CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership Food Security through Rural ... · In Eastern and Central Africa,...

CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership

Food Security through Rural Development Initiative

Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

Version 2 (June 2011)

Table of Contents

Background ........................................................................................................................................... 1

The AusAID-CSIRO Agreement ........................................................................................................ 2

The Monitoring & Evaluation System .................................................................................................... 4

Partnership Level Monitoring: ............................................................................................................ 4

Partnership Portfolio Monitoring ........................................................................................................ 4

Project Level Monitoring: ................................................................................................................... 5

Partnership M&E Tools.......................................................................................................................... 5

CORAF/WECARD Project Monitoring ............................................................................................... 5

Project Monitoring Tool ...................................................................................................................... 6

Stakeholder Survey............................................................................................................................ 6

Action Learning .................................................................................................................................. 7

Partnership Annual Review................................................................................................................ 8

Data Collection and Management ......................................................................................................... 9

Monitoring Gender Equity...................................................................................................................... 9

Environmental Safeguards .................................................................................................................... 9

Technical Advisory Group ..................................................................................................................... 9

Partnership Reporting............................................................................................................................ 9

Partnership Annual Report................................................................................................................. 9

Annual Contract Report ................................................................................................................... 10

CORAF/WECARD Interim Reports.................................................................................................. 10

M&E Roles and Responsibilities ......................................................................................................... 10

AusAID Independent Evaluations........................................................................................................ 11

Timetable for monitoring, evaluation and reporting activities .............................................................. 11

Appendix 1: Logical Framework Matrix for the CORAF/WECARD-CSIRO Partnership ..................... 13

Appendix 2: CORAF/WECARD Project proposal template................................................................. 21

Appendix 3: Structure of project evaluation reports ............................................................................ 26

Appendix 4: Example Project Logframe: Strengthening Seed Systems ............................................. 27

Appendix 5: Example set of discussion points for use in the Action Learning process between CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD........................................................................................................................ 29

Appendix 6: AusAID Quality Reporting Criteria................................................................................... 30

CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Version 2 (June 2011)

1

Background

In response to the global food crisis, in May 2009, the Australian Government announced that it will spend $464 million over four years to encourage greater food security globally. As part of the Food Security through Rural Development Initiative, Australia will provide A$100 million over four years to improve food security in Africa.

Building on Australian expertise, the Australia-Africa Food Security Initiative is structured around three main components, aimed at supporting Africa’s progress toward the Millennium Development Goals, through increasing the availability of and access to food. These components were outlined by the United Nations as key responses for governments and donors:

1. Increasing agricultural productivity through increased investments in agricultural research and development;

2. Improving rural livelihoods by helping to address market failures that hinder economic development in rural areas; and

3. Building community resilience by supporting social protection mechanisms that enable vulnerable people to withstand shocks.

This focus closely aligns the program to the Africa Union's New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP), a framework to harness African resources for national and regional agricultural development.

AusAID has developed an agricultural research partnership with Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). Via this Partnership, CSIRO will lead two activities in Africa which align specifically with the CAADP Pillar IV: Agricultural Research, Technology Dissemination and Adoption:

1. In West and Central Africa, CSIRO is developing a partnership with the West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development (CORAF/WECARD). CORAF/WECARD is mandated by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) to coordinate the implementation of CAADP Pillar IV in West and Central Africa. The Partnership will focus on increasing crop productivity through more efficient water and nutrient use and management, improving animal disease management and increasing services for smallholder farmers via more effective agri-input and out markets.

2. In Eastern and Central Africa, CSIRO is developing a partnership with Biosciences Eastern and Central Africa (BecA). BecA is an initiative endorsed by NEPAD to support eastern and central African countries in development and application of bioscience research and expertise to produce technologies that help poor farmers secure their assets, improve their productivity and income, and increase their market opportunities. The Partnership will focus on building African capacity in biotechnology to address Africa’s agricultural, health and environmental problems.

The CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership involves multiple hierarchies of interaction as specified in Table 1. Also within Table 1, the relationship between the hierarchies of interaction and the Partnership Logic (which is part of the CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO Partnership Design Document and provided in Figure 1) are defined. The logical structure of the Partnership design was initially developed in a workshop between CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD staff and subsequently adjusted in consultation with AusAID and CORAF/WECARD. The logical structure of the Partnership design will contribute directly to the implementation of the CORAF/WECARD Operational and Strategic Plans by focusing primarily on a program of priority agricultural research over four years 2010 – 2013, and to the achievement of CAADP Pillar IV in West and Central Africa.

The M&E framework to be applied in the AusAID-CSIRO Agreement needs to report at each layer of interaction and aggregate the information, outcomes and learnings across the full portfolio of work. This M&E Plan aims to achieve this at the CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership, CORAF/WECARD Partnership Portfolio and CORAF/WECARD Projects levels.


2

The AusAID-CSIRO Agreement

The Agreement between AusAID and CSIRO states (Section 4.1) that CSIRO must carry out the Activity in accordance with the Activity Proposal and the terms and conditions of the Funding Agreement. The Activity Proposal consists of the documents which describe the two Partnerships in Africa:

1. BecA Hub and CSIRO Partnership Design Document; and

2. CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO Partnership Design Document.

According to Section 19.1, CSIRO must report annually to AusAID, and details of reporting requirements are provided in the relevant section below. In addition, at the completion of the Agreement, CSIRO will submit a final report which provides a brief outline of the Activity and, in more detail, covers key outcomes compared with objectives, development impact, sustainability and lessons learned.

Table 1: The components of the AusAID-CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership agreements

Hierarchy Partnership Logic link Objectives

AusAID-CSIRO Agreement

Report implementation strategy & progress; outcomes, impact, sustainability & lessons

CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership

CORAF/WECARD Specific Objective (i.e. CAADP Objective)

CORAF/WECARD Results 1,2,3,4

Contribute directly to the implementation of the CORAF/WECARD operational and strategic plans and to the achievement of CAADP Pillar IV in West and Central Africa

CORAF/WECARD Partnership Portfolio

Partnership Activity Areas 1,2,3,4,5,6

Add value to crop productivity through more efficient water and nutrient use and management

Add value to livestock productivity through better feed and animal disease management

Current and new knowledge being disseminated at the farm and community level

Research includes socio-economic aspects to underpin adoption

Capacity building with institutional partners and community stakeholders

Research portfolio aimed at addressing market access and informing policy

CORAF/WECARD Projects

To be explicitly stated in each project as a component of the standard CORAF/WECARD full project specification


3

Figure 1: CORAF/WECARD-CSIRO Partnership Logic (modified from p. 13 of CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO Partnership Design Document)

CAADP Pillar IV: Agricultural Research, Technology Dissemination and Adoption

Partnership will

COMPLETE these

activity areas,

contributing to

CORAF/ WECARD

Results…

…by 2013

Partnership will

CONTRIBUTE to

the CORAF/

WECARD

Specific

Objective and

target Results…

…over the long-

term

CORAF/WECARD SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE

Broad-based agricultural productivity, competitiveness and markets sustainably improved in West and Central Africa

CORAF/WECARD RESULT 1

Appropriate technologies and innovations

developed

(to improve smallholder farming systems and market

access in mixed crop livestock systems in semi-arid

and sub-humid regions of WCA)


