Monitoring and Evaluation · 2020-01-22 · Citation: Tizikara, C. 2014. FARA Monitoring and...

Monitoring and Evaluation

STRATEGY 2014–2018

Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa

12 Anmeda Street, Roman Ridge,

PMB CT 173, Accra, Ghana

2014

Monitoring and Evaluation

STRATEGY 2014–2018

Clesensio Tizikara

Citation: Tizikara, C. 2014. FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018, Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa, Accra, Ghana

FARA encourages fair use of this material. Proper citation is requested.

Editing and design: BluePencil Infodesign (www.bluepencil.in)

Printing: Pragati Offset Pvt Ltd (www.pragati.com)

Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA)

12 Anmeda Street, Roman Ridge

PMB CT 173, Accra, GhanaTel: +233 302 772823 / 302 779421 Fax: +233 302 773676Email: [email protected] Website: www.fara-africa.org

ISBN 000-0000-0000-0-0 (print)ISBN 000-0000-0-0000-0 (pdf)

1. Background 00

2. The need for Monitoring and Evaluation in FARA 00

2.1 Strategic context 00

2.1.1 FARA the stakeholder platform 00

2.1.2 FARA Secretariat as coordinating hub 00

2.2 Stakeholder expectations from the FARA M&E system 00

2.2.1 Expectations from the CAADP 00

2.2.2 Expectations from development partners 00

2.2.3 Expectations from the SROs 00

2.2.4 Expectations from the NARES 00

2.2.5 Expectations from the farming community and private sector 00

3. Strategy for Monitoring and Evaluation in FARA 00

3.1 Role and function of M&E in FARA 00

3.2 FARA’s Performance Monitoring Framework 00

3.2.1 Review of the PMF 00

3.3 Developing an integrated M&E system for FARA 00

3.3.1 M&E theory of change 00

3.3.2 Establishing appropriate and integrated M&E systems at all levels 00

3.3.3 M&E system automation 00

3.3.4 Strengthening the M&E capacity of CAADP-KIS institutions 00

3.3.5 Assessing and establishing the outcomes and impacts of FARA investment 00

3.3.6 Institutional arrangements for implementation 00

Acronyms and abbreviations 00

Contents

iii

iv FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

Africa Feeding Africa:

Enhancing African Agricultural Innovation Capacity

Vision

Reduced poverty in Africa as a result of sustainable broad-based agricultural growth and improved livelihoods, particularly of

smallholder and pastoral enterprises

Mission

The creation of broad-based improvements in agricultural productivity, competitiveness and markets by continental-level

strengthening of capacity for agricultural innovation

Value Proposition

Strengthening Africa’s capacity for innovation and transformation by visioning its strategic direction, integrating its capacities for change and creating an enabling policy environment for

implementation

1FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

2 FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

FARA – PMFFARA value proposition: Strengthening Africa’s capacity for innovation and transformation by visioning its strategic direction, integrating its capacities for change and creating an enabling policy environment for implementationStrategic priority Key result area OutcomesVisioning Africa’s agricultural transformation

African agricultural stakeholders determining how the sector should be transformed and establishing the needed collective actions in a gender-sensitive manner

• High-level stakeholder ownership of gender-disaggregated evidence-based information and policy recommendations derived from strategic analysis and foresight studies

• Functional partnerships and platforms for agricultural innovation and trade among African stakeholders (intra-continental), and between them, and northern and southern partners (Africa-South, Africa-North and Africa-South-North)

Integrating capacities for change

Strengthened and integrated continental capacity responding to stakeholder demands within the agricultural innovation system in a gender-sensitive manner

• Functional interactions and partnerships for creating capacity among farmers, research, education, extension, trade and agri-business organizations

• Adopted mechanisms for articulating demand and strengthened capacity to respond to demand

• Communities of practice addressing identified capacity deficits (in the design and implementation of R&D programs) in a gender-sensitive manner

• Strengthened human, organizational and institutional capacities for gender-sensitive agricultural innovation

Enabling environment for implementation

Enabling environment for increased AR4D investment and implementation of agricultural innovation systems in a gender-sensitive manner

• Evidence-based policy formulation, decision-making and investment

• Framework for African Agricultural Productivity (FAAP) principles and guidelines embedded in all aspects of CAADP planning and implementation

• Information and knowledge for learning exchange in agricultural innovation knowledge systems available and used

• Critical mass of policy-makers and advocacy agents avoiding duplication and filling critical gaps at the continental level

• Effective communication strategies and systems, including Information and Communication Technology (ICT), for disseminating and building constituencies for policy changes


FARA performance indicators for MTOP 2014–2018

Purpose level: Strengthened Africa capacity for agricultural innovationIndicator 1: Percentage increase in number of individuals, groups, organisations directly affected or reached by FARA interventions (disaggregated by gender)Indicator 2: Percentage increase in core competencies, capabilities and capacities for innovation among targeted (individual, organisational/inter-organisational and/or institutional)ARD actorsIndicator 3: Degree of stakeholder satisfaction with FARA performance and quality of products and servicesIndicator 4: Level of annual contributions by African Governments and institutions to agricultural research fundingVisioning Africa’s Agricultural Transformation: African agricultural stakeholders determining how the sector should be transformed and establishing the needed collective actions in a gender-sensitive manner

Integrating Capacities for Change: Strengthened and integrated continental capacity responding to stakeholder demands within the agricultural innovation system in a gender-sensitive manner

Enabling Environment for Implementation: Enabling environment for increased AR4D investment and implementation of agricultural innovation systems in a gender-sensitive manner

1.1 Number of Countries with AR&D agendas being influenced by the S3A (outcome of foresight studies, countries in which FAAP principles and guidelines have been embedded in CAADP national and/or regional compacts and agriculture and food security investment plans - AFSIPs)

1.2 Number of functional partnerships and platforms for agricultural innovation and trade among African stakeholders and between them and northern and southern partners established

1.3 Number of participants reached, participating or contributing to innovation platforms, consultations, workshops, meetings (individuals, institutions disaggregated by country, region, gender, stakeholder category)

2.1 Number of institutions adopting FARA-initiated interventions or mechanisms for identifying, articulating and/or addressing capacity needs

2.2 Number of institutions (disaggregated by category) whose capacity development needs have been assessed and/or supported (enhanced knowledge, skills and attitudes of individuals delivered through training workshops; changes in organisational design and culture, accountability, responsiveness, transparency and efficiency)

2.3 Number of functional communities of practice for creating gender-sensitive capacities formed and addressing identified capacity deficits in the design & implementation of AR&D programs

3.1 Number of countries and RECs in which FAAP principles and guidelines have been embedded in CAADP national and/or regional compacts and AFSIPs

3.2 Number of information and knowledge products/packages (briefs, reports, scientific papers and publications documentaries) produced and made available to stakeholders

3.3 Number of stakeholders (individuals, institutions disaggregated by country, region, gender, stakeholder category) reached with information through continental information and knowledge sharing platforms (websites, publications, visual and social media)

3.4 Number of platforms used for information delivery and exchange

3.5 Degree of improvement in availability of ICTs (magnitude of ICT speed and capacity performance, reliability of internet access, equity, service quality, cost-effectiveness) amongst targeted NARS institutions


Executive summaryBackground

The Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) was launched in June 2002, to serve as an African-owned facilitation and information-exchange forum to support Sub-Regional Research Organisations (SROs) and as an apex body to represent Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). In the subsequent years, FARA has evolved into a continent-wide umbrella organization bringing together and forming coalitions of major stakeholders in agricultural research and development in Africa. FARA is now poised to guide Africa to: (i) determine the agriculture that it wants and the mode of achieving it; (ii) develop, attract and retain the human and institutional capacity to implement its agricultural ambitions; and (iii) ensure that policy-makers get the evidence-based information they need to create enabling policy environments and also make certain that their constituents are well-informed and support the changes.

FARA’s vision is: “Reduced poverty in Africa as a result of sustainable broad-based agricultural growth and improved livelihoods, particularly of smallholder and pastoral enterprises”. The mission is: “The creation of broad-based improvements in agricultural productivity, competitiveness and markets by continental-level strengthening of capacity for agricultural innovation”. The vision and mission are supplemented by its value proposition: “Strengthening Africa’s capacity for innovation and transformation by visioning its strategic direction, integrating its capacities for change and creating an enabling policy environment for implementation”.

In order to realise its mission, FARA developed its first Strategic Plan (SP) covering the period from 2002–2012. The plan established three pillars as the core of the Forum’s work, namely: raising awareness, promoting appropriate policy options and, advocacy and resource mobilisation. FARA revised and adopted an ambitious SP for 2007–2016, as well as a five-year Medium-Term and Operational Plan (MTOP) for 2008–2012. The implementation of the MTOP was undertaken through an institutional architecture comprising five networking support functions (NSFs) in the areas of: (i) advocacy and resource mobilisation; (ii) access to knowledge and technologies; (iii) regional policies and markets;(iv) capacity strengthening; and (v) partnerships and strategic alliances. Of particular significance was the mandate given to FARA by the African Union Commission (AUC) and the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) Policy and Coordinating Agency (NPCA) to serve as the Pillar Lead Institution for the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme’s (CAADP) Pillar IV implementation. The CAADP stands out as the most credible Africa-owned and led development framework for catalysing agricultural transformation in Africa, thereby justifying the need for a greater and more “strategic” collaboration between AUC, NPCA and FARA.

1. Background


FARA has developed a new SP and MTOP for 2014–2018 in response to emerging agricultural development imperatives. They focus on the need to sustain the CAADP momentum and also to make science take centre stage in technology generation, extension, innovations, policy and social learning that Africa needs to apply in order to meet its agricultural and overall development goals. The Strategy and Plan are premised on “enhancing African agricultural innovation capacity” by visioning Africa’s agricultural transformation, integrating capacities for change and creating an enabling environment for implementation.

Box 1: CAADP 2013–2023 Strategic results matrix

Level Narrative summary Main assumptions1. Impact: to which

CAADP contributes (indirect link)

Agriculture’s contribution to Africa’s socio-economic growth and inclusive development (wealth creation; economic opportunities and prosperity – jobs and poverty alleviation; improved food security and nutrition; resilience; environmental sustainability)

Countries follow an agriculture-led, inclusive growth strategy for social and economic transformation

2. Outcomes: changes in African agriculture resulting from the implementation of CAADP (a reflection of the performance of African Agriculture)

Agricultural transformation and sustained agricultural growth2.1 Increased agriculture production and productivity 2.2 Better functioning national agriculture and food markets,

and increased intra/inter-regional trade 2.3 Expanded local agro-industry and value addition 2.4 Improved management and governance of natural

resources for sustainable agricultural production

Systemic capacity for transforming agriculture as envisaged in level 3 is attained

3. Results: added value of CAADP support and interventions to institutional transformation, and CAADP operational effectiveness are measured at this level

Strengthened systemic capacity for effective execution and delivery of results 3.1 Improved and inclusive policy design and

implementation capacity for agriculture3.2 More effective and accountable institutions to drive

planning and implementation of public policies and investment programmes

3.3 More inclusive and evidence-based agricultural planning and implementation processes

3.4 Improved coordination, partnerships and alliances within and across sectors and countries (regional trade and collaboration)

3.5 Increased (public/private) investment financing in agriculture, achieving better value for money

3.6 Enhanced knowledge support and skills development for agriculture through improved science and technology (S&T), education and training, peer learning, analytical capacity and strategic thinking

Political leadership as ensuring conducive and stable policy environment, and including sustained increase of public sector investment in agriculture

4. Inputs Implementation guidelines; knowledge pools; capacity building; peer review mechanisms

6 FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

2.1 Strategic context

The practice of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) draws heavily from the theoretical and conceptual foundations of management science.

