nutrient dense food; and (ii) improving post- harvest handling, preservation and processing to
improve availability of good nutritional quality and safe food.
CSA technologies under the project refer: to technologies that increase productivity and resilience
(adaptation).
Not all technologies are gender sensitive or contributing to improved nutrition or climate smart, but it is
still critical to know for the project how many are being promoted through FREGs and AGP2 . Some
technologies can contribute to both gender and nutrition For the disaggregation in terms of gender,
nutrition and CSA, it is possible to have double counting of some technologies as some technologies might
contribute to both gender and nutrition or gender and CSA. Some technologies won’t fit in any of the
disaggregation.
FREG STATUS
FREG under implementation ☐ FREG completed ☐ Under implementation is defined as a FREG supported by AGP2 for which a contractual arrangement has
been established between research, the farmer groups and extension services.
Completed is defined as a FREG that has achieved its intended benefit/objective and does not require
further support from the project.
FREG STAGES
FREG group members identified and sensitized ☐
FREG group formed, has by laws and M&E Committee is established ☐
FREG group trained on the prepared technology package ☐ Total members trained: Men: Women:
FREG group implementing introduced new technology ☐
Total members: Men: Women:
FREG completed: ☐
Total members: Men: Women:
OUTCOME/IMPACT
Total FREG members who have adopted the introduced technology on their field:
Men: Women:
Impact/Change in Productivity:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………........................
Impact/Change on Gender:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………........................
Impact/Change on Nutrition:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………........................
Impact/Change on Climate Smart Agriculture:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………........................
117
Impact/Change on revenue:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………........................
FREG MEMBERS
Did any FREG members dropped out of the FREG during implementation?
Men: Women:
Did any FREG members joined during FREG implementation?
Men: Women:
Name of FREG members At group formation stage
Men Women
118
ANNEX 8: CROSS FARMER GROUP MONITORING
Name of Farmer Group Visited:
Region:
Woreda:
Kebele:
Name of Farmer Group Members Visiting
Name Sex Farmer Groups Name
Kebele/Woreda Signature
DAs Facilitators
Name Title Signature
SMSs Facilitators
Name Title Signature
Description of the farmer groups visited and its field:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………
119
Difficulties encountered while working in a group to adopt new technology:
What were the main difficulties encountered while implementing the new technologies? What
were the solutions found to the issues encountered?
What are the recommendations/lessons learned?
What are the main recommendations you can provide? What are the lessons learned (good and
bad practices).
Other Comments Remarks
Farmer Group Visiting (Head) Farmer Group Visited (Head)
Name: Name:
Signature: Signature:
Date: Date:
Technical Staff DA/SMS Kebele Head:
Name: Name:
Signature: Signature:
Date: Date:
120
ANNEX 9 ASSESSING QUALITY AND TIMELINESS OF WOREDA REPORTS
The quality of Woreda reports represents 60% of the total performance (60 points) and the timeliness of reporting represents 40% of the total
performance (40 points). Quality is defined in Table 3. Each RPCU has developed a rating that is tailor made to their needs, but the concept are
quite similar.
Table 1: Overall Rating of Woreda Reports’ Quality and Timeliness
N.o Number of Points TOTAL PERFOMANCE RATING
1 85 - 100 Excellent
2 70 - 84 Very Good
3 55 - 69 Good
4 45 - 54 Satisfactory
5 < 44 Unsatisfactory
Table 2: Rating of Timeliness of Reports S. No Name of Implementing
Partner/Woreda Submission Date
REPORT SUBMITTED
Exactly on/before the agreed date (40 points)
1-2 days after the agreed date (32 points)
3-5 days after the agreed date (24 points)
6-7 days after the agreed date (16 points)
More than 7 days after the agreed date (8 points)
1
2
3
4
5
121
6
7
8
9
Table 3: Rating of Quality of Reports S.N REPORT QUALITY AS PER THE FOLLOWING POINTS Points Name
of woreda
Name of
woreda
Name of
woreda
Name of
woreda
Name of
woreda
Name of
woreda
Name of
woreda
Name of
woreda
1 Agreed reporting formats are used ( 16 point) 16
The narrative part of the report is structured based on reporting guideline
Narrative of all activities/project performance is described component by component (8 point)
Narrative of most activities/project performance is described component by component 6 point)
Activities/project performance in the report are not described component by component (4 point)
Project activities/project performance narrative are very limited and are not described component by components ( 2 point)
No narrative part (0 point)
Attachment part (Excel sheet)
Agreed format is used and the data are filled with no error (8 point)
Agreed format is used and the data are filled with Limited errors (6 point)
Other format is used and the data are filled with Limited error (4 point)
Other format used and the data are filled with a lot of errors (2 point)
No attachment used (0 point)
2 Physical and financial targets and corresponding achievements are reported on ( 8 point)
8
122
All physical and financial targets & achievements are included (filled) component by component (8 points)
Most of physical and financial targets & achievements are included (filled) component by component (6 points)
Only physical targets & achievements are included (filled) component by component (4 points)
Limited data are included (filled) component by component (2 points)
No data are included (0 point)
3 Data disaggregation ( 8 point) 8
All data are disaggregated by gender and youth. (8 points)
Most of the data are disaggregated by gender and youth. (6 points)
Most of the data are disaggregated only by gender. (4 points)
Limited data are disaggregated by gender and youth. (2 points)
No data are disaggregated (0 point)
4 Quantitative data are adequate/ Supported and Validate with quantitative data (based on field observations and implementers opinions/perception) . (8 points)
8
All Quantitative data are adequately supported /validated with qualitative information (8 points)
Most of Quantitative data are adequately supported /validated with qualitative information (6 points)
Some Quantitative data are adequately supported /validated with qualitative information (4 points)
Limited Quantitative data are supported /validated with qualitative information (2 points)
No Quantitative data are adequately supported /validated with qualitative information (0 point)
5 Reasons for better or low performance (compared to annual plan activities/project output/outcome) are stated and analyzed. It includes identifying the implication for achieving components outcome/output and project outcome (6 points)
6
Clearly stated and analyzed (6 points)
Clearly stated but not analyzed (4 points)
123
Partially stated and analyzed (2 points)
Partially stated and not analyzed (1 point)
Not stated (0 point)
6 Report Narration are elaborated, with pictures, case studies, lesson learned, best practices ; (8 points)
8
Well elaborated, with pictures, case studies, lesson learned, best practice (8 points)
Elaborated, with pictures, lesson learned, best practice (6 points)
Elaborated, with pictures, lesson learned, (4 points)
Elaborated with pictures (3 points)
Not elaborated (0 point)
7 Key Implementation challenges and strengths are identified with proposed actions /measures to address challenges (including the responsible body at all levels). (6 points)
6
Challenges and strengths are clearly identified with proposed actions/measures (6 points)
Challenges and strengths are adequately identified with proposed actions/measures (4 points)
Challenges and strengths identified are limited with proposed actions/measures (3 points)
Only Challenges and opportunities are identified (2 points)
Not identification (0 point)
124
Table 4: Reporting Format Name of Ministry
Name of Project
Report submission Evaluation / Rating/ Quality Follow up Matrix (4th Quarter)
Quarter 4 report evaluation results Previous Quarter 3 Results Progress
From
Total
Rating
S.
N
o
Name of
Implementing
Partner/Woreda
Report
Timeline
Report
quality
Total
rating
TOTAL PERFOMANCE RATING Report
Timelines
Report
Quality
Total
Rating
Excellent Very
Good
Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8