Demand for agricultural knowledge

from targeted clients facilitated & met

(to improve extension/dissemination of

new technologies in mixed crop

livestock systems in semi-arid and sub-

humid regions of WCA)

PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY

AREA 1

A research portfolio

that can add value to

crop productivity

through more efficient

water and nutrient use

and management


AREA 2

A research portfolio

that can add value to

livestock productivity

through better feed and

animal disease

management

PARTNERSHIP

ACTIVITY AREA 3

Current and new

knowledge being

disseminated at

the farm and

community level

CORAF/WECARD RESULT 2 Strategic decision-making options for policy, institutions

and markets developed

AND


Sub-regional agricultural research system strengthened

and coordinated


AREA 5

Capacity building with

institutional partners and

community stakeholders

Research Priority Setting

Communications

Research Skills

PARTNERSHIP

ACTIVITY AREA 6

Research portfolio

aimed at addressing

market access and

informing policy

Research

Project

Research

Project

Research

Project

Research

Project

Research

Project

Research

Project

Partnership-funded Research Portfolio

PARTNERSHIP

ACTIVITY AREA 4

Research

includes socio-

economic

aspects to

underpin

adoption

Links between African and Australian agricultural scientists


4

The Monitoring & Evaluation System

The Partnership will be monitored and evaluated in accordance with its M&E system, which is described in this M&E Plan. It includes aspects of the Logical Framework approach which is used extensively by Australian and other agencies working in overseas agricultural projects1, and is also the methodology adopted by CORAF/WECARD, and it includes a number of additional evaluation activities and reports.

The intent of M&E within the AusAID-CSIRO Partnership is to provide both formative and summative evaluation information:

• formative in providing input into the design of future activities, both iteratively within the initiative and, via publication, to the efforts of others implementing new initiatives;

• summative in collating compelling evidence and argument of those impacts attributable to the initiative within the activity systems where it operated.

The Partnership will be judged as successful if relevant, good quality research is being conducted in accordance with the IAR4D approach, in a range of countries and addressing a range of priority research questions, with inputs from both African and Australian researchers. Over the long-term, attributable impact of benefit through increased food security to smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa is the aspiration to which this initiative ultimately strives.

Farm-level and value-chain impacts will take time to achieve. Research projects will take at least 2-3 years to complete even the most applied research, meaning that on-the-ground impact will be achieved largely after the life of this Partnership design. Therefore monitoring, especially during the first 2-3 years of the Partnership, will focus on project level performance and on the quality and effectiveness of the Partnership itself, although always with a clear view towards the ultimate impact the research is likely to have in its sphere of influence and activity. In other words, day-to-day monitoring will focus primarily on performance at the levels of each Project and within the Partnership Activity Areas.

Monitoring will use a mix of qualitative and quantitative measures. A small set of targeted indicators (see Appendix 1) will contribute to the monitoring and evaluation of Partnership performance and progress in completing activities and contributing towards CORAF/WECARD results. It includes a subset of the objectively verifiable indicators already specified in the CORAF/WECARD Operational Plan Logframe, in order to anchor Partnership monitoring in the broader institutional monitoring and reporting. These indicators are routinely monitored and reported by CORAF/WECARD.

The M&E system will be reviewed annually by the Partnership Management Committee with the support of the Technical Advisory Group (see ‘the Annual Review’ section below), and adjustments made as necessary to ensure M&E and reporting best meets management and accountability requirements.

Partnership Level Monitoring:

At the Partnership level, the contribution to CORAF/WECARD’s Results and Specific Objective will be considered. Assessment at this level will mainly occur during an Annual Review process, which is described below. It will draw on a range of data sources including annual reports as produced by CORAF/WECARD, the NARS, sub-regional organisations and operating units. The quality of the effectiveness of the Partnership between CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD will also be assessed at this level. While considering performance as defined by the indicators at all levels of the matrix, to better inform the nature of this relationship, the Partnership will undertake an iterative ‘Action Learning’ process within a Participatory Action Research framework which is described in more detail in the ‘Monitoring and Evaluation Tools’ section below.

Partnership Portfolio Monitoring

At the Partnership Portfolio level, activity will be monitored across the Partnership Activity Areas of the matrix (see Appendix 1). Monitoring will largely use the existing processes and tools employed by CORAF/WECARD, such as project proposal documents, research project reports and mid-term reviews, although additional processes and monitoring tools have been incorporated to meet the

1 Dart, J., Petheram, R.J., Straw W. (1998) Review of Evaluation in Agricultural Extension. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation


5

specific requirements of AusAID and CSIRO within the ‘Partnership Activity Area 5’, ‘Partnership’, ‘Social/human ethics’ and ‘Recognition’ elements of the matrix and these are described in the ‘M&E Tools’ section below. Regular meetings of the Partnership Management Committee (PMC)2 will be a significant opportunity for ongoing monitoring and assessment of project- and portfolio-level performance.

Project Level Monitoring:

Project-level performance will be monitored largely in accordance with usual CORAF/WECARD monitoring practices as defined within CORAF/WECARD’s results-based M&E System (see below and Box 1), supported and enhanced by the Partnership as necessary. CSIRO will be closely involved in the whole project process from preparation to completion, and as such is uniquely placed to support and enhance the value of CORAF/WECARD’s project monitoring through a number of steps within the M&E System. Crucially, during Project design, CSIRO has and will continue to provide significant scientific and methodological expertise to help inform definition of activities and budget. CSIRO’s close collaboration during this step is particularly important in also helping to ensure the ensuing development of sound and useful objectives and indicators. These indicators are designed to inform not only each project’s capacity-building, extension and communication activities, but also pathways to farm-level impacts.

In addition to the existing CORAF/WECARD project monitoring and reporting processes, the Partnership will also undertake an additional qualitative process to underpin the understanding of how the Partnership’s research activities will contribute to practice change at the farm-level and hence farm-level impacts, Here, we propose determining progress towards practice change through use of a simple Project Monitoring Tool, which is described in detail in the ‘M&E Tools’ section below.

Partnership M&E Tools

As noted above, monitoring and evaluation at the project level will be undertaken by CORAF/WECARD using its established project management and monitoring tools. In addition to this, several Partnership-specific tools will be developed and used to collect and analyse data, in accordance with the logframe matrix (Appendix 1). Qualitative and quantitative data will therefore be collected including from government statistics reports, observations, interviews, surveys, media reports, project reports and publications.

CORAF/WECARD Project Monitoring

The CORAF/WECARD M&E system includes key sources of data that are the standard monitoring and assessment tools and templates as produced by CORAF/WECARD and project partners (final project proposal documents, annual project evaluation reports, mid-term review reports). The CORAF/WECARD project proposal template is provided in Appendix 2 and the structure of the project evaluation reports in Appendix 3. A number of AusAID’s quality criteria are routinely addressed in these project evaluation reports, namely; relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability. An example of typical project-level logframe details is provided in Appendix 4, for the Strengthening Seeds Systems project.