Monitoring refers to a continuing function that uses the systematic collection of data on specific indicators of an on-going development intervention. The purpose of monitoring is to indicate the extent of progress and achievement of objectives, and the headway made on the use of allocated funds, both to the management and the main stakeholders.

Evaluation is the systematic and objective assessment of an on-going or completed project, programme or policy by focusing on its design, implementation and results. Evaluation is conducted to determine the relevance and fulfilment of objectives, development efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. It should provide information that is credible and useful, enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into the decision-making process of both the management and the main stakeholders.

In keeping with the principles of project cycle management, typical M&E systems tend to focus on tracking the implementation of planned activities in compliance with work plans and budgets. However, following the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, there has been an ever-increasing need for donor recipient organizations to develop robust M&E systems that provide timely information on:

• Progress of implementation

• Effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation process

• Relevance of products and services generated

• Outcomes and impacts of products and services on target beneficiaries

The principles of Managing for Development Results (MfDR) also require mutual accountability. FARA staff and implementing teams have to translate the direction provided by the SP and MTOP into sustainable benefits to targeted groups. This forms the axis of a Mutual Accountability Framework (MAF), which includes:

• Turning governance and strategic directions into results and performance

• A culture supported by strong corporate values, learning, innovation and change management

2. The need for M&E in FARA

The need for M&E in FARAFARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018 7FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

• Management excellence in the areas of stewardship, policy and programmes , risk management, people-focused service, accountability and people management

In order to design a system with these capabilities, there is need to understand FARA’s uniqueness as a forum. FARA is a continental-level hub of excellence and knowledge on agricultural research and innovation that is able to identify and source technical expertise across the continent and globally, to provide technical support to CAADP country teams, regional partnership forums and training programmes.

FARA is not a research implementing body, but the: (i) service provider of choice in the provision of Knowledge, Information and Skills (KIS) to countries and Regional Economic Communities (RECs); (ii) continental representative in the development and implementation of the Science Agenda for Agriculture in Africa (S3A); (iii) coordinator of regional productivity platforms for enabling Research and Development (R&D) actors to align and streamline their actions; (iv) mobiliser, convenor and coordinator for research, extension and education by advancing common interlinking and reinforcing strategies; (v) mainstreamer of evidence-based agricultural policy; and (vi) intelligence arm for detecting changes in CAADP and other continental initiatives and facilitating the alignment processes.

From the foregoing, although FARA, the Forum, is responsible for designing and accountable for implementing the requisite interventions for realising the objectives articulated in both the strategic plan and the MTOP, the FARA Secretariat implements the portfolio of interventions through a multitude of actors (often from autonomous institutions not necessarily answerable to FARA and with diverse mandates, backgrounds, expertise and competence). This can often easily make the logical link to the outcomes difficult and lead to loss of coherence and synergy between interventions. More often, results-based planning is applied but implementation falls short in the collection of relevant data that can contribute performance information, which in turn will improve decision-making and reporting. Accordingly, the archetypal monitoring and evaluation system for a typical investment project is ill suited for FARA Secretariat. The following attributes of FARA should therefore guide the design of its M&E system.

2.1.1 FARA the stakeholder platform

As a continent-wide forum of stakeholders, FARA provides a strategic platform for fostering global and continental networking for agricultural research and innovation in Africa. The stakeholders of FARA include farmers, the National Agricultural Research System (NARS) (policy-makers, academia, scientists, and change agents), the SROs, private business concerns and entrepreneurs, civil society organizations, governments and development partners. Often times, getting this diverse group of stakeholders to agree on a common goal and strategies for achieving a given set of objectives is quite a challenge. Fortunately, the CAADP initiative provides a common framework around which all the stakeholders can rally. In addition, the CAADP MAF provides a mechanism and incentives for partners to effectively deliver on their


commitments by focusing on shared goals and mutual responsibility, and in so doing promoting accountability and rewarding performance. In this scheme, the stakeholders endorse a common set of performance criteria for assessing the delivery on commitments such as budgetary allocations, outputs and development outcomes.

The primary challenge is therefore getting stakeholders to agree on common frameworks for planning and performance monitoring. In developing the corporate Performance Monitoring Framework (PMF) for the MTOP, FARA picked elements from the logical framework matrix (logframe), the results framework and outcome-mapping framework. These frameworks come with different terminologies and definitions that sometimes appear to contradict each other. Fortunately, the convergence point for all of these frameworks is the internal consistency in objective hierarchy logic. It is critical, in developing the PMF, to establish a rational and well-researched basis for believing that the cause is strongly related to the intended effect. There is no point in merely hoping that doing something will produce the desired effect. The PMF is therefore complemented by a “theory of action” (the connection between the actions undertaken and the effect which these actions are meant to produce); and a “theory of reach” (the necessary and sufficient coverage to produce credible claim to observed change). Together these three lead to: a Theory of Change (ToC) that lays out the impact that the stakeholders of FARA are seeking; outcomes that must change in order to achieve the impact that is sought; strategies to be used by partners to bring about desired outcomes; and processes that will create the conditions and capacity of the system to put these strategies in place.

The ToC is therefore a statement of four cause-and-effect relationships: the influence of observed changes on long-term benefits to the wider community; of products/outputs on immediate benefits to targeted groups; of interventions on recognisable products; and of inputs provided to the actions accomplished. The PMF describes the “what” for activity, the theory of action describes the “how” and the theory of reach describes the “scope and scale” of coverage. Thus irrespective of the framework, FARA should have a PMF that reflects how the various inputs and activities translate into outputs, outcomes and impact, and also a set of performance indicators that embrace the aspirations of its broad stakeholder constituency. The M&E system must capture the causal (or cause-effect) logic that links interventions to the desired changes in the actors that FARA is targeting, including the tactics and strategies used to achieve the desired changes in the target actors.

2.1.2 FARA Secretariat as coordinating hub

FARA delivers its results through entities over which it does not have direct control. The products and services generated through FARA’s investments are therefore co-owned by the implementing partners. Depending on the M&E strategy and plan, these products and services could be classified as FARA’s immediate outcomes or direct outputs.

The delivery of FARA generated results is premised on strengthening the capacities of African actors to be more effective and efficient in supporting African agriculture to achieve the internationally and continentally agreed development goals, on the basis of national

The need for M&E in FARA 9FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

development strategies. The commitment of the continental partners to participate and benefit from the African Agricultural Innovation System (AAIS), working collectively to achieve results in line with national and regional priorities, is part and parcel of the shared identity and an important aspect of FARA’s legitimacy as a continent-wide umbrella organization. The adoption of results-based management (RBM) aims to improve the effectiveness and accountability of FARA, accompanied by increased inter-agency collaboration and interaction as dictated by innovation system approaches. The FARA ToC places greater emphasis on integration and harmonisation of processes and approaches. An important challenge is to identify the best practice guidelines and the rule of thumb for performance indicators.

Furthermore, most of the implementing partner organizations have their own M&E system, with custom indicators designed to capture progress of delivery of a diverse range of products and services that fall outside of FARA’s primary responsibility. FARA’s progress tracking and reporting system should therefore be robust enough to cascade seamlessly and address attribution challenges in the case of shared benefits, following the principles of subsidiarity.

2.2 Stakeholder expectations from the FARA M&E system

The process for developing the FARA 2010–2014 M&E strategy, the precursor to the present strategy, employed an elaborate stakeholder consultation process that included key informant interviews and a stakeholder validation workshop. FARA’s key stakeholder groups provided feedback on their expectations from the FARA M&E system. These are still largely valid and are carried forward to this strategy.

2.2.1 Expectations from the CAADP

The CAADP, a programme of the Africa Union (AU)-NPCA, stands out as the most credible development framework for catalysing agricultural transformation in Africa. It provides a strategic framework for harmonising public and private investments that would generate the 6% annual growth in agricultural output. To sustain the CAADP momentum, the CAADP Secretariat has adopted a new “knowledge, information and skills” (KIS) approach since 2014. This approach will be used to backstop country-level CAADP processes with a lighter touch that does not require lead implementation institutions. As a consequence, FARA no longer has the explicit mandate to be the lead implementation institution for CAADP Pillar IV. However, FARA remains well positioned to sustain leadership – especially for the S3A – for setting Africa’s agricultural development agenda and coordinating research and the generation of new knowledge and innovations for sustainable agricultural transformation and growth. FARA has a vital role in the realisation of Sustainable Development Goal 2 (SDG2), which sets targets and indicators for sustainable agriculture, food security and adequate nutrition. In this regard, FARA, as one of the lead institutions in the monitoring of progress in the achievement of this goal is expected to develop appropriate institutional capacity to contribute effectively. More specifically, FARA is expected to develop an M&E framework with standard indicators that speak to those in the overarching CAADP M&E framework, and custom indicators for tracking incremental improvements in the performance of the AAIS.


2.2.2 Expectations from development partners

For most development partners, the evalu-ation criteria given by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) with the Development Assistance Committee (DAC), provides the key reference point for M&E. The criteria include relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustain-ability. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between FARA and the development partners signed in early 2008, states that to the extent possible, the development part-ners will use the monitoring, evaluation and review processes established by FARA. In this regard, FARA as the grant recipient of the Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) will be responsible for the overall M&E process. This responsibility entails regular prepara-tion of progress reports on the basis of the indicators specified in the agreed annual programme of activities (MDTF Programme Document, 2009). It is evident from the fore-going that the development partners rate technical accountability as the primary func-tion of FARA’s M&E system.

2.2.3 Expectations from the SROs

The four SROs have varied capacities, compe-tencies, capabilities and interests, and are at different levels in establishing effective moni-toring and evaluation systems. Their strategic focus remains on addressing trans-boundary problems and effecting spill overs of benefits of agricultural research and development. The SROs therefore look to the FARA Secre-tariat to strengthen their M&E capacity, to provide an indicator integration mechanism and the overarching standard indicators for tracking the FARA activities at the sub-regional level.

2.2.4 Expectations from the NARES

The National Agricultural Research and Extension Systems (NARES) include the National Agricultural Research Institutes (NARIs), the universities, and public and private sector

Box 2: OECD-DAC evaluation criteria

Relevance (doing the right thing)

• To what extent are the objectives of the programme still valid?

