WLI ANNUAL REPORT 2013 GUIDELINE

Bezaiet Dessalegnb.dessalegn@cgiar.org

IntroductionWLI in country __X_:

Overall objective and linkage with national objectives

Site Description Location (map and

coordinates), site characterization, bio-physical and socio-economic targets, and areas for up-scaling

WLI ANNUAL REPORT 2013

Context – in relation to national policies, site characterizations, maps, etc.

Maps

WLI ANNUAL REPORT 2013 (11/12-10/13)

MAPS

Strategic activities for knowledge exchange and enhancement

Field date collection and processing –bio-physical, livelihood studies, etc.

Key findings and recommendations – WLM and livelihoods

SUMMARIES

Page limits References Appendices

2013 Workplan indicating activities complete or incomplete Final FTF indicator reporting Full listing of participants in trainings (including identification

of gender: M/F) Questionnaires or check-lists used for socio-economic data

collection Specification of equipment used for biophysical measurement Compiled datasets (or list of Excel tables available separately) Technical reports on modelling activities Completed scientific publications Outlines for future scientific publications Webpages, brochures or other outreach materials developed High quality photographs to be used in promotional materials

Workplan 2014 Up-scaling and complementary activities to be supported from other

sources Strategy for development of full WLI Country Program

NEXT STEPS

FEED THE FUTURE INDICATORS

Indicators selected for monitoring and evaluating the President’s global hunger and food security initiative

M&E system for tracking and measuring change, helping to pinpoint where, when and how the processes of change facilitated through project interventions are occurring (or not).

FEED THE FUTURE INITIATIVE

Seven indicators selected from a comprehensive l ist of performance indicators (57 indicators) Number of hectares under improved technologies or management

practices as a result of USG assistance Number of farmers and others who have applied new technologies or

management practices as a result of USG assistance Number of individuals who have received USG supported short-term

agricultural sector productivity or food security training Number of food security private enterprises (for profit), producers

organizations, water users associations, women's groups, trade and business associations, and community-based organizations (CBOs) receiving USG assistance

Number of stakeholders implementing risk-reducing practices/actions to improve resi l ience to cl imate change as a result of USG assistance

Number of new technologies or management practices in one of the fol lowing phases of development: (Phase I/ I I / I I I – under research/field testing/made available for transfer)

Gross margin per unit of land, ki logram, or animal of selected product

WLI - FEED THE FUTURE (FTF) INDICATORS

Individuals within the target area that receive direct benefits (i.e., goods or services) from the program) including Individuals who receive training or benefit from program-supported technical assistance or service provision

PROJECT BENEFICIARIES

Oct. -Dec. 2012 Jan-March 2013 April-June 2013 July-Sept 2013 Annual (Due January 15,

2013)(Due April 15,

2013)(Due July 15,

2013)(Due Aug. 15,

2013)Report

Technology type

Crop and /or animal genetics

Pest and/or disease management

Climate mitigation or adaptation

Land management

soil-related

conservation agriculture

Water management

Irrigation

Water harvesting

Post-harvest handling and storage

processing

Fishing gear/technique

Association-applied

Other

Total w /one or more improved technology

Disaggregates Not Available

New /Continuing

New

Continuing

Disaggregates Not Available

Sex of landow ners

Male

Female

Association-applied

Disaggregates Not Available

Targets for 2014

Reporting Period

Indicator / Disaggregation

4.5.2(2): Number of hectares under improved technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance

Set targets for 2013

FTF REPORTING TEMPLATE

Feed the Future recognizes the ro le of women in agr icu l ture as being cr i t ica l to increas ing agr icu l tura l product iv i ty , reduc ing poverty and improv ing nutr i t ion, and i s therefore interested in monitor ing how i ts benefits and serv ices are d ist r ibuted among females and males.

5 of the 7 indicators selected for WLI requi re d isaggregat ion by sex (e .g. , male, female) . The requ irement re lates to both technology and management pract ices ind icators (4.5.2-2 and 4.5.2-5) , and to a l l five data po ints for gross margin (4 .5-15) .

A sex d isaggregat ion of " joint" can be used in those cases where men and women share equal ly in dec is ion-mak ing regarding the use of land. “Joint” is not applicable to situations in which a male makes the management decisions about the land and a female mainly provides labor. who makes the decision(s) on what to plant

and how, when to harvest, which inputs to purchase and how to use them

GENDER

For number of hectares (4.5.2-2), the area planted is counted each time it is cultivated with one or more improved technologies or practices during the reporting year. For example, if a farmer applies an improved technology or practice to a plot that is cultivated three times during the reporting year, the area of the plot is counted each time and reported as a sum.