2 The PMC comprises the CORAF/WECARD Director of Programmes (Harold Roy Macauley) and CSIRO Partnerships Leader (Bruce Pengelly)


6

Project Monitoring Tool

As noted above, to more fully inform the understanding of how the Partnership’s research activities will contribute to practice change at the farm-level and hence farm-level impacts, we recommend that information derived from CORAF/WECARD’s project-level indicators be enhanced through the inclusion of an additional process at this level. Here, we propose determining progress towards practice change through use of a simple Project Monitoring Tool, The tool will utilise simple methods such as an interview or survey which elicits information about the KASAP elements (knowledge, attitude, skills, aspirations, practice) as defined within the Bennett’s Hierarchy methodology. Use of this methodology will not only help to more clearly attribute any impacts to this Partnership’s work, but also provide learnings both to better plan extension/communication/capacity-building activities and to assist in determining ongoing project changes. Bennett’s Hierarchy is already commonly used within CSIRO’s Sustainable Agriculture Flagship to monitor and evaluate impact that is externally credible, and thus aligning with accepted best practice for impact oriented research in Australia.

CSIRO will provide a Social Scientist who will develop the specific methods used to derive information for the Project Monitoring Tool (using KASAP). It is likely that the approach will determine practice change through use of a simple tool such as an interview or survey. The method will be fully developed and in use by the first Annual Review (see below) in November 2011.

Stakeholder Survey

With support from CSIRO, CORAF/WECARD M&E staff will design and implement a simple Annual Stakeholder Survey, to monitor the satisfaction of key CORAF/WECARD stakeholders, including representatives from members countries, NARS, and the Scientific and Technical Committee, with aspects of CORAF/WECARD services, particularly with respect to media and communications. The survey will be developed, and a baseline survey undertaken, by November 2011. Subsequent surveys will enable CORAF/WECARD, and CSIRO, to monitor any improvements in satisfaction as a result of Partnership support to communications.

Box 1: The CORAF/WECARD project-level M&E System

This project-level M&E System consists of a set of key interrelated processes and tools, and is essentially an information system that includes implementation monitoring and impact evaluation activities, as well as a learning and feedback mechanism. Part of this System is the Monitoring and Evaluation Manual, which details the design process for M&E as well as all activities, processes, tools, timing and budget for data collection, processing, analysis and use. The System makes use of the international evaluation criteria as defined by OECD-DAC, i.e. coherence, relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact, sustainability, partnerships.

Steps Process

Project design Design structure of logical framework, project activities and budget

Design of indicators Definition of indicators (indicator information sheet), Result framework and targets, data collection system (indicator matrix)

M&E manual Redaction of M&E manual that describes the M&E system

Definition of processes and tools

Definition of M&E data bases and information flows

Procedures and tools for monitoring (Annual Workplan & Budget (AWPB), quarterly reports, financial reports), for supervision (periodic audits) and for evaluations (Baseline studies, mid-term review, impact studies)

Define M&E Plan Preparation of action plan and budgeting for M&E

Data collection Establishing reference situation (if necessary organization of reference surveys)

Monitoring of implementation

Monitoring of impact (if necessary surveys)

Data processing and analysis

Analysis of information and assessment whether results have been achieved

Formulate recommendations for adjustments

Communication & knowledge management

Communication of results to stakeholders concerned in various ways; written reports, audio-visual techniques, workshops, brochures


7

Action Learning

The Partnership will undertake an iterative ‘Action Learning’ process within a Participatory Action Research framework (see Box 2), as the central method of monitoring at the Partnership level. It will also consider the research portfolio and the key cross-cutting issues identified in the logframe. The Action Learning process will be two-way, with key stakeholders within both CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD being part of and learning from the process3. This process will use a variety of planned and opportunistic methods (eg. observations, discussions, reflections, surveys, focus group discussions) to derive a variety of data (eg. relating to governance, implementation of recommendations and perceptions, capacity building). An example set of discussion points which could be modified for use within this process is provided in Appendix 5. The derived annual Action Learning report will be a valuable additional source of information feeding in to the reflective and learning processes that accompanying the Annual Review, and, importantly, leading also to building of capacity and informing improvement of aspects of the Partnership.

The CSIRO Social Scientist who will work on the Project Monitoring Tool will also develop the Action Learning tool and support its implementation. It is likely to involve systematic collection of both structured and opportunistic data through methods including observations, discussions, reflections, surveys and focus group discussions. There is also the potential for the use of tape/video recording.

The Action Learning process will be fully developed, and will be underway, by the time of the first Annual Review (see below) in November 2011.

3 CSIRO also sees considerable value in recording reflections from interactions with partners at levels below the CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD partnership level (ie. project members, farmers), to assist in determining the success of the overall Partnership at these levels. CSIRO staff will be closely interacting with these levels throughout the term of the Agreement, so are ideally placed to be involved in this area of enquiry. However, we recognise the need for any interaction at these levels to be both carefully considered and have full agreement from both AusAID and CORAF/WECARD on the terms of such an approach. We do not intend to confuse nor undermine existing CORAF processes.

Box 2: Action Research

Action Research can be described as being:

• participative and collaborative – a researcher is not an outside expert but rather “a co-worker doing research with and for the people concerned with the practical problem and its actual improvement”;

• practical – “the results and insights gained from the research are not only of theoretical importance to the advancement of knowledge in the field, but also lead to practical improvements during and after the research process”;

• emancipatory – “all people concerned are equal participants contributing to the enquiry”.

• interpretive – “solutions are based on the views and interpretations of the people involved in the enquiry (with) research validity achieved by rigorous methods”;

• critical – participants act as “critical and self-critical change agents … (they) change their environment and are changed in the process”.

Participatory Action Research (PAR) is often depicted by the action research cycle consisting of iterative cycles of planning, action, observation, reflection and replanning:

Cycle 1

PLAN

ACT

OBSERVE

REFLECT

Cycle 2

PLAN

ACT

OBSERVE

REFLECT


8

Partnership Annual Review

The Annual Review will be the main opportunity for assessment of progress, reflection and learning, and it will include PMC members, key staff from both partners, and the Technical Advisory Group. The process will enable the partners to reach conclusions about performance and progress, and will provide the basis for the preparation of the Partnership Annual Report (see ‘Partnership Reporting’ for details).

Annual Reviews will include brief field visits to research sites by the Partnership Leaders and the Technical Advisory Group. Following the field visits, the Annual Review will include a two-day workshop early in each calendar year (probably in February/March).

During the first day of the annual review workshop, the project leaders of each supported research project will present the progress and achievements of the projects to the Partnership Management Committee in a formal presentation (submission of a 2-page summary will probably be requested in advance). The partnership-level Action Learning report, outcomes of the project-level KASAP process, and progress towards indicators in the matrix will also be presented to the Review.

On the second day, the Committee will discuss and reach conclusions on:

• research project performance, including those aspects that are most and least effective (or “what is working, what isn’t working as we expected, and what are the implications of this?”);

• performance at the partnership- and higher-level indicators in the matrix, with the first Annual Review examining the baseline of these indicators;

• the effectiveness of the Partnership in supporting CORAF/WECARD to achieve its aims and in supporting enhanced relationships between Australia and Africa in agricultural science;

• the management and monitoring arrangements; and • any other matters.