• Are the outputs of the programme consistent with the intended impacts and effects?

Effectiveness (achieving objectives)

• To what extent are the objectives achieved/ likely to be achieved?

• What are the major factors influencing the (non-) achievement of the objectives?

Efficiency (doing the things right/ use of resources)

• Are activities cost-efficient? Are activities achieved on time?

• Is the programme being implemented in the most efficient way compared to alter-native propositions?

Impact (outreach and pace of programme output)

• What is the result of the programme? How many people are affected?

• What real difference has the activity made to the beneficiaries?

Sustainability (long-term effect)

• Do the benefits of the programme continue after donor funding has ceased?

• What were the major factors, which influ-enced the achievement or non-achieve-ment of sustainability in the programme?

The need for M&E in FARAFARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018 11FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

extension services. Their capacities, competencies and capabilities vary widely across countries and between institutions. The NARIs, the extension systems and the universities require custom indicators for tracking their performance. More importantly, the CAADP agenda brings on board additional challenges given the increased levels of investment and the need to track both implementation and outcomes of increased support to agriculture at the country-level. The FARA M&E system should therefore provide a set of standard indicators and best practice guidelines for tracking and reporting progress in the implementation of NAFSIPs at country-level. Both the CAADP and the FARA M&E frameworks should provide the standard indicators for tracking improvements and achievements in agricultural research, education and training.

2.2.5 Expectations from the farming community and private sector

The farmers are the ultimate beneficiaries of products and services generated by FARA. The farming community and private sector operators would like to be placed at the forefront in setting the agenda and articulating investment priorities for agricultural research, extension, education and training. Critically speaking, accountability frameworks that empower the farmers to review performance of agricultural research, extension, and education and training systems are lacking. The FARA M&E system should include a framework that allows active participation of farmers, civil society and the private sector in the review and evaluation of these programmes, in accordance with the principles set out in the CAADP agenda documents and the S3A.


3.1 Role and function of M&E in FARAThe FARA Secretariat is expected to deliver results through a network of implementing partners over whom it does not have direct control. The M&E systems operated amongst all the partners generally have a number of different objectives. Nevertheless, a functional M&E system provides the strategic information needed to make good decisions for managing and improving programme performance, formulating policy and advocacy messages, and planning programmes better. It also generates data to satisfy accountability requirements. The FARA M&E unit oversees the tracking and reporting of progress, and achievement of results. It also provides management with timely information and advice for improving the performance of specific activities of the FARA Secretariat and of the Forum as a whole. The institutional architecture and operational modalities for the FARA M&E system are built around enhancing accountability to stakeholders, informing decision-making and performance improvements, measuring impact, and supporting learning.

a) Enhancing accountability by tracking the implementation of budgets and work-plans: FARA conducts ex-ante evaluations through appraisal and tracks the progress made towards the achievement of stated outputs/ results based on the activity milestones and output indicator targets. Through these, FARA provides timely information to its investors on the likely returns on their investment. Typically, implementation monitoring is used to ensure the timely delivery of output through an assessment of the degree to which the implementation process is in compliance with work-plans and budgets. All the data and information are generated by the implementing agencies/ units following well-defined reporting formats, performance indicators and milestones.

b) Enhancing accountability by assessing the outcomes and impacts of interventions: By focusing on the process of managing for the achievement of results, rather than on the underlying system of service delivery, and also analysing and documenting the outcomes and impacts of investment in its work, FARA provides investors with information on actual returns on investment. Stakeholders are interested in: i) the current performance of agriculture in the continental and national economies – with respect to wealth creation, resilience including climate change mitigation and improved food and nutrition security; ii) the trends that may need to be reversed/ accelerated (agricultural growth, job creation, poverty reduction); and, iii) the current course of action (conducive environment, systemic capacities) that may improve the performance of agriculture within the national economies.

3. Strategy for M&E in FARA

Strategy for M&E in FARAFARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018 13FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

c) Enhancing performance and facilitating lesson-learning: Identifying indicators at all levels of the implied results chain (output, outcome and impact) makes it possible to monitor the implementation process and pinpoint areas where there are bottlenecks in the delivery of the results, and which need more attention or a change of strategy to achieve the desired results. Synthesis of information through in-depth evaluations and reviews draws out key lessons for strategy, programme, and project formulation and reporting. Lesson-learning enables FARA to respond more proactively to the changing needs of its stakeholders and therefore remain a relevant and viable entity in a constantly changing environment. More importantly, the indicators and lessons not only form a basis for evaluating progress towards agricultural and capacity development targets, but also help to adjust and fine tune policies in order to meet the planned targets by linking programmes, goals, objectives and strategies of various programmes with agricultural growth performance at the continental-, sub-regional- and national- levels.

From the foregoing, it is evident that the primary function of M&E is to generate objective evidence of progress in the implementation of planned activities and in the achievement of set objectives. The underlying principle for the system is the development of a culture of learning and evaluation. This would be achieved by: (i) developing a simple, technology-enabled monitoring approach that supports managers at multiple levels to capture, analyse, visualise and report on progress in delivering work and achieving results; (ii) significantly increasing the number of evaluations in programmes and projects through a managed, regular cycle of outcome and impact M&E; (iii) producing evaluative knowledge products; (iv) providing coaching, capacity-building to support staff and selected partners to manage and develop their skills in M&E; and, (v) increasing staff skills in the commissioning and management of high quality evaluations. The M&E system addresses the following specific objectives:

• Reporting against the FARA SP, MTOP and the Results Framework (RF) that they contain

• Accountability for funds, staff time and other inputs expended by FARA against the MTOP

• Monitoring the performance of FARA and partners, to allow an assessment of whether the inputs are being applied on appropriate areas to achieve the desired results, and to trigger an appropriate management response.

• Creating an evidence base including baselines, to enable the evaluation of the MTOP as a whole, both in a mid-term review at the end of the MTOP period, and in an on-going plan for impact-assessment

• Learning lessons on how FARA outputs can make a difference to the AAIS and people’s lives

• Generating information for corporate reporting, program/ unit performance and the FARA strategic objectives

The above functions influence FARA to use evidence to drive value for money, impact other AAIS actors to do the same and drive programme design through rigorous evaluations of what works. They also allow FARA and constituents to test, innovate, scale up, and help partners


build and strengthen capacity to generate and use evidence. The strategy of embedding M&E in all FARA actions and interventions would be achieved through a systematic change process focussed on RBM. Key elements of this are: including more staff with knowledge, skills and competencies to undertake work on commissioning and using M&E information. It also comprises using clearer guidelines and standards on evidence when new programmes are being commissioned, an increase in work on rigorous Impact Evaluations (IEs) within programmes, and the development of a professional cadre of M&E specialists and practitioners from across the range of FORUM partners, with the Secretariat providing guidance across and within.

Box 3: Components of a functional M&E system

Component Performance goal for this componentOrganizational structures with M&E functions

Establish and maintain a network of organizations responsible for M&E at the various decision-making and service delivery levels

Human capacity for M&E Ensure adequate skilled human resources at all levels of the M&E system to ensure completion of all tasks defined in the annual M&E workplans. This includes sufficient analytical capacity to use the data and produce relevant reports

Partnerships to plan, coordinate and manage the M&E system

Establish and maintain partnerships among stakeholders involved in planning and managing the M&E system

M&E plans Develop and regularly update the M&E plans, including identified data needs, standardised indicators, data collection procedures and tools, and roles and responsibilities for implementation

Annual, costed M&E workplans Develop annual, costed M&E workplans including specified and costed M&E activities of all relevant stakeholders and identified sources of funding. It also involves using this plan for coordination and assessment of the progress of M&E implementation throughout the year

Advocacy, communication and culture for M&E

Ensure knowledge of and commitment to M&E among policy-makers, programme managers, programme staff and other stakeholders

Routine programme monitoring Produce timely and high-quality (valid, reliable and comprehensive) routine programme monitoring data

Surveys and surveillance Produce timely, valid and reliable data from surveys and surveillanceDatabases Develop and maintain databases that enable stakeholders to access

relevant data for formulating policy, and for managing and improving programmes

Supportive supervision and data auditing

Monitor data quality periodically and address obstacles to producing high-quality (that is, valid, reliable, comprehensive and timely) data

Evaluation and research Identify evaluation and research questions, coordinate studies to meet the identified needs, and enhance the use of evaluation and research findings

Data dissemination and use Disseminate and use data from the M&E system to guide the formulation of policy and the planning and improvement of programmes

Source: adapted from “Organizing framework for a functional national HIV monitoring and evaluation system”. Geneva, UNAIDS, 2008 (http://siteresources.worldbank.org/ INTHIVAIDS/Resources/375798-1132695455908/GROrganizingFrameworkforHIVMESystem.pdf.)


Box 4: Role and objectives by type of M&E process

Role Main type of M&E

ObjectivesMonitoring Evaluation

Management On-going evaluation (e.g. Mid-term evaluation)

• Reviewing progress of programme/ project

• Allowing managers to identify and assess potential problems or successes and make appropriate modifications throughout an operation (including to its original design), to keep it on track to achieve its objectives

• Revisiting and improving pre-determined action plans and/ or making necessary changes in operational modalities

• Improving current and future operations

Performance measurement

Continuous monitoring

• Tracking performance against predetermined input, activity, process and output indicators during the formative phase of a programme/ project to establish that the intended performance is being achieved

• Objectively reviewing the results of processes, operations, and policies

Accountability Ex-ante evaluation

• Defining indicators and clearly articulating the details of a given programme/ project

• Determining the needs and assurances of programme/ project continuity

Continuous feedback

• Providing assurance of sound resource utilisation to management, implementing partners, donors, beneficiaries and the wider public

• Providing assurance of sound resource utilisation to management, implementing partners, donors, beneficiaries and the wider public.

Terminal evaluation

• Reviewing capacity, effectiveness, and sustainability, and determining whether additional follow up is necessary after the completion of a programme/ project

Learning Ex-post evaluation

• Providing stakeholders with lessons while implementing the M&E process

• Reviewing impacts and sustainability of a programme/ project

• Obtaining lessons and recommendations for design improvement and implementing future interventions

• Enabling learning by sharing evaluation findings, recommendations and lessons

Advocacy Sustainability monitoring

• Providing information and evidence for continued or new support

• Ensuring availability of necessary resources and provisions needed for sustainability throughout a programme’s pre-determined lifecycle

• Providing information and evidence for continued or new support


3.2 FARA – PMFWhile developing the FARA SP (2014–2018), a comprehensive analysis of challenges that FARA is expected to respond to generated three strategic priorities or key areas for intervention. Following the causal logic, the three intervention areas were transformed into results that FARA needs to deliver and the action required, in order to contribute to the strategic goal of sustainable broad-based agricultural productivity growth in Africa.