AGGREGATION

THANK YOU

Thank you

A sex disaggregation of " joint" can be used in those cases where men and women share equal ly in decision-making regarding the use of land. “Joint” is not applicable to situations in which a male makes the management decisions about the land and a female mainly provides labor. who makes the decision(s) on what to plant and how, when to harvest, which inputs to

purchase and how to use them The second new disaggregate category, “association-applied”, can be

used when the technology or management practice is applied by a group or association. For example, a group of farmers appl ies a new fert i l izer on a demonstrat ion plot. In this case, the hectares are counted as “association-appl ied” under 4.5.2-2 (number of hectares) and gross margin (4.5-15). The farmers are counted as one (1) group under 4.5.2-42, Feed the Future’s indicator referr ing to “groups”.

The association-appl ied disaggregate is only new for gross margin (4.5-15); i t already existed for hectares under improved technology or pract ices (4.5.2-2).

4.5.2-42 Number of pr ivate enterpr ises (for profit) , producers organizat ions, water users associations, women’s groups, trade and business associations, and community-based organizat ions (CBO) that appl ied new technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance.

Feed The Future Agricultural Indicators Guide: Guidance on the col lection and use of data for selected Feed the Future Agricultural Indicators. July 2013. `

NEW CATEGORIES

Two of the four indicators covered in this guide require measurement of the area under production – gross margin (4.5-15) and hectares under improved technologies or management practices (4.5.2-2). In both cases, the relevant measure for crops and aquaculture ponds is hectares, often converted from local units. For gross margin, this data point represents the unit of production, and is used in the denominator when calculating the commodity-specific gross margin value. For many livestock products, the unit of production is not land-based (i.e., cannot be measured by area), and is therefore reported as the number of animals involved in production; for fisheries, the unit of production is either hectares (for aquaculture ponds) or cages. Pp 14 –different methodologies of measurements for different land types including ponds – tape and compass, GPS, Pacing, farmers’ estimates and remote sensing

MEASURING AGRICULTURAL AREA

Preliminaries < 10 Executive Summary 1 Body

Introduction Site Description Strategic Activities Field Data collection and processing Summary of Analysis Next steps

References Appendices

Workplans FtF Indicators

monitoring uptake of improved technologies and practicesThis indicator seeks to measure the number of farmers and

others (e.g., farmers, ranchers, producers, entrepreneurs, managers, traders, processors (individuals only), natural resource managers) that are applying improved technologies or management practices promoted through USG-supported programs, disaggregated by whether or not the farmer had begun applying the technology or practice for the first time within the reporting year (new) or whether s/he had begun using it in the year prior to the current reporting year and continues to apply it in the current reporting year (continuing), and by sex. In the Feed the Future context, it is assumed that any “new” technology is an “improved” technology.

Appl icat ion i s the use o f techno logy or management pract i ce by a fa rmer or o ther producer over a t least one crop season or equ iva lent product ion per iod in the case o f l i ves tock or fisher ies . Adopt ion i s the use o f techno logy or management pract i ce by a fa rmer or o ther producer in a sus ta inab le way over an extended per iod o f t ime.

New vs. cont inuing: Both the number o f hectares (4 .5 .2-2) and the number o f fa rmers (4 .5 .2 -5) ind icators requ i re d i saggregat ing by whether a techno logy or p ract i ce promoted by the pro ject to improve product iv i ty was app l ied fo r the fi rs t t ime dur ing the repor t ing year (new) or whether i t was app l ied in the current report ing year and in the p rev ious repor t ing year (cont inu ing) , i .e . , over two consecut ive years .

For number o f f a rmers (4 .5 .2-5 ) , “new” ind icates that , as a resu l t o f USG ass i s tance, a fa rmer fi rs t app l ied the techno logy or p ract i ce dur ing the current repor t ing year ; i t does not re fer to whether a fa rmer was prev ious ly fami l ia r w i th a techno logy or management pract i ce ( i . e . , whether or not i t was “new” to h im/her ) . A fa rmer i s on ly counted once, regard less o f how many improved techno log ies or p ract i ces s /he app l ies in a repor t ing year.

“Cont inu ing” ind icates that , as a resu l t o f USG ass i s tance, a fa rmer app l ied the techno logy or p ract i ce in the prev ious repor t ing year and i s cont inu ing to app ly i t in the current repor t ing year. I n those cases where a beneficiary fa rmer was a l ready app ly ing an improved techno logy at base l ine, they are counted as “cont inu ing” i f they cont inue to app ly the techno logy or p ract i ce promoted through your current program act iv i t ies dur ing the repor t ing year. A fa rmer must app ly a techno logy or pract i ce over two consecut ive years ( i . e . , the current and prev ious repor t ing years ) to be cons idered as “cont inu ing” . For example , i f a fa rmer app l ied the techno logy or pract i ce in report ing year 1 o f a p ro ject , d id not app ly i t dur ing the second report ing year , but app l ied i t aga in in report ing year 3 , s /he i s repor ted as “new” in year 1 , not app ly ing in year 2 , and “new” in year 3 .