Discussion during this second day will focus on looking at the complete set of evidence relevant to the Partnership, and drawing conclusions about the implications of that evidence for the Partnership, for its future work, for its management, and reporting its performance. The conclusions will be documented and the Partnership Annual Report will be prepared on the basis of these conclusions.

The first Annual Review will, however, be conducted in October or November 2011. This first Annual Review will follow the process described above, and will also consider a number of specific issues including:

• A review and confirmation or adjustment of the Partnership Logic; • A review and confirmation or adjustment of the Partnership indicators, to ensure they are still

relevant, sufficient, and feasible to report; • A discussion of the projected immediate and long-term impact of the Partnership-supported

research projects.

This expanded set of issues for consideration is likely to require one or two additional days in the program for the first Annual Review.

Box 2: Action Research – cont.

Planning and action are standard practices in the conduct of agricultural RDE and so are well accepted in the research community. Most RDE efforts originate with a formal plan and are actioned within standard procedures for research. Important in planning is situation analysis, where any new effort is informed by the current state of the studied system and the underpinning knowledge which has been garnered and collated within knowledge systems. Less practised and formalised in RDE are observation and reflection on how the research has been implemented and learnt lessons used to inform the next iteration of the research cycle. Action research places emphasis on all four components and, conducted well, will result in research and impacts which are concrete, attributable and recognised.

The key to implementing action research is rigorous documentation in each stage of the iterative cycles and the subsequent use of these data to inform the next action learning cycle. The outcome of participatory action research, well practised, will be increased capacity of all participants to undertake IAR4D activities.


9

Data Collection and Management

Importantly, all participants, whether at Project or Partnership levels, will be made aware of the M&E objectives and the approach to collecting, analysing and reporting data. Thus any survey, focal group discussion, interview or other data collection method will include prior acknowledgement of the intent and approach to data collection and seek participant approval for involvement and use of these data. The approaches used in the project will be subject to the research ethics standards set by CORAF/WECARD, participating partners and CSIRO.

Data collection will be as per CORAF/WECARD’s standard procedures (report collection at all levels of the logframe hierarchy), supplemented by CSIRO where the data are not routinely collected by CORAF/WECARD and its project partners. For example, CSIRO will lead collection of data to verify progress towards Recognition and Social/human ethics. Being a 2-way process, data collected during the partnership-level Action Learning process will be by both CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO. The responsibilities and nature of data collection during the project-level KASAP process would need to be clarified once details of the process are agreed by all project partners.

We propose storage of all the Partnership’s monitoring and evaluation data on the Partnership’s web-based Sharepoint site which has been established by CSIRO. This is a centralised repository which will allow read access to all key members of the Partnership. We suggest that both the CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD Partnership Coordinator have joint responsibility for managing this database.

Monitoring Gender Equity

Both partners will endeavour to monitor gender equity in accordance with AusAID’s guidelines, and the indicators contained in the logframe reflect appropriate gender disaggregation wherever possible. Data associated with CORAF/WECARD institutional indicators are not routinely gender disaggregated although if it is possible to enable this additional disaggregation over the life of the Partnership then such assistance will be provided.

Environmental Safeguards

In accordance with Australian Government requirements, CSIRO will monitor the compliance with relevant environmental safeguards, for relevant research projects. CSIRO is developing a brief paper that will outline its approach to this, which will be included in, or referred to, in future versions of the M&E Plan.

Technical Advisory Group

AusAID will establish a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to provide additional support and advice. Contracted by AusAID, the TAG will comprise a small group of specialists to assist CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD continuously improve aspects of the partnership as required. It will have a key review and advisory role especially in monitoring and evaluation, and engagement with AusAID. The TAG will have particular involvement during the Annual Reviews, but its members may also be asked to provide additional inputs on specific issues or activities, drawing on their individual expertise.

The TAG will provide an independent perspective on Partnership performance and will also provide support and advice directly to AusAID, including brief TAG reports each year.

The TAG will comprise no more than three people, with skills between them encompassing:

• Expertise and experience in IAR4D and agricultural research more broadly; • Knowledge of the institutional and strategic context in African agricultural research; • Monitoring and evaluation, including the specific requirements of AusAID; • International organisational and institutional development and strengthening.

AusAID will constitute the TAG in time for the first Annual Review in 2011.

Partnership Reporting

Partnership Annual Report

Partnership reporting adopts the existing reporting practices of CORAF/WECARD at the research project level, with the addition of a single brief Partnership Annual Report. The Partnership Annual Report is the centrepiece of reporting and will be prepared jointly by the members of the Partnership


10

Management Committee, supported by the Partnership Coordinators. The Partnership Annual Report will be submitted to the CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO Boards, after it is approved by the relevant senior managers in each Partner. The Partnership Annual Report will also be provided to AusAID, and will contribute to its monitoring the performance of the overall Food Security Initiative, to the preparation of the AusAID Africa Program Annual Performance Report, as well as other internal reporting required by AusAID performance and Quality reporting processes (see Appendix 6 for further details).

The Partnership Annual Report will be prepared by the partners, structured around the internal Annual Review process. The partners will draw on support and guidance from the (AusAID-contracted) Technical Advisory Group, if necessary.

Annual Contract Report

In addition, CSIRO will provide a short (five page) annual report to AusAID, in August each year, in compliance with its contractual reporting requirements. This contract annual report will address:

1. A review of implementation progress to date; and

2. An implementation strategy and work program for the coming period that:

i) incorporates any lessons from the assessment of Activity progress;

ii) outlines the expected outputs and development results of the proposed program of work; and

iii) describes the inputs, work and outputs of both CSIRO and any other key stakeholders.

CORAF/WECARD Interim Reports

CORAF/WECARD will provide six-monthly Interim Reports to CSIRO, as agreed in the contract between the partners. These reports will not excessively duplicate the central Partnership Annual Report, and will be brief, focusing mainly on administrative, management and financial reporting.

M&E Roles and Responsibilities

M&E roles and responsibilities are distributed between the partners, with CORAF/WECARD and particularly CSIRO having key coordinating roles. The specific responsibilities of the main participants in the M&E system are described below:

Partnership Management Committee: The Partnership Management Committee (PMC) has responsibility for analysis and reporting of monitoring data (supplemented, especially during the Annual Reviews, with input from the Technical Advisory Group). The PMC will continually monitor progress of the Partnership, largely through their regular meetings (at least 4 times per year, with a minimum of two of these meetings being face-to-face), and, more formally, through the Annual Review. The PMC has lead responsibility for the preparation and submission of the Partnership Annual Report, and also has ultimate responsibility for ensuring that this M&E Plan is implemented as agreed. The PMC will be supported by the CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO Partnership coordinators4,

CORAF/WECARD Partnership Coordinator: The CORAF/WECARD Partnership Coordinator will be responsible for development of some of the interview data collected to inform the indicators. He will also be responsible for collation of much of the data across all levels of the hierarchy.

CSIRO Partnership Coordinator: The CSIRO Partnership Coordinator will support the PMC in their M&E responsibilities, including the preparation of the Partnership Annual Report. She will undertake selected data collection (including interview data) and will participate in the Annual Review process. She will also work closely with the CORAF/WECARD Partnership Coordinator to support the overall implementation of this M&E Plan.