In elaborating FARA’s previous hierarchies of objectives, a hybrid of the results framework, logframe and outcome mapping framework have been used. Those involved with deter-mining the impact of agricultural innovation have noted the difficulty of relating relatively modest inputs to outcomes that are subject to a very large number of other influences. It will not be easy to measure the impact that FARA results have on development. In fact, it will even be more difficult to separate those factors that actually result in change over time, let alone apportion the observed changes to the multitude of actors involved in implementa-tion. The SP-2014 further acknowledges that individual outputs will rarely bring about change on their own. It is more likely that people will act on evidence that is built up over many years, in different contexts, once this has been communicated effectively. Even when FARA outputs help shape policy and practice, it will sometimes take years to see the benefits to poor people.

The new FARA strategic and operational plans are based on a ToC - the assumed “results chain/ impact pathway” or how the various inputs and activities translate into outputs, outcomes and impact. This was extensively discussed to establish a rational and well-researched basis for believing that the cause is strongly related to the intended effect. There is no point in merely hoping that doing something will produce the desired effect. Consequently, the Results Framework (RF) is complemented by a ToC– – the connection between the actions undertaken and the effect(s) which these actions are meant to produce, and a theory of reach – the necessary and sufficient coverage required to produce credible claim to observed change. Together these three constituted the ToC that lays out the impact FARA is seeking: outcomes that must change in order to achieve the impact sought; strategies to be used by partners to bring about the outcomes desired; and, processes that will create the conditions and capacity of the system to put these strategies in place. The ToC states the connection between the actions to be undertaken and the effects that these actions are meant to produce (Figure 1).

The FARA ToC is therefore a statement of four cause-and-effect relationships: the influence of observed changes on long-term benefits to the wider community; of FARA outputs (products and services) on immediate benefits to targeted groups; of FARA interventions on recognisable

Box 5: Strategic challenges for FARA to address

• Visioning Africa’s agricultural transfor-mation: with foresight, strategic analysis and partnerships to enable African agri-cultural stakeholders to determine how the industry should develop and plan how to get there, based on evidence and the combined strength of all stakeholders

• Integrating capacities for change: by making the different actors aware of each other’s capacities and contributions, and helping them to make the best of their relative collaborative advantages to mutual benefit, while also strengthening their own human and institutional capacities

• Creating an enabling environment for implementation: through advocacy and communication to generate enabling poli-cies and ensure that they get stakeholders’ support for their implementation.


Figu

re 1

: FA

RA th

eory

of c

hang

e an

d im

pact

pat

hway


products; and of inputs provided to the actions accomplished. The RF describes the “what” for activity, the ToC describes the “how” and the theory of reach describes the “scope and scale” of coverage. A ToC is the causal (or cause-effect) logic that links FARA activities to the desired changes in the actors that FARA is targeting to change. It describes the tactics and strategies, including working through partnerships and networks, thought necessary to achieve the desired changes in the target actors.

The PMF is designed (through clarity of objectives that respond to clearly defined priority issues, objective hierarchy that defines the temporal scale and levels of responsibility for achieving the objectives, and a set of performance indicators) to test and refine the ToC. The indicators and milestones challenge pre-conceptions, aid reflection and help implementers regularly ask themselves “are we doing the right thing to achieve the changes we want to see?” These indicators have been identified at different points in the results chain to trace how certain activities are being effective. This has the benefit of allowing FARA to track any bottlenecks that may appear in the efficient achievement of.

The generic results (output-level where FARA is expected to deliver 100%) and indicators reflect an end-of-state and not a process or activity. The language of use, therefore, in constructing the results statements reflects “change” rather than “action”. The generic products relate to knowledge (guidelines, strategies, analysis), physical outputs (agricultural production), behaviour change (campaigns, TV and radio programmes, documentaries, shows, public debates), and capacity development (conferences, working groups, trainings).

At the outcome-level, the same end-of-state objective is adopted. It reflects the adoption and use of the FARA products (e.g. using policy and technology-related research-based knowledge, strengthening capacity to use research, public awareness, political will, policy adoption and implementation, physical and social changes in lives and communities - including negative and positive changes, reversals and backlash, gender equality and women’s empowerment). Although FARA is expected to have a higher level of accountability, use also influenced by the actions (or inaction) of other actors.

The goal defines the long-term benefit (impact) to society of FARA’s investments. Since many actors besides FARA contribute to the realisation of a goal, it is not a direct accountability objective. On a temporal scale, a goal is only realised after many years of concerted effort. As an objective, the goal statement also defines an end state and not a process or activity.

3.2.1 Review of the PMF

The strategic matrix in the FARA SP provides a sound basis for reviewing the PMF. The objective statements reflect an end state, while the outcome-related indicators are key performance indicators. The overarching statement of objectives (the goal) in both the SP and the MTOP is at a higher-level, and speaks to the Millennium Development Goals or MDGs (which will change to Sustainable Development Goals - SDGs after 2015). The standard indicators proposed for each result are summarised in Table 1 below. The monitoring processes will pursue convergence between intentions expressed as targets for each of the indicators and the real achievements. Evaluations will analyse the facts. Results go beyond management (systems, scorecards, metrics and reporting) to embrace decision-making for transformative change and improvement.


Tabl

e 1: F

ARA

PMF,

2014

– 20

18

Objec

tive h

ierar

chy

Indi

cato

rsSo

urce

s of v

erifi

catio

nAs

sum

ptio

nsGo

al: S

ustai

nable

re

ducti

on of

food

ins

ecur

ity an

d po

verty

in A

frica

while

enha

ncing

the

envir

onme

nt

Meas

ures

linke

d to t

he M

DGs/S

DGs a

nd

contr

ibutio

n to A

frica’s

socio

-eco

nomi

c dev

elopm

ent

focus

sing o

n dec

reas

es in

leve

ls of

pove

rty,

wealt

h-cre

ation

, res

ilienc

e and

incre

ases

in fo

od

and n

utritio

n sec

urity

by: (

1) ge

nder,

(2) s

pace

, (3)

ag

e, (4

) soc

io-ec

onom

ic gr

oup a

nd im

prov

emen

ts in

quali

ty of

envir

onme

nt

UNDP

repo

rtsCA

ADP

M&E

ReSA

KSS

repo

rts

Afric

an D

evelo

pmen

t Ban

k sta

tistic

s Mi

nistrie

s of A

gricu

lture

and

Finan

ceNa

tiona

l acc

ounts

W

orld

Bank

and F

AO st

atisti

csPu

rpos

e: To

contr

ibute

to ge

nera

ting h

igh,

broa

d-ba

sed a

nd

susta

inable

agric

ultur

al gr

owth

in Af

rica

Indica

tors g

ener

ally s

how

the ef

ficien

cy an

d eff

ectiv

enes

s of F

ARA

and p

artne

rs’ in

vestm

ents

in bo

ostin

g agr

icultu

ral p

rodu

ctivit

y, ge

nera

ting m

arke

t su

rplus

es fo

r tar

geted

value

chain

s, fun

ction

al lin

kage

s betw

een a

nd am

ongs

t insti

tution

s of th

e AA

IS, a

nd bo

ostin

g stak

ehold

er en

gage

ment

and

inves

tmen

t in th

e agr

icultu

ral s

ector

, thro

ugh:

Prod

uctiv

ity: C

hang

es in

real

Agric

ultur

al Gr

oss

Dome

stic P

rodu

ct (A

gGDP

) gro

wth r

ate an

d fac

tor pr

oduc

tivity

and u

se by

: (1)

sub-

secto

r, (2)

co

mmod

ity, (

3) ge

nder,

(4) s

ocio-

econ

omic

grou

p, (5

) spa

ceM

arke

ts: C

hang

es in

mar

ket s

hare

, acc

ess a

nd

status

/ con

dition

/ cap

acity

/ sev

erity

of re

lated

tra

de-b

arrie

rs Co

mpe

titive

ness

: Cha

nges

in re

turns

to in

vestm

ents,

co

sts an

d pric

e tre

nds,

confo

rmity

to sp

ecific

sta

ndar

ds by

: (1)

sub-

secto

r, (2)

comm

odity

, (3)

sp

ace

Dive

rsity

and

susta

inabil

ity: C

hang

es in

dive

rsity

of ac

tors p

artic

ipatin

g in a

nd be

nefitt

ing fr

om th

e ag

ricult

ural

innov

ation

syste

m ba

sed o

n gen

der,

socia

l gro

up, a

ge an

d spa

ce

UNDP

repo

rtsAU

/ CAA

DP re

ports

ReSA

KSS

repo

rtsFA

RA re

ports

FARA

annu

al re

ports

CAAD

P M&

E Re

SAKS

S re

ports

, Mi

nistrie

s of A

gricu

lture

and

Finan

ce na

tiona

l acc

ounts

,W

orld

Bank

and F

AO re

ports

• Re

giona

l poli

tical

and s

ocio-

econ

omic

cond

itions

do no

t neg

ate ga

ins. A

gricu

ltura

l tra

nsfor

matio

n and

susta

ined i

nclus

ive

agric

ultur

al gr

owth

conti

nue t

o be k

ey in

co

ntine

ntal, r

egion

al an

d nati

onal

deve

lopme

nt str

ategie

s •

Natio

nal a

nd in

terna

tiona

l con

texts

prom

ote

bene

fits (a

t this

level)

. CAA

DP co

mpon

ents

incre

asing

ly co

ntribu

te to

a sup

portiv

e ag

ricult

ural

envir

onme

nt •

Activ

e coo

rdina

tion w

ith ot

her r

eleva

nt no

n-ag

ricult

ural

R&D

secto

rs bo

osts

posit

ive

resp

onse

to th

e nee

ds of

the r

ural

and u

rban

po

or•

Stre

ngthe

ned h

uman

reso

urce

and s

ystem

ic ca

pacit

y is d

evelo

ped/

attra

cted a

nd re

taine

d in

Afric

a•

Natio

nal a

nd in

terna

tiona

l poli

tical

and

econ

omic

envir

onme

nts do

not n

egate

gains

. Po

litica

l lead

ersh

ip co

ntinu

es to

ensu

re

cond

ucive

and s

table

polic

y env

ironm

ent a

nd

evide

nce-

base

d acti

on im

prov

es pu

blic s

ector

pla

nning

, imple

menta

tion a

nd re

view


Objec

tive h

ierar

chy

Indi

cato

rsSo

urce

s of v

erifi

catio

nAs

sum

ptio

ns•

HIV

infec

tion r

ates d

o not

furthe

r und

ermi

ne th

e ab

ility o

f the A

frican

labo

ur fo

rce to

enga

ge in

ag

ricult

ure

Indi

cato

r 1: P

erce

ntage

incre

ase i

n num

ber o

f ind

ividu

als, g

roup

s, or

ganiz

ation

s dire

ctly a

ffecte

d or

reac

hed b

y FAR

A int

erve

ntion

s (dis

aggr

egate

d by

gend

er)

Indi

cato

r 2: P

erce

ntage

incre

ase i

n co

re

comp

etenc

ies, c

apab

ilities

and c

apac

ities

for in

nova

tion a

mong

targ

eted (

indivi

dual,

or

ganiz

ation

al/ in

ter-o

rgan

izatio

nal a

nd/ o

r ins

titutio

nal)

Agric

ultur

al Re

sear

ch fo

r Dev

elopm

ent

(AR4

D) ac

tors

Indi

cato

r 3: D

egre

e of s

takeh

older

satis

factio

n with

FA

RA pe

rform

ance

and q

uality

of pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s

Indi

cato

r 4: L

evel

of an

nual

contr

ibutio

ns by

Afric

an

Gove

rnme

nts an

d ins

titutio

ns to

agric

ultur

al re

sear

ch

fundin

g

Key r

esul

t 1:

Afric

an ag

ricult

ural

stake

holde

rs de

termi

ning h

ow

the se

ctor s

hould

be

tran

sform

ed an

d es

tablis

hing t

he ne

eded

co

llecti

ve ac

tions

in

a gen

der-s

ensit

ive

mann

er

Indi

cato

r 1.1:

Num

ber o

f Cou

ntries

with

AR&

D ag

enda

s bein

g infl

uenc

ed by

the S

3A (o

utcom

e of

fores

ight s

tudies

, cou

ntries

in w

hich F

AAP

princ

iples

an

d guid

eline

s hav

e bee

n emb

edde

d in C

AADP

na

tiona

l and

/or re

giona

l com

pacts

and A

FSIP

s)

FARA

M&E

prog

ress

repo

rtsSR

O, R

EC an

d NAR

S re

ports

CAAD

P/ IF

PRI/ R

eSAK

SS

repo

rtsGF

AR R

epor

tsCG

IAR

annu

al re

ports

S3A

repo

rts

• Na

tiona

l and

inter

natio

nal p

olitic

al an

d so

cio-e

cono

mic e

nviro

nmen

t doe

s not

nega

te ga

ins at

this

level

while

politi

cal le

ader

ship

conti

nues

to en

sure

cond

ucive

and s

table

polic

y en

viron

ment

• Ad

equa

te inf

rastr

uctur

e (inc

luding

ICT)

and

gene

ral s

ystem

ic ca

pacit

y is d

evelo

ped a

nd

maint

ained

• Na

tiona

l poli

cies,

inter

natio

nal e

vents

and u

nfair

comp

etitio

n do n

ot co

mpro

mise

gains

• Co

mplem

entar

y and

enab

ling p

olicie

s and

lega

l fra

mewo

rks ar

e dev

elope

d and

imple

mente

d


Objec

tive h

ierar

chy

Indi

cato

rsSo

urce

s of v

erifi

catio

nAs

sum

ptio

ns•

Incre

ased

syste

mic c

apac

ity, in

clusiv

enes

s and

ev

idenc

e-ba

sed a

ction

impr

ove p

ublic

secto

r pla

nning

, imple

menta

tion a

nd re

view

• Tr

ansfo

rmati

onal

chan

ge st

imula

tes gr

eater

sta

keho

lder e

ngag

emen

t and

inve

stmen

t•

Targ

eted a

nd co

ordin

ated s

uppo

rt, ca

pacit

y bu

ilding

, pee

r-rev

iew an

d lea

rning

gene

rate

institu

tiona

l tran

sform

ation

Indi

cato

r 1.2:

Num

ber o

f func

tiona

l par

tnersh

ips

and p

latfor

ms fo

r agr

icultu

ral in

nova

tion a

nd tr

ade

estab

lishe

d amo

ng A

frican

stak

ehold

ers,

and

betw

een t

hem

and n

orthe

rn an

d sou

thern

partn

ers

Indi

cato

r 1.3:

Num

ber o

f par

ticipa

nts (d

irectl

y) re

ache

d, pa

rticipa

ting o

r con

tributi

ng to

inno

vatio

n pla

tform

s, co

nsult

ation

s, wo

rksho

ps, m

eetin

gs

(indiv

iduals

, insti

tution

s disa

ggre

gated

by co

untry

, re

gion,

gend

er, st

akeh

older

categ

ory)

Key R

esul

t 2:

Stre

ngthe

ned a

nd

integ

rated

conti

nenta

l ca

pacit

y res

pond

ing to

sta

keho

lder d

eman

ds

withi

n the

agric

ultur

al inn

ovati

on sy

stem

in a g

ende

r-sen

sitive

ma

nner

Indi

cato

r2.1:

Num

ber o

f insti

tution

s ado

pting

FARA

-ini

tiated

inter

venti

ons o

r mec

hanis

ms fo

r iden

tifying

, ar

ticula

ting a

nd/ o

r add

ress

ing ca

pacit

y nee

ds

FARA

M&E

prog

ress

repo

rtsTe

rtiary

institu

tions

’ repo

rtsUn

iBRA

IN in

itiativ

e rep

orts

Indi

cato

r 2.2:

Num

ber o

f insti

tution

s (dis

aggr

egate

d by

categ

ory)

whos

e cap

acity

deve

lopme

nt ne

eds

have

been

asse

ssed

and/

or su

ppor

ted (e

nhan

ced

know

ledge

, skil

ls an

d attit

udes

of in

dividu

als

deliv

ered

thro

ugh t

raini

ng w

orks

hops

; cha

nges

in

orga

nizati

onal

desig

n and

cultu

re, a

ccou

ntabil

ity,

resp

onsiv

enes

s, tra

nspa

renc

y and

effic

iency

)


Objec

tive h

ierar

chy

Indi

cato

rsSo

urce

s of v

erifi

catio

nAs

sum

ptio

nsIn

dica

tor 2

.3: N

umbe

r of fu

nctio

nal c

ommu

nities

of

prac

tice f

or cr

eatin

g gen

der-s

ensit

ive ca

pacit

ies

forme

d; an

d add

ress

ing id

entifi

ed ca

pacit

y de

ficits

in th

e des

ign an

d imp

lemen

tation

of A

R4D

prog

ramm

esKe

y res

ult 3

: Cr

eatin

g an e

nabli

ng

envir

onme

nt for

inc

reas

ed A

R4D

inves

tmen

t and

im

pleme

ntatio

n of

agric

ultur

al inn

ovati

on

syste

ms in

a ge

nder

-se

nsitiv

e man

ner

Indi

cato

r 3.1:

Num

ber o

f cou

ntries

and R

ECs i

n wh

ich FA

AP pr

incipl

es an

d guid

eline

s hav

e bee

n em

bedd

ed in

CAA

DP na

tiona

l and

/ or r

egion

al co

mpac

ts an

d AFS

IPs

Coun

try an

d REC

repo

rtsAU

–NEP

AD re

ports

FARA

repo

rts

Indi

cato

r 3.2:

Num

ber o

f infor

matio

n and

know

ledge

pr

oduc

ts/pa

ckag

es (b

riefs,

repo

rts, s

cienti

fic pa

pers

and p

ublic

ation

s doc

umen

taries

) pro

duce

d and

ma

de av

ailab

le to

stake

holde

rsIn

dica

tor 3

.3: N

umbe

r of s

takeh

older

s (ind

ividu

als,

institu

tions

disa

ggre

gated

by co

untry

, reg

ion, g

ende

r, sta

keho

lder c

atego

ry) re

ache

d with

infor

matio

n thr

ough

conti

nenta

l infor

matio

n and

know

ledge

sh

aring

platf

orms

(web

sites

, pub

licati

ons,

visua

l and

so

cial m

edia)

Indi

cato

r 3.4:

Num

ber o

f plat

forms

used

for

infor

matio

n deli

very

and e

xcha

nge

Indi

cato

r 3.5:

Deg

ree o

f impr

ovem

ent in

avail

abilit

y of

ICTs

(mag

nitud

e of IC

T sp

eed a

nd ca

pacit

y pe

rform

ance

, reli

abilit

y of in

terne

t acc

ess,

equit

y, se

rvice

quali

ty, co

st-eff

ectiv

enes

s) am

ongs

t targ

eted

NARS

insti

tution

s


3.3 Developing an integrated M&E system for FARA

3.3.1 M&E – ToC

RBM underscores the need to enhance the effectiveness of investments by linking outputs and outcomes with inputs and activities. MfDR is a RBM strategy that puts particular emphasis on: aligning programming, M&E with results; managing for and not by results; keeping measurement and reporting simple; and, using result-based information for learning and decision making. MfDR facilitates strategic planning, management of risks, and measuring outcomes with development results at the centre of consideration. It enhances objective and robust management and decision-making processes. MfDR is useful primarily in three important areas: strengthening internal capacity, enhancing the relevance and effectiveness of funded programs, and improving relations with partners and stakeholders.

Besides the roles and responsibilities for the FARA M&E system in promoting the principle of MfDR, the FARA Secretariat is responsible for contributing towards the following key areas:

• Setting up an integrated M&E system for tracking the performance of agricultural research, extension, education and training in Africa;

• Developing the requisite capacity to manage the integrated M&E system; and,

• Supporting strategic analyses to demonstrate outcomes and impacts of investments in agricultural research, extension, education and training in Africa.

The M&E embedding process in FARA follows a ToC that represents as far as possible the intent and vision. The ToC presented in Figure 2 links eight key areas of activity with outputs, intermediate and final outcomes. The main objectives of embedding M&E include: increasing ownership of M&E by bringing it closer to the operational units, and improving the likelihood of staff acting on the findings as they would have initiated and/ or participated in the M&E processes. The idea of M&E as a culture implies that M&E is considered an integral part of the project cycle – as a core process rather than a separate activity built into project design from the beginning.

3.3.2 Establishing appropriate and integrated M&E systems at all levels

The CAADP agenda, as a strategic framework for harmonising and coordinating interventions for enhancing agricultural sector performance in Africa, provides the impetus for the development of an embedded PMF at the continental-, sub-regional and national-levels. Likewise, an overarching M&E framework for CAADP identifies a set of standard outcome and impact indicators for tracking performance. Given the diversity in socio-econo-political and agro-ecological conditions in Africa, some degree of variation in areas of focus is expected from the CAADP investment plans developed by the RECs and the NAFSIPs of individual countries. A set of custom indicators that reflects this diversity is therefore required to track these investments.

The FARA basic results framework presents the strategic development objective and intermediate outcomes. Through the process of indicator integration, FARA and partners will


Figu

re 2

: The

ory

of c

hang

e fo

r em

bedd

ing

M&

E in

FA

RA


continue to identify common sets of standard and custom indicators in accordance with the CAADP M&E framework (Table 2) to guide consistency, systematic tracking of progress and the adjustments involved in the design of interventions during implementation. Tracking these indicators will facilitate comparative analysis of trends in performance across countries and sub-regions. At the same time, data on the custom indicators will provide critical information on specific country and sub-regional parameters. The indicators of all existing FARA supported interventions and projects have been reviewed and integrated, harmonised and/ or rationalised with the standard indicators in the FARA corporate PMF. The process of indicator integration will ensure that the objectives and associated indicators of all new initiatives are aligned to the FARA PMF. The process of unpacking the standard indicators to reflect specific programme deliverables and responsibilities is illustrated in Annex 1.