Project Coordinators: At the level of the research projects, each Project Coordinator will be responsible for collecting and reporting data to CORAF/WECARD in accordance with the prevailing organisational and project requirements. The Project Coordinator will also present on project progress during each Annual Review.

4 The CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO Partnership coordinators are Issoufou Kollo and Caroline Bruce, respectively


11

CORAF/WECARD Programme Managers: Within CORAF/WECARD, the project reports are evaluated by the relevant Programme Manager with key input from the M&E and (as required) Planning Units. Programme Managers will also contribute to the Annual Review process as required.

CSIRO Social Scientist: The Social Scientist will develop the specific tools, methods and analysis procedures which the KASAP and Action Learning processes will utilise, and will provide ongoing support in the implementation of those processes.

Technical Advisory Group: The members of the TAG will participate in the annual review process, and will make additional contributions to monitoring or evaluation processes or activities if and when invited.

AusAID Independent Evaluations

In accordance with its evaluation guidelines, AusAID will commission an Independent Progress Evaluation (a mid-term evaluation) of the Partnership in 2012.

AusAID will work with CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO to prepare a Terms of Reference for the Evaluation. The ToR will guide the Evaluation to examine Partnership monitoring data (with particular attention to the indicators specified in the M&E matrix) and to consider the Partnership against the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) criteria for evaluations, namely:

• Relevance – to what extent is the research supported by the Partnership relevant to the

needs and demands of farmers in the target areas? How did the Partnership support CORAF/WECARD towards achieving its own Goal, Objective and Results? Is the research portfolio still relevant to the changing circumstances of the sub-regions?

• Effectiveness – was the design appropriate? How did the Partnership progress towards

achieving its objectives and results? How was the relationship between the partners?

• Efficiency – how confident can we be that the research is of good quality, and is being conducted in accordance to research plans, within budgets and timelines, with good value for money?

• Impact – what signs are there that the research is likely to have a positive impact on the

livelihoods of smallholder farmers in the target areas?

• Sustainability – what is the likelihood that the benefits of the Partnership will be sustained – in CORAF/WECARD and in the participating countries? How is planning for dissemination and extension work progressing and is it likely to succeed?

The evaluation will also examine the approach of the Partnership to gender equality.

The Independent Progress Evaluation will be scheduled to substitute for the second Annual Review Process in March 2012, in order to avoid duplication of process and excessive demands on all stakeholders. AusAID will determine the composition of the IPR team, in discussion with CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO. It will be led by an independent Evaluation Team Leader but may also include some or all members of the TAG.

AusAID may also commission a further Independent Completion Review (a completion evaluation) of the Partnership at the end of the Partnership period in 2013, although this will be decided closer to that time.

Timetable for monitoring, evaluation and reporting activities

Table 2 presents the proposed timetable for monitoring, evaluation and reporting activities for the CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership.


12

Table 2: Timetable for monitoring, evaluation and reporting activities

2011 2012 2013

what who 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6

Reporting

Annual QAI report AusAID

Annual Contract Report CSIRO

1st

interim report C/W

1st

annual report C/W

2nd

interim report C/W

2nd

annual report C/W

final report & acquittal C/W

High-level M&E

Partnership Annual Reviews C/W, CSIRO

Partnership Annual Report prep C/W, CSIRO

CORAF Board meeting C/W

CORAF Annual Report prep C/W, CSIRO

PMC Meetings C/W, CSIRO at least 4x/yr

AusAID Indep. Progress Review

Completion evaluation AA (if confirmed) early 2013

Project-level M&E

Final project proposal documents C/W, CSIRO

6 research projects underway projects

Field Monitoring C/W, CSIRO

Research project report submission C/W, CSIRO annually, date tbc

Mid-term review reports C/W, CSIRO mid-term of each project tbc - ~ June 2012

Project gender analysis reports C/W, CSIRO once during first year of each project

Annual stakeholder surveys C/W CSIRO

Project-level KASAP reports CSIRO C/W tbc

CSIRO ethics clearance CSIRO once during project inception

Action learning report C/W CSIRO


Appendix 1

13

Appendix 1: Logical Framework Matrix for the CORAF/WECARD-CSIRO Partnership

Hierarchy of Objectives Indicators Target (where relevant)

Means of Verification

Responsibility to Analyse & Report

Timing and Frequency

CORAF/WECARD SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Broad-based agricultural productivity, competitiveness and markets sustainably improved in WCA

1. Productivity: At least 4% increase in agricultural production for priority crops, livestock and fisheries per unit of input by 2013

2. Competitiveness: At least 20% of commodities and products confirm to specific national, sub-regional and/or international standards by 2013

3. Markets: at least 10% increase in the inter- and intra-regional market share of agricultural products by 2013

(existing CORAF/WECARD Indicators)

Government statistics

Economic Commission for African statistics and reports

FAO statistics

ECOWAS and other regional organisation reports

Selected CGIAR reports and publications

External evaluation and impact assessment

Appropriate UN organisations

CORAF/WECARD Annually to CORAF/WECARD Board in May each year


Appendix 1

14





CORAF/WECARD RESULT 1: Appropriate technologies and innovations developed

(to improve smallholder farming systems and market access in mixed crop-livestock systems in semi-arid and sub-humid regions of WCA)

4. At least 15 appropriate technologies / innovations for crops, livestock and/or fisheries available to poor and vulnerable households by 2013

5. At least 10 technologies for land rehabilitation for sustainable production developed by 2013

6. At least 60 new multi-stakeholder partnerships and mechanisms for the development of appropriate technologies and innovations effectively operational by 2013

NARS Annual Reports

CORAF/WECARD Annual Reports

Operating Unit Annual Reports

Sub-regional organisation annual reports


7. More efficient water and nutrient use and management that would improve crop productivity demonstrated experimentally and/or in simulation

at least 50% of projects in this area demonstrate/ simulate capacity to improve crop productivity

Research Project Reports

PMC supported by the Partnership Coordinators

Annually as part of the annual review process

8. Portfolio works across countries in the the sub-tropic to semi-arid zone across the region

at least 5 different countries

Final project proposal documents

PMC At project start

PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 1: A research portfolio that can add value to crop productivity through more efficient water and nutrient use and management

9. Portfolio works across multi-stakeholder partnerships

at least 5 organisations Final project proposal documents


PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 2: A research portfolio that can add value to livestock productivity through better feed and animal disease management

10. Ability to improve animal production from changes in animal feed regimes demonstrated experimentally

at least 50% of livestock projects on feed management demonstrate ability to improve animal production





Appendix 1

15





11. Ability to improve disease management practices to enhance livestock productivity demonstrated experimentally

at least 50% of livestock projects on disease management demonstrate ability to improve livestock productivity




12. Portfolio works across countries in the sub-tropic to semi-arid zone across the region

at least 5 different countries



13. Portfolio works across multi-stakeholder partnerships

at least 5 organisations Final project proposal documents


CORAF/WECARD RESULT 4: Demand for agricultural knowledge from targeted clients facilitated and met (to improve extension/ dissemination of new technologies in mixed crop- livestock systems in semi-arid and sub-humid regions of WCA)