FARA has developed a “Guidance Manual” for performance monitoring. The manual provides samples of protocols for data collection, analysis and reporting. A management information system, data entry, data quality, the efficient transmittal of data to a central database, and data utilisation guidelines will additionally be developed. This is very critical in the case of FARA where multiple agents are involved in providing data or reports for aggregation.

3.3.3 M&E system automation

The FARA strategy for M&E automation is to develop a simple, technology-enabled monitoring approach that supports FARA managers, staff and partners at multiple levels to capture, analyse, visualise and report on progress in delivering work and achieving results. The monitoring approach should inform management and decision-making so that FARA can adapt more quickly and effectively while simultaneously learning about what is effective, and sensing changes in the environment. This will involve: (i) developing and implementing a practical monitoring approach that meets the needs of FARA and its stakeholders; (ii) building the capacity of FARA staff and key partners to populate and use the approach; and, (iii) creating clear data visualisation and reporting tools to communicate monitoring results to multiple audiences for more effective management and decision-making.

The RF will be used to communicate the progress and results of the interventions. The general approach will be to include results in a “dashboard”, highlighting only the key high-level objectives and outcomes/ outputs achieved. The RF will show the current status of the indicators using the change in the indicators from baseline to highlight the results. Thus, choosing the correct outcome indicator and connecting it to key intervention outputs should provide a powerful communication and dissemination tool to inform and gather support from key stakeholders. Where web-based data entry and reporting are not practical, provisions will be made for the next best means of transmission, such as the use of Excel templates, which can be transferred by email or hard copy.

FARA M&E data captures technical factors in the form of performance and impact indicators; time factors in the form of detailed periodic plans of various activities; and financial factors in the form of comparative budget forecasts and utilisation. The automation tool required


Tabl

e 2: A

ligni

ng th

e FAR

A in

dica

tors

to th

e CAA

DP M

&E fr

amew

ork

Leve

lCA

AD

P re

sult

sFA

RA in

dica

tors

Impa

ct: t

o w

hich

CA

AD

P/FA

RA c

ontr

ibut

es

(indi

rect

link

)

Agr

icul

ture

’s c

ontr

ibuti

on to

Afr

ica

soci

o ec

onom

ic g

row

th a

nd in

clus

ive

deve

lopm

ent:

wea

lth c

reati

on; e

cono

mic

op

port

uniti

es a

nd p

rosp

erity

– jo

bs a

nd p

over

ty a

llevi

ation

; im

prov

ed fo

od s

ecur

ity a

nd n

utri

tion;

resi

lienc

e;

envi

ronm

enta

l sus

tain

abili

tyO

utco

mes

: Cha

nges

in

Afr

ican

agr

icul

ture

re

sulti

ng fr

om th

e im

plem

enta

tion

of C

AA

DP/

FA

RA

inte

rven

tions

(a

refle

ction

on

the

perf

orm

ance

of A

fric

an

agri

cultu

re)

Agr

icul

tura

l tra

nsfo

rmati

on a

nd

sust

aine

d ag

ricu

ltur

al g

row

thH

igh,

bro

ad-b

ased

and

sus

tain

able

agr

icul

tura

l gro

wth

2.1 In

creas

ed ag

ricult

ure p

rodu

ction

and

prod

uctiv

ity

Prod

uctiv

ity: C

hang

es in

real

AgG

DP

grow

th-r

ate

and

fact

or p

rodu

ctivi

ty a

nd u

se b

y:

(1) s

ub-s

ecto

r, (2

) com

mod

ity, (

3) g

ende

r, (4

) soc

io-e

cono

mic

gro

up, (

5) s

pace

2.2 B

etter

func

tionin

g nati

onal

agric

ultur

e an

d foo

d mar

kets

and i

ncre

ased

int

ra/ in

ter-re

giona

l trad

e 2.3

Exp

ande

d loc

al ag

ro-in

dustr

y and

va

lue ad

dition

Mar

kets

: Cha

nges

in m

arke

t sha

re, a

cces

s an

d st

atus

/ co

nditi

on/

capa

city

/ se

veri

ty

of re

late

d tr

ade-

barr

iers

Com

petiti

vene

ss: C

hang

es in

retu

rns

to in

vest

men

ts, c

osts

, and

pri

ce tr

ends

, co

nfor

mity

to s

peci

fic s

tand

ards

by:

(1) s

ub-s

ecto

r (2

) com

mod

ity (3

) spa

ce

2.4 Im

prov

ed m

anag

emen

t and

go

vern

ance

of na

tural

reso

urce

s for

su

staina

ble ag

ricult

ural

prod

uctio

n

Resu

lts:

Add

ed v

alue

of

CAA

DP/

FA

RA s

uppo

rt

and

inte

rven

tions

to

insti

tutio

nal

tran

sfor

mati

on. C

AA

DP/

FA

RA o

pera

tiona

l eff

ectiv

enes

s is

m

easu

red

at th

is le

vel

Stre

ngth

ened

sys

tem

ic c

apac

ity

for

effec

tive

exe

cuti

on a

nd d

eliv

ery

of

resu

lts

Stre

ngth

ened

Afr

ican

cap

acit

y fo

r ag

ricu

ltur

al in

nova

tion

wit

h pu

rpos

eful

ly

dete

rmin

ed o

utco

mes

, cre

ation

of c

apac

ity

for

inno

vati

on a

nd e

nabl

ing

envi

ronm

ents

for

impl

emen

tati

on3.1

Impr

oved

and i

nclus

ive po

licy d

esign

an

d imp

lemen

tation

capa

city f

or

agric

ultur

e

2.3 N

umbe

r of fu

nctio

nal c

ommu

nities

of pr

actic

e for

crea

ting g

ende

r-sen

sitive

capa

cities

for

med a

nd ad

dres

sing i

denti

fied c

apac

ity de

ficits

in th

e des

ign an

d imp

lemen

tation

of

AR4D

prog

ramm

es

3.1 N

umbe

r of c

ountr

ies an

d REC

s in w

hich F

AAP

princ

iples

and g

uideli

nes h

ave b

een

embe

dded

in C

AADP

natio

nal a

nd/ o

r reg

ional

comp

acts

and A

FSIP

s 3.2

Mor

e effe

ctive

and a

ccou

ntable

ins

titutio

ns to

drive

plan

ning a

nd

imple

menta

tion o

f pub

lic po

licies

and

inves

tmen

t pro

gram

mes

Div

ersi

ty a

nd s

usta

inab

ility

: Cha

nges

in d

iver

sity

of a

ctor

s pa

rtici

patin

g in

and

be

nefitti

ng fr

om th

e ag

ricu

ltura

l inn

ovati

on s

yste

m b

y ge

nder

, soc

ial g

roup

, age

and

sp

ace

2.1 N

umbe

r of in

stitut

ions a

dopti

ng FA

RA-in

itiated

inter

venti

ons o

r mec

hanis

ms fo

r ide

ntifyi

ng, a

rticula

ting a

nd/ o

r add

ress

ing ca

pacit

y nee

ds


Leve

lCA

AD

P re

sult

sFA

RA in

dica

tors

3.3 M

ore i

nclus

ive an

d evid

ence

-ba

sed a

gricu

ltura

l plan

ning a

nd

imple

menta

tion p

roce

sses

plan

ning

1.1 N

umbe

r of c

ountr

ies w

ith A

R4D

agen

das b

eing i

nflue

nced

by th

e outc

ome o

f fore

sight

studie

s

3.4 Im

prov

ed co

ordin

ation

, par

tnersh

ips

and a

llianc

es w

ithin

and a

cross

se

ctors

and c

ountr

ies (r

egion

al tra

de

and c

ollab

orati

on)

1.2 N

umbe

r of fu

nctio

nal p

artne

rships

and p

latfor

ms fo

r agr

icultu

ral in

nova

tion a

nd tr

ade

estab

lishe

d amo

ng A

frican

stak

ehold

ers a

nd be

twee

n the

m an

d nor

thern

and s

outhe

rn

partn

ers

1.3 N

umbe

r of p

artic

ipants

reac

hed,

partic

ipatin

g or c

ontrib

uting

to in

nova

tion p

latfor

ms,

cons

ultati

ons,

works

hops

, mee

tings

(indiv

iduals

, insti

tutio

ns d

isagg

rega

ted

by co

untry

, re

gion,

gen

der, s

take

holde

r cat

egor

y)

3.5 In

creas

ed (p

ublic

/priva

te) in

vestm

ent

finan

cing i

n agr

icultu

re ac

hievin

g be

tter v

alue f

or m

oney

Purp

ose-

leve

l ind

icat

or 4

: Lev

el o

f ann

ual c

ontr

ibuti

ons

by A

fric

an G

over

nmen

ts

and

insti

tutio

ns to

agr

icul

tura

l res

earc

h fu

ndin

g fu

ndin

g

3.5 D

egre

e of im

prov

emen

t in av

ailab

ility o

f ICTs

(mag

nitud

e of IC

T sp

eed a

nd ca

pacit

y pe

rform

ance

, reli

abilit

y of in

terne

t acc

ess,

equit

y, se

rvice

quali

ty, co

st-eff

ectiv

enes

s) am

ongs

t targ

eted N

ARS

institu

tions

3.6 E

nhan

ced k

nowl

edge

supp

ort a

nd

skills

deve

lopme

nt for

agric

ultur

e thr

ough

impr

oved

S&T

, edu

catio

n an

d tra

ining

; pee

r lear

ning;

analy

tical

capa

city a

nd st

rateg

ic thi

nking

2.2 N

umbe

r of in

stitut

ions (

disag

greg

ated b

y cate

gory)

who

se ca

pacit

y dev

elopm

ent n

eeds

ha

ve be

en as

sess

ed an

d/ or

supp

orted

(enh

ance

d kno

wled

ge, s

kills

and a

ttitud

es of

ind

ividu

als de

liver

ed th

roug

h tra

ining

wor

ksho

ps; c

hang

es in

orga

nizati

onal

desig

n and

cu

lture

, acc

ounta

bility

, res

pons

ivene

ss, tr

ansp

aren

cy an

d effic

iency

)3.2

Num

ber o

f infor

matio

n and

know

ledge

prod

ucts/

pack

ages

(brie

fs, re

ports

, scie

ntific

pa

pers

and p

ublic

ation

s doc

umen

taries

) pro

duce

d and

mad

e ava

ilable

to st

akeh

older

s3.3

Num

ber o

f stak

ehold

ers (

indivi

duals

and i

nstitu

tions

disa

ggre

gated

by co

untry

, reg

ion,

gend

er, st

akeh

older

categ

ory)

reac

hed w

ith in

forma

tion t

hrou

gh co

ntine

ntal in

forma

tion

and k

nowl

edge

shar

ing pl

atfor

ms (w

ebsit

es, p

ublic

ation

s, vis

ual a

nd so

cial m

edia)

3.4 N

umbe

r of p

latfor

ms us

ed fo

r infor

matio

n deli

very

and e

xcha

nge


should be able to improve productivity by allowing data capture and processing for automated reporting and quick access to information. In addition, the tool should enable the normalisation of captured data by referencing input data to the Annual Work Programme / RF Matrix. It must also incorporate easy database query facilities to enable multi-criteria sorting on several aspects of monitoring, analysis of detailed data and on the identification of problem areas for rapid decision making. The tool should have the right set of functionalities, produce the right information for those exerting technical control on the various activities, and be highly interactive to provide direct access to key performance indicators.

The system, overall, should enable the linkage and export of data for further data processing and analysis, with a General User Information (GUI) environment that allows users with minimal IT skills, to navigate through the system. This requires:

a) A data and application infrastructure that encourages best practices. The data and indicator templates should provide a structure that supports the best practices when it comes to data collection, metric-based planning and reporting by location and time

b) Accessible and open data administered by provider to ensure data quality and integrity

c) Data collection and analysis in real time

d) User-driven data management to ensure sustainability without custom services

e) Local to global collaboration – including interactive tools and applications, not just web pages of reports and maps

f) Identifying and tracking indicators with context and traceability. Impact is measured based on quantifiable data and progress is tracked against goals – by location and time

The following strategy and actions will be required:

1. Developing and implementing a practical FARA-wide monitoring approach, with an emphasis on:

• Identifying existing data and information needs across FARA and analysing gaps to determine optimal strategy for monitoring data for the full portfolio of programmatic and operational work

• Designing and implementing a simple, technology-enabled approach to meet these data and information needs by collecting, storing, retrieving and analysing progress against targets in a near “real time” way

• Codifying and standardising monitoring processes and tools to ensure a common approach is used across teams, while addressing customised needs where appropriate (e.g., teams working on Time Bound Activities (TBAs) vs. teams working on the FARA finances)

• Guiding the development of any basic, cost-effective technological solutions that may be needed, using an iterative and adaptive approach

• Ensuring relevant data on outcome/ impact monitoring is captured appropriately and fed into the new monitoring and reporting approach in a timely way for a full picture of progress. Incorporating scanning data on changes in the external environment to help monitor and mitigate risks


• Ensuring relevant data related to grants and other resources are captured appropriately and fed into the new monitoring system in a timely way for a full picture of investments made

2. Building the capacity of FARA teams and key partners to populate and use the monitoring approach:

• Supporting programme and operations teams to populate and use the monitoring approach to track progress and manage their work by extracting useful, relevant information that can help them learn and adapt

• Engaging with individual teams in developing short-term monitoring indicators related to strategy and plan delivery (typically connected to inputs, activities, and outputs), that will be integrated with outcomes and impact data in the monitoring approach

• Ensuring the ability of the M&E function of FARA to use data for integrated reporting

3. Creating clear data visualisation and reporting tools to communicate monitoring results to multiple audiences for more effective management and decision-making:

• Developing tools to analyse and communicate progress for teams, and at a FARA-wide level using clear narratives and compelling data visualisation

• Customising content at a range of levels for different stakeholders, including different sets of programme and operations staff, managers, the Board of Trustees and external stakeholders

• Linking M&E results and lessons with the strategy and planning functions and ensuring that analysis informs dynamic strategy shaping and annual work programming

• Identifying patterns and implications for the work of the FARA and advising accordingly

3.3.4 Strengthening the M&E capacity of CAADP-KIS institutions

The FARA M&E framework pitches on to the CAADP agenda and partially focuses on developing the capacity to track implementation and progress in the development and use of capacity for agricultural innovation in Africa in the areas of knowledge, information and skills. Together with the continental organizations, the NARS and other stakeholders, a targeted and comprehensive capacity improvement plan will be developed and implemented, paying special attention to the newly established organizations and the universities. Harmonisation of professional qualifications, competence requirements and quality standards will be an important consideration in facilitating capacity-building and cross-border business and professional opportunities.

Capacity-strengthening will focus on talent-management as the new approach for succession-planning that focuses on developing M&E champions and leaders within one’s very own organization. Talent management ensures that the right people, with the right skills are in the right place, and that these people are engaged and focussed on the right activities to achieve targeted results. Successful organizations develop talent by establishing a culture of wellness and provide learning opportunities, by empowering people to be successful by allowing them to play to their strengths. FARA will provide concrete strategies to implement a


talent-management system that focusses on identifying, assessing and developing M&E talent, nurtures people to maximise their potential, and creates a workplace well positioned to face whatever challenges lie ahead.

FARA uses two main routes to increasing internal M&E capacity: creating dedicated M&E advisory posts in operational units, and also creating an M&E cadre able to undertake specialised work by drawing on staff working in a wide range of roles to support the development of M&E skills across the organization. The generation of internal capacity has been complemented by a programme of external capacity-building work with partners and the international development community. M&E experts provide professional advice to support the preparation and implementation of M&E plans and the commissioning, design and implementation of evaluations. They also have a quality assurance role in ensuring that monitoring and evaluations are well designed and executed.

The establishment of an M&E cadre seeks to recognise, embed and develop M&E skills among staff. This process shall be advanced through accreditation. All staff will be eligible to apply for accreditation irrespective of grade, role or qualifications. Individuals can apply for accreditation at levels 1 to 4 (i.e. “foundation”, “competent”, “skilled” and “expert”) and will be assessed against a competencies framework and FARA context-specific competencies. The core set shall be based on the competencies framework developed by the International Development evaluation association (IDEAS). The core competencies of M&E are basically the same regardless of where or for whom a practitioner or expert works. The cadre also will serve as a pool of highly skilled individuals to fill M&E posts. However, no mandatory link will be made between accreditation and recruitment. This means that, in some cases, individuals in M&E posts will not be formally accredited to the cadre. The M&E unit shall encourage interested staff to attend training and apply for accreditation. Accreditation to the M&E cadre shall recognise an individual’s professional qualifications, expertise and experience, thus providing FARA with an assured standard, while enabling the individual to apply for posts requiring such expertise, with the support of the M&E unit.

Another important part of the M&E role shall be developing and delivering training to FARA staff and other partners. The M&E unit envisages running two courses – “Principles of M&E” and “Development Evaluation in Practice” – aimed at developing M&E skills and knowledge among the FARA staff. The “Principles of M&E” training course is to be designed as a two-day basic course aimed at introducing staff to the concepts, principles and terminology used in M&E, and providing an overview of M&E theory, approaches and practices. The course shall be aimed at staff seeking accreditation at level 1 or 2. Internal training events shall be funded through the administrative budget, and largely delivered by staff.

“Development Evaluation in Practice” is to be designed as a four or five-day higher level course for M&E managers and practitioners who are looking to attain level 3 skills (although the course alone does not equip individuals to be accredited to level 3). It seeks to prepare participants for commissioning, conducting and using development evaluation. This course shall be outsourced with the possibility of running it in collaboration with the African Evaluation Association (AfrEA)


and the International Programme for Development Evaluation Training (IPDET). It shall also be open to staff partners.

In addition to the two courses, M&E workshops will be facilitated targeting M&E practitioners and other accredited cadre members (and even for generalist and administrative (including programme) staff who often have an important role in managing evaluations) to support the growing demand for rigorous M&E. In addition to training, there is a need to consider what further support programmes staff may require, in managing the increasing volume of M&E assignments. M&E cafes and networks are considered useful as an alternative to traditional classroom forms of training, as are online training modules. Increasingly there is a clear preference and demand for ”learning by doing” in M&E, as this is where the real gains in expertise can be made. The pool of skills will not be fully utilised if preference is for the outsourcing of much of the work. Opportunities need to be created for the kind of hands-on learning, which is potentially a valuable area to develop further.

3.3.5 Assessing and establishing the outcomes and impacts of FARA investment

Evidence suggests that investments in agricultural research play a key role in raising agricultural productivity and enhancing sustainability. In recent years, ever-increasing importance has been given to assessing the impact of agricultural research. This is for reasons of accountability and transparency as well as to ensure that limited financial resources are used in the most effective manner possible. Impact assessment can provide empirical evidence of the effectiveness of past investments and thereby ensure the continued support of governments and donors to agricultural research in the future.

FARA will track the outcomes and impacts of its investments by comparing progress against targets, through field inspection, third-party monitoring and commissioned impact studies - using different approaches, using models and tools to assess the impacts of the investments, and using the best practices for disseminating impact assessment results to policy-makers and other relevant stakeholders. Both ex-ante impact assessment (predicting the impacts that planned investments might have in the future), and ex-post (looking at the impacts after the investment is completed) assessments will be applied. FARA recognises that credible and objective impact evaluations are demanding, both in terms of data and in terms of analytical rigour. To the extent possible, FARA will partner with reputable think-tanks and Advanced Research Institutions (ARIs) to conduct the detailed evaluation studies.

3.3.6 Institutional arrangements for implementation

The implementation of FARA interventions is based on wide consultation, participation and contribution of a broad range of stakeholders including Africa-based organizations and their International Cooperating Partners (ICPs), in order to create ownership for outputs and to internalise the principles upon which implementation is based. Action also occurs at various levels and scales of the Africa agricultural innovation landscape. This means that the M&E system has to take into account the several processes that take place at all these levels. The


involvement of all key stakeholders and actors in providing information to different processes and performances along the chain would improve decision-making and subsequent outcomes. The various levels, processes taking place at each level (Figure 3), and the sorts of issues to monitor and evaluate at each of the levels are outlined below.

M&E at the Secretariat level

The overall monitoring of FARA interventions shall focus on assessing the processes of implementing its mandate, and paying particular attention to: (1) capacity to facilitate and/ or coordinate the development and harmonisation of processes and procedures for enhancing African agricultural innovation capacity; (2) role in facilitating the development and adoption of relevant policies, guidelines and other instruments to foster institutional cooperation and collective action for sustainable agricultural productivity and capacity development; (3) ability to develop implementation plans acceptable to stakeholders; (4) capacity to collaborate with ICPs to generate funds for the implementation of specific projects and programmes; (5) ability to facilitate the implementation and monitoring of supported projects and programmes; and, (6) ability to develop capacity-building programmes for various stakeholders. These functions imply joint planning, prior mutual agreements on commitments amongst diverse actors, and the attribution of outcomes to both joint and individual efforts.

The key question for process monitoring of FARA interventions is “are activities happening according to plan and if not, what are the reasons?” The medium-term and annual work plans stipulate all the envisaged outputs, actions and stakeholders responsible for undertaking different activities for certain time periods. In tracking and reporting the agricultural sector’s performance in Africa, the FARA Secretariat will strive to delineate and attribute achievements from investments by individual countries, the SROs and those from resources mobilised directly by the Secretariat. In this regard, analysis of the Forum’s performance will focus on highlighting the collective achievements of all constituents in a given period, while that of the Secretariat will focus on the outcomes of its direct inputs in terms of the roles outlined above.