14. At least 40% increase in met demand for appropriate knowledge, information and requested technology by 2013

15. At least 30% increase in the numbers of users including vulnerable/ disadvantaged stakeholders able to successfully access relevant knowledge and information by 2012

(sub-set of existing CORAF/WECARD Indicators)

NARS Annual Reports






Appendix 1

16





16. For research projects where pre-existing technology exists, implementation of a gender-appropriate dissemination/ adoption strategy which includes researchers - extension and agribusiness- farmers and rural communities

at least 80% of research projects implement a gender-appropriate dissemination/ adoption strategy

Research project reports

Mid-term review reports



PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 3: Current and new knowledge being disseminated at the farm and community level

17. Research projects use a range of appropriate communication tools to communicate their project activities to men and women5

at least 80% of projects use gender-appropriate communication tools

Research project reports

Mid-term review reports



PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 4: Research includes socio-economic aspects to underpin adoption

18. Socio-economic aspects relevant to adoption process incorporated in project designs

at least 80% of projects incorporate socio-economic aspects relevant to adoption



5 Such as radio, print media, local languages, project branding in accordance with AusAID guidelines


Appendix 1

17





CORAF/WECARD RESULT 2: Strategic decision-making options for policy, institutions and markets developed

19. At least 15 new and effective multi-stakeholder partnerships and mechanisms for the development of policy, institutional and market options established and functional by 2013

20. At least 20 policy options have been proposed/ recommended and advocated for to decision makers at regional and national levels by 2013

21. At least 50% of proposed policy options are effective and operational by 2013


NARS Annual Reports





CORAF/WECARD RESULT 3: Sub-regional agricultural research system strengthened and coordinated

22. At least 30% increase in effective partnerships and mechanisms operating in IAR4D paradigm established, strengthened and effectively operational by 2013

23. At least 30% increase in the capacity of identified stakeholders to acquire information and utilise improved technologies/ innovations to produce, develop, process and market agricultural products by 2013


NARS Annual Reports






Appendix 1

18





24. Stakeholders’ satisfaction with CORAF/WECARD communication (gender disaggregated)6

at least 30% increase in men and women stakeholder satisfaction

Anonymous Annual Stakeholder Survey

CW Partnership Coordinator with M&E Programme Officer

Annually in Dec

25. Partnership capacity building in CORAF/WECARD has added value to the practice of research priority setting

Annual Stakeholder Survey (possibly only a sub-set of stakeholders – mainly STC?)

Action Learning report

CW Partnership Coordinator with M&E Programme Officer and CSIRO Partnership Coordinator

Annually in Dec

26. Participating NARS acknowledge that capacity building supported by the partnership is delivering improved science project implementation processes7

at least 80% of NARS Project Mid-Term Review reports

Action Learning report



PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 5: Capacity building with institutional partners and stakeholders

27. Publications/conference presentations produced by NARS scientists relating to C/W projects

Publications

Conference papers

C/W communications ongoing

PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 6: Research portfolio aimed at addressing market access and informing policy

28. Market access and policy initiative elements for men and women included in project designs

At least 2 projects include gender-equitable market access and policy initiative elements

Final Project proposal documents


At project start

6 CORAF/WECARD communication includes, but is not limited to: reports, publications, website etc 7 processes are about project management, M&E, communications


Appendix 1

19





29. Number of Australian scientists involved in research projects (gender disaggregated)

Project reports


Annual review

30. Number of Australian institutions involved in the research projects

Project reports PMC supported by the Partnership Coordinators

Annual review

31. Number of African scientists benefitting from mentoring and backstopping (gender disaggregated)

Project reports PMC supported by the Partnership Coordinators

Annual review

PARTNERSHIP: Links between African and Australian agricultural scientists established and supported.

32. The quality of the relationship between CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO

Action Learning report8


Annual review

33. Gender analysis completed for each project

100% Project Gender analysis reports


Once during first year of project

34. Men and women participate equitably in project activities

Project reports

Project Mid-Term Review reports


Annual review

GENDER EQUITY: Women and men participate in the research projects and share its benefits equitably.

35. Impact pathways support equitable access for men and women to new technologies and/or to other outputs from projects


Project reports


At project start

Annual review

8 The action learning process is described in the relevant section of this M&E Plan. It will include consideration of many data, including those relating to governance, implementation of recommendations, perceptions etc


Appendix 1

20





SOCIAL/HUMAN ETHICS:

Research projects using social/participatory methods and human participants abide by local or Australian guidelines

36. projects conducted ‘ethically’ (as per guidelines)

100% (for applicable projects)

Project Leaders

Occasional review


CSIRO Ethics committee

Annual review

As deemed necessary by CSIRO Ethics committee

37. Media coverage of Australian contribution to agricultural development in WCA

Project reports

C/W communication records

Australian embassy and AusAID media records

CSIRO media records


Annual review RECOGNITION: Australia’s contribution to the agricultural innovation system in WCA recognised and acknowledged

38. Number of invitations received from organisations external to CORAF for Australian representation at subregional fora

CSIRO records of invitations

Australian diplomatic missions in the region


Annual review


Appendix 2

21

Appendix 2: CORAF/WECARD Project proposal template

CORAF/WECARD Competitive Grant and Commissioned Research Schemes

Guidelines for preparing Project Proposal (PP)

SECTION A: KEY INFORMATION

Total Cost of Project:

Duration of Project:

Date of Submission:

Location (country/region/zone) of Project:

[NOTE: Section A1 should be submitted on a separate sheet]

A1 Project Title

The applicant should provide a title which describes the scope of the work and an abbreviated version of the project title for administrative purposes.

Project Co-ordinator This is the person with overall responsibility for the application and the implementation of the Project.

Address

Telephone

Fax

e-mail

Collaborator[s]

Contact details for the Project Co-ordinator

A2 Project Summary [Guideline of 100 words]

Please write a summary which briefly describes the development problems and how the project will help to solve them. The summary should identify the Project Purpose, proposed Activities and expected Outputs.

A3 Project Location (Country/region/zone)

The countries for the proposed project – a minimum requirement is for the project to be in at least 3 countries.

A4 Starting and Finishing Dates

The duration of the project should be the minimum necessary to deliver the Results of the project set out in proposal. The fund will not support proposals requiring funding for more than three years, and objectives should be carefully defined with this in mind.

** Attach the Project Logical Framework **

The logical framework is described, and guidelines for its construction are given in Chapter 2 of the CORAF/WECARD competitive grant scheme operating manual.

SECTION B: PROJECT INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

B1 Project's Specific Objective[Guide length - 50 words]

The project Specific Objective means the impact, or change, which it is hoped to achieve by


Appendix 2

22

delivering the project Results, provided certain key Assumptions hold. This should not be a reformulation of the Results.

B2 What problems or needs is the project aimed at?

Applicants are asked to provide a brief description of the problems or needs which the project will help to resolve. This description should be as specific as possible and directed to practical problems. Evidence in economic and/or social terms should be provided.

B3 What is the evidence for the demand for the proposed work?

Describe how the applicants have determined that demand exists for the proposed work.

Is the project General Objective linked to that of CORAF/WECARD and the wider policy environment of NEPAD and CAADP/FAAP?

Will the Specific Objective contribute to this General Objective in a meaningful way, and are the Results necessary and sufficient to achieve this Specific Objective?

It is especially important that the role of Target Groups [see B5] in determining the nature of the proposed work is explained. How have they been involved in the preparation of the proposal, and do they have a sense of ownership of the process and results.

B4 Will the project contribute to resolving those problems [in B2] and over what timescale?

What contribution will the successful conclusion of the project make to resolving the problems described in B2. Support your case with quantitative social and/or economic data.

How will the Results be utilised?

B5 Who are the target group?

The target group are the people immediately involved in the implementation of the project, and who will be the first to use and benefit from the Outputs. Indicate which target/collaborating groups or intermediate users of project products [information, technology, methodology, materials, structures for example] have been identified and have explicitly agreed to the objectives of the project.

B6 Who will the beneficiaries be and are there any groups who will be disadvantaged by the application of the findings of the proposed work?

Beneficiaries are those outside the immediate project area, who will benefit in time from the project Results. This will be as a result of the spread or up-scaling of the processes, systems or technology developed by the project.

Explain who is likely to benefit from the successful conclusion of the project and, in particular, which communities will benefit, and why.

State whether there will be any group on whom project findings or Activities and application may have a negative impact, both immediately or in the longer-term. For example, when a category of person's labour is no longer required because of the development of a certain technology. With regard to both positive and negative impact, particular attention should be paid to the benefits of the project for women as well as for the poor.

Indicate whether representatives of the beneficiaries have participated in defining their needs such that they are commonly understood.

Explain how representatives of the intended beneficiaries have been involved in the preparation of the proposal, and so may have a sense of ownership of the project process and the results.

B7 How will the proposal contribute to sustained poverty reduction?

Explain how the project will contribute, directly or indirectly, to poverty elimination amongst the target groups and beneficiaries.

B8 What are the proposed promotion pathways for the uptake, or up-scaling, of the project Results to the intended beneficiaries?

If applicable, identify how the Results of the project will reach a wider set of beneficiaries.

Have any market studies for the Results been produced?


Appendix 2

23

How will the Results be made available to intended users?

What are the further stages that will be needed to develop Results such as testing and establishing manufacture of a marketable product?

How, and by whom, will the further stages be done and paid for?

Indicate the ownership of the promotion/up-scaling pathways?

If applicable, what mechanisms will be used in dissemination/up-scaling:

personal professional contact;

publications;

hand-over of actual materials;

training;

technical internal report;

other [please specify].

If the project is to produce intermediate products, list these and indicate the classes of beneficiaries, which should receive each type of product. Include the cost of dissemination. The project should cover all its own publication and distribution costs.

SECTION C: BACKGROUND TO WORK

C1 What work has previously been done or is currently being pursued towards the Specific Objective, Results and Activities of the project? [Guide length - 500 words]

For research focussed projects, describe briefly any relevant work which has either been done or is currently being done by your organisation or institution. Explain how this project will relate to that work. Provide a brief literature review in order to relate this project to other relevant research. Note that the aim of this review should be to provide the scientific background to the project. It is important to establish that previous knowledge has been adequately addressed and knowledge gaps properly identified.

For extension/development focussed projects, describe the current farmer practice, and indicate what will change as a result of the project, what has been tested elsewhere, what is new and how local resources will be utilised in the Result.

SECTION D: OUTPUTS AND ACTIVITIES

D1 What are the project's intended Results?

What is the project to accomplish? These are the results and/or products appropriate to the project Specific Objective. The Results should be clearly stated and they should be necessary and sufficient to achieve the Specific Objective of the project. Expand on the Results given in the logical framework, giving detail of what lies behind those statements.

D2 What are the objectively verifiable indicators for the Results?

Please expand on your logical framework statement. Show the logical connection between these and the Outputs and why they have been selected as indicators.

D3 How will the Result indicators be measured?

Please expand on your logical framework statement. Explain any methodology that will be necessary in order to verify the indicators.

D4 What are the expected environmental impacts? [beneficial, harmful, neutral]

Yes or no answers will not be sufficient. Highlight any hazards arising from the implementation of the project itself and, briefly, any positive or negative impacts which the implementation of the project Outputs may lead to.

D5 What are the expected social impacts? [beneficial, harmful, neutral]


Appendix 2

24

D6 What are the expected economic impacts? [beneficial, harmful, neutral]

D7 Describe the project Activities

There should be an Activity or group of Activities associated with each of the project Results. The description of the Activities should explain how the project's Results will be delivered. This should include a discussion of the problems to be considered, the approach and methods to be adopted and the concepts or hypotheses to be examined or tested. A Gantt Chart should be prepared to summarise the Activities listed.

Where appropriate, the proposed methods of data collection and analysis should be set out and justified. Where field data are to be collected, attention should be given to sampling, sample size and bias and their possible implications for the wider applicability and validity of the results. Where a questionnaire survey is intended, a draft version should be supplied with the application. Any additional technical support [such as biometric or social science] should be described in this section with the appropriate Activity or methodology to be used.

D8 Attach milestones for the life of the project

A milestone is defined as a specific, significant, intermediate indicator, which is a necessary step towards delivery of the final Results[s]. These will assist in monitoring progress.

These milestones may be subject to review, and are only required for the first year. Subsequent milestones should be presented with each annual Activity plan.

SECTION E: COLLABORATION AND PARTNERSHIPS

E1 Internal Collaboration and Partnerships

Internal partners are those with whom agreements have been signed, and who are an integral part of the project implementation and Activities.

Indicate the mechanisms for collaboration between any partners within the project structure. Issues such as planning, monitoring, responsibilities, roles and reporting should be explained.

E2 External Collaboration

External collaborators are those who will interact with the project, such as target groups, but who are not directly involved with the implementation. They may be, for example, stakeholders invited to open days or training workshops.

Indicate how the project will liaise with these partners who are external to project funding and implementation. Who will these partners be, and what will be their role in the project implementation?

Indicate what role farmers will have in the planning, monitoring and implementation process.

SECTION F: FINANCIAL INFORMATION

F1 Total financial support requested from CORAF/WECARD

Budgets should be presented by project Activity, and the budget for each Activity should be broken down separately to indicate how the final figure has been determined.

Rates for travel and subsistence should be according to the institutional norms of the organisations involved with the application. Certified, documentary evidence is required that these are official rates.

Management of funds will be according to CORAF/WECARD’s financial rules.

The budgets should be shown in US$ and by calendar year [1st January to 31st December]. Full


Appendix 2

25

allowance should be made for inflation.

Reasonable administrative costs [overheads] may be included, but will need to be itemised and accounted for. Such costs may include the relevant proportion of the following:

general secretarial, administrative, accounting and computer costs;

rent, rates and other expenses of upkeep or offices, furnishings, equipment and supplies;

postage, telecommunications and other utilities.

The purchase of capital equipment items will not normally be supported, but if requested will need to be fully justified.

Contingency should be kept to a minimum and the total of contingency and overhead charges should not exceed 10% of the total budget.

F2 Other contributions

Indicate any contributions, financial or in kind, that the applicant organisation[s] will make towards project implementation. This is especially important for development projects where sustainability of results after completion is an issue.

F3 Application elsewhere

Please state if you have applied elsewhere for funding for this particular project proposal

The size of the boxes on this form has been reduced for presentation purposes.


Appendix 3

26

Appendix 3: Structure of project evaluation reports

Executive summary The executive summary includes the main findings and recommendations

I. Evaluation objectives, methodology and processes

Main evaluation objectives are defined, as well as the evaluation framework. An overview of information sources and data collection instruments is presented, as well as the evaluation process.

II. Country and sector background

Only background information that is relevant for the project.

III. Project background Information on: 1) project objectives, goals and components; 2) project data; 3) planning and monitoring, implementation support, supervisions; 4) quality enhancement by COPRAF/WECARD

IV. Implementation results

Assessment of project performance in terms of 1) outputs; 2) budget use; 3) compliance with schedules and deadlines

V. Project performance Relevance and coherence; alignment with CORAF/WECARD objectives, project design features

Effectiveness; the quality of physical and financial outputs

Efficiency; financial and administrative monitoring

Overall assessment of performance

VI. Impact Impact on agricultural productivity and food security

Impact on the target group

Impact on capacity building of individuals and institutions

Impact on policies

VII. Sustainability and innovations

VIII. performance of partners

IX. Conclusions and recommendations


Appendix 4

27

Appendix 4: Example Project Logframe: Strengthening Seed Systems

Indicators Mean of verification

Assumptions

G

oal

Increased productivity of target staple crops in WCA.

% change in productivity of the target crops

Baseline and evaluation reports

% change in number of farmers using improved seeds

Baseline and evaluation reports

Quantity (mt) of improved seeds used

S

pec

ific

Ob

ject

ive

Enhanced knowledge of stakeholders in seeds system for staple crops in WCA.

Number of models developed by the scientists

1. Constraints & opportunities for farmer access to seeds of improved varieties identified

1.1 Number of case studies conducted (disaggregated by country)

i) Country / partner's reports; ii) case study reports

Timely availability of funds (the banking system).

2.1 Number of high yielding varieties identified though review of secondary data

i) Country/ regional/partner's reports;

Rainfall patterns remain unchanged

2.2 Number of participatory variety trials conducted

i) Country/ partner's reports

Availability of inputs (fertilizers, chemicals…) to be used in the trails

2. Performance of high yielding varieties confirmed in participatory on-farm trials

2.3 Number of varieties for which performances have been confirmed through the on-farm trials

i) Country/ partner's reports; ii) specific reports on the trials.

3.1 Number of cost benefit analysis conducted (disaggregated by country)

i) Country/ partner's reports; ii) specific reports.

O

utp

uts

3. Cost effective seed delivery channels identified

3.2 Number of cost effective delivery channels identifed (disaggregated by country)


Appendix 4

28

4. Capacities of target stakeholders in the seed value chain strengthened

4.1. Number of training courses on value chain analysis, M&E data collection and analysis, communication/extension etc.

i) Country/regional/ partner's reports;

ii) specific training reports.

4.2. Number of training modules developed

Training manuals, Power point presentations…

4.3. Number participants in trainings (gender disaggregated)

i) Training reports; ii) Attendance list; iii) Payment statements

4.4. Number of user friendly communication tools provided to target stakeholders.

i) fliers, pamphlets, posters, bills of radio & television programs, publications…

5. Project Coordination & M&E

5.1 Number of regional project initiation workshop to prepare works plans and budgets organised 5.2 Number of annual review and work planning meetings

5.3 Number of periodic technical progress and financial reports produced

5.4 Number of monitoring and evaluation tours in project sites

Workshop Reports, Reports of planning and review meetings, Technical and financial report produced; Reports of M&E tours of the projects.


Appendix 5

29

Appendix 5: Example set of discussion points for use in the Action Learning process between CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD

Baseline evaluation

1. BASE SET OF QUESTIONS TO BE POSED TO KEY PARTICIPANTS 2. What are your expectations for this partnership?

Further prompts:

3. At the partnership level? 4. For CORAF? 5. For other stakeholders (eg. NARS, CGIAR …)? 6. For farmers? 7. For yourself? 8. In 3 years time, when you are looking back at the operations of this partnership, can you

suggest what the impacts will have been that will have pleased you most?

Further prompts:

9. Can you suggest how such impacts can be measured and documented? 10. Likewise, what consequences, if they occur, could have disappointed you? 11. Can you suggest how these undesired consequences can be avoided? 12. Where do you think investment in IAR4D, such as proposed in this AusAID-supported

initiative, can be best directed?

Further prompts:

13. Does science contributing to new knowledge and publications have a place? 14. Should the investment be in developing new germplasm or improving agronomic

management? What balance between these options? 15. Should there be investment in on-farm variety and agronomic trials with farmers? 16. Can such initiatives engage within the value chain and try to connect farmers to markets? 17. Is capacity building of participants through training a priority? 18. Can you nominate IAR4D initiatives in West/Central Africa which you regard as having been

successful?

Further prompts:

19. If you can, what made them successful? 20. If you can’t what were the key barriers which prevented progress? 21. What do you think Australia can contribute to IAR4D in West/Central Africa?

Further prompts:

22. What has the funding injection from Australia meant in terms of your operations? 23. The injection of funding from Australia is acknowledged as important, but are there other

contributions which will be important? 24. Can you nominate Australian expertise you particularly seek from this partnership? 25. What advice can you give to the initiative at this point in time of its inception?

Further prompts:

26. On our expectations for “making a difference”? 27. On working in West/Central Africa and its institutions? 28. For Australians wishing to partner with local researchers?


Appendix 6

30

Appendix 6: AusAID Quality Reporting Criteria

Partnership monitoring and reporting will provide the information necessary for AusAID to assess the quality of Partnership implementation, in accordance with its quality system. The Partnership Annual Report will be the main vehicle for providing this information, which includes the requirement to provide meaningful management information that enables AusAID to provide a high quality aid program.

Quality is the extent to which aid activities apply internationally recognised characteristics of good aid practice, as summarised by quality criteria. Australian aid quality criteria have been refined since 2007 based on implementation experience, and feedback from program and thematic groups to improve alignment with international evaluation standards. They are applied, though slightly differently, across all stages of quality reporting 9. All activities are expected to satisfy and are assessed against these criteria:

• Relevant: Contribute to higher level objectives of the aid program (outlined in country, regional and thematic strategies) as well as partner strategic objectives, priorities and plans for development.

• Effective: Achieve clearly stated, measurable objectives and continually manage risks.

• Efficient: Manage the activity to get maximum value for money from aid funds, staff and other resources, and continually manage risks.

• Monitoring and evaluation: Be able to effectively measure progress towards meeting objectives.

• Analysis and learning: Based on sound technical analysis and continuous learning. (Not assessed in QAI, but otherwise implicit in management response/actions to improve)

• Sustainable: Appropriately address sustainability of the benefits of the activity after Australian contribution has ceased, with due account given to partner government systems, stakeholder ownership and phase out.

• Gender equality: Advance gender equality and promote the role of women.

9 Entry, implementation and independent evaluation (progress/completion).

CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership Food Security through Rural ... · In Eastern and Central Africa,...

Documents

Transcript of CSIRO-CORAF/WECARD Partnership Food Security through Rural ... · In Eastern and Central Africa,...