Monitoring and Evaluation at the Secretariat level

The evaluation of FARA interventions shall focus on the achievement of outputs, purpose and targeted objectives. Each major FARA undertaking must be evaluated, during implementation and at or before closure. Independent evaluations focussing on corporate programme, policy issues and operations linked to the SP shall be commissioned by the Board, while other evaluations will be undertaken in accordance with agreements negotiated with ICPs. Evaluations will, in general, identify and disseminate lessons and knowledge gained through these evaluations to support improved programming and organizational learning.

The ARIs, through partnership arrangements to enhance analytical rigour and technical quality, will provide support in areas of data collection and analysis. The M&E reports from FARA, focussing on performance of agricultural research, extension and education systems, will be integrated in the overall CAADP M&E report.


Figure 3: Structure of the FARA M&E system


Responsibilities for different entities A. FARA M&E unit

The M&E unit shall be responsible for the design, development, implementation and management of a practical FARA-wide performance M&E system and approach. Accordingly, the M&E unit is responsible for:

a) Developing and updating the FARA corporate performance monitoring framework (results framework matrix or any other framework deemed relevant for PM&E)

b) Developing the FARA corporate Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) with a specific indicator reference document and procedures manual. These guidance materials and tools are meant to support policy and MTOP implementation in the programme units and cooperating agencies, and to advance M&E practices

c) Developing a simple, technology-enabled monitoring approach that supports foundation managers at multiple levels to capture, analyse, visualise and report on progress in delivering work and achieving results

d) Building the capacity of FARA teams and key partners to populate and use the monitoring approach

e) Creating clear data visualisation and reporting tools to communicate monitoring results to multiple audiences for more effective management and decision-making

f) Managing a regular cycle of outcome and impact M&E, producing evaluative knowledge products, and providing coaching and capacity-building in M&E to FARA staff and selected partners

g) Assessing the degree to which the implementation process is in compliance with work-plans and budgets in order to ensure timely delivery of output

h) Receiving and synthesising data and information generated by the implementing agencies following a well-defined reporting format based on agreed indicators

i) Generating integrated performance reports and technical synthesis papers on FARA’s performance and lessons learnt, for the management and the Board of Directors

j) Ensuring that relevant data from outcome/ impact monitoring feeds is captured appropriately and feeds into the monitoring and reporting system in a concise and timely way to inform decision-making, improve practice and contribute to learning

k) Commissioning and supervising impact assessment studies

l) Monitoring and strengthening the internal M&E capacity of the Secretariat and fostering community and capacity development to support improvements in the capacity and competence of M&E units of the SROs and other pertinent continental agencies focussing on skills development to enhance the ability of the programme and support units and partners to monitor and evaluate the key areas of intervention

m) Providing coaching, training and mentoring as appropriate for FARA teams and key partners to enable relevant, high quality and useful M&E for FARA


n) Supporting innovation in approaches to evaluation and measurement that are useful and appropriate for the innovative nature of initiatives and the strategy of FARA, including innovations in technology-enabled M&E, gender and resilience and equity measurement

o) Documenting and disseminating information on the outcomes and impact of FARA interventions on target beneficiaries; overseeing the production of evaluation knowledge products and reports for the senior leadership and Board of FARA, partners, peers, learning forums and the FARA website. This includes print and multi-media formats as well as creative and innovative ways of communicating M&E findings and lessons

p) Conducting internal reviews of FARA programmes and projects

q) Commissioning and facilitating organizational lesson-learning initiatives

r) Facilitating and participating in external reviews

s) Representing FARA at internal and external M&E events

B. Executive Director

a) Championing organizational learning, causing and leading change necessary to implement the lessons learned

b) Commissioning FARA-wide external reviews including mid-term and end-of-programme reviews

c) Commissioning FARA-wide peer reviews for quality assurance

C. Directors

a) Commissioning and supervising internal reviews of FARA programmes and projects

b) Facilitating external reviews

c) Preparing discussion and occasional papers on key lessons learned from the implementation and the outcome/ impact of FARA’s interventions

D. Programme Managers and Heads of Units (with support from the M&E unit)

a) Developing the programme, unit and projects’ performance monitoring frameworks in accordance with the FARA corporate PMF

b) Developing the PMPs for the programme, unit and projects

c) Conducting regular visits to assess implementation progress

d) Preparing performance reports together with performance data (and submitting to the M&E unit for consolidation)

e) Organizing annual review and planning meetings to derive lessons learnt for the programme, unit and project

f) Selecting appropriate programmes/ project for evaluation

g) Preparing terms of reference for the evaluation of the selected programme/ project

h) Determining evaluation criteria for the selection of the evaluation team


i) Calling for evaluation proposal through public newspapers

j) Selection of appropriate individual or team of evaluators on the basis of set evaluation criteria and terms of reference, and arranging for signing the contract agreement with the selected party

k) Organizing discussion sessions with the evaluation team on the need and objectives of evaluation

l) Discussing and finalising questionnaires based on the inception report submitted by the evaluator/s

m) Holding discussions on the field report to ascertain whether it has been prepared as per the terms of reference and questionnaires of the evaluation

n) Holding discussions with relevant stakeholders on the draft report to ascertain whether the comments, inputs and observations made in the field report have been incorporated

o) Getting the final report incorporating the inputs and suggestions received during the discussion

p) Incorporating the recommendations or suggestions of the final report in an Evaluation Action Plan, and moving towards necessary action

Field-level monitoring

Whilst elements of M&E shall be outlined in the detailed work plans and project documents, the overall FARA intervention outputs and goals should be recognised in the whole tracking process. All interventions, which shall be managed by implementations teams, shall report to the line unit heads at the FARA Secretariat on progress related to activities as outlined in the annual plans. This means that all FARA supported activities shall develop annual work plans in line with issued guidelines. The key question for process monitoring at this level is “are things happening according to plan and if not, what are the reasons?” Answering this question requires the work plan and budget for each intervention, baseline data for each indicator, record keeping and data collection system for each output defining who should collect, analyse and write reports; and finally a reporting system.

The annual work plan for any intervention shall follow the general FARA format. The plan outlines what needs to be done during one financial year under consideration and identifies those FARA interventions and strategic objectives (results) that it contributes to. Based on the work plan, the M&E plan is also drawn up. The monitoring at project-level shall be in the form of monthly reports presented and discussed at review meetings by the project team, and quarterly reports to the line unit at FARA. The quarterly report should indicate plans for the quarter, and the achievements, constraints and challenges of the most recent quarter, and how they were overcome. At the end of each year, just before the next annual plan is developed, the project management shall organize a meeting to review performance on various activities. The result of this review is the revision of priorities and focussing activities to meet the project’s objectives.


Evaluation at project level shall review the progress made in fulfilling its agreed objectives, to evaluate the process of project preparation and design, its relevance to the intervention areas of FARA and to assess the efficiency and effectiveness with which resources have been used to generate results and achieve the project purpose with a special emphasis on sustainability. The evaluation shall (normally) be undertaken half way through the project life (mid-term review) and at the end of the project (end of project evaluation). Evaluations shall be undertaken by independent consultants, and shall measure the impact of the project upon the FARA objectives including the impact of the project’s capacity-building activities. The evaluation will link the project to the overarching poverty and food insecurity reduction objective. The conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation will be used to help reorient project activities and to identify what further action is required at both the FARA and project level to strengthen the capacities implementation partners, and to foster uptake and up-scaling. The general responsibilities of the project teams for M&E shall be:

a) Preparing and submitting M&E plans to the relevant programme directors

b) Collecting and analysing relevant baseline and performance data and ensuring its safe storage and quick retrieval

c) Preparing and submitting to relevant programme directors, performance reports and data

d) Documenting and sharing lessons learned, and best practices arising from the programme/ project implemented

Monitoring by RECs, SROs and NARS partners

FARA shall observe the principle of subsidiarity in the implementation of the strategy. The integrated M&E system will be implemented at the continental, sub-regional and national levels. The RECs and SROs will track and report on the progress of implementation, outcomes and impacts of multi-country agricultural productivity, as well as their own investment programmes. Where they are sub-grantees to FARA-sourced funds, they will be obliged to track and report progress as specified in agreements and against a given set of indicators.

At the national level, where the CAADP agenda is primarily implemented, the NARES are expected to generate and manage data on key CAADP performance indicators. The standard and custom indicators will have been identified in the country NAFSIPs, agricultural sector common performance assessment frameworks, and the specific institutional results frameworks. The monitoring and reporting schedules will be guided by the country’s National Integrated M&E System (NIMES). With support from ReSAKSS, they will synthesise and generate county-level CAADP performance reports. The FARA Secretariat will access the individual country performance data and reports through the CAADP M&E channels and, in coordination with AUC and NPCA, establish a continent-wide agricultural sector performance database.


Anne

x 1:

Fram

ewor

k fo

r in

tegr

atin

g an

d tr

acki

ng F

ARA

resu

lts1

Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)Pr

oduc

tivity

: Cha

nges

in re

al Ag

GDP

grow

th ra

te an

d fac

tor pr

oduc

tivity

and

use b

y: (1

) sub

-secto

r, (2)

comm

odity

, (3

) gen

der, (

4) so

cio-e

cono

mic g

roup

, (5

) spa

ce

• Pr

oduc

tivity

of ta

rgete

d cro

ps an

d tec

hnolo

gies a

mong

partic

ipants

an

d non

-par

ticipa

nts [P

STAD

- Di

ssem

inatio

n of N

ew A

gricu

ltura

l Te

chno

logies

in A

frica (

DONA

TA)]

• Fie

ld an

d hou

seho

ld-lev

el ch

ange

s – us

e of n

ew an

d imp

rove

d tec

hnolo

gies,

use o

f inpu

ts, ch

ange

s in

prod

uctio

n and

prod

uctiv

ity

(SSA

-CP)

Mar

kets:

Cha

nges

in m

arke

t sha

re,

acce

ss an

d stat

us/ c

ondit

ion/ c

apac

ity/

seve

rity of

relat

ed tr

ade-

barri

ers

Com

petiti

vene

ss: C

hang

es in

retur

ns

to inv

estm

ents,

costs

, pric

e tre

nds,

and

confo

rmity

to sp

ecific

stan

dard

s by:

(1)

sub-

secto

r,(2)

comm

odity

,(3) s

pace

Dive

rsity

and

susta

inabil

ity: C

hang

es

in div

ersit

y of a

ctors

partic

ipatin

g in

and b

enefi

tting f

rom

the ag

ricult

ural

innov

ation

syste

m ba

sed o

n gen

der,

socia

l gro

up, a

ge an

d spa

ce

Visio

ning

Afri

ca’s

agric

ultu

ral t

rans

form

atio

n: w

ith fo

resig

ht, st

rateg

ic an

alysis

and p

artne

rships

to en

able

Afric

an

agric

ultur

al sta

keho

lders

to de

termi

ne ho

w the

indu

stry s

hould

deve

lop an

d plan

how

to ge

t ther

e, ba

sed o

n evid

ence

and t

he

comb

ined s

treng

th of

all st

akeh

older

s

1.

Indica

tors a

re di

splay

ed re

lative

to th

e thr

ee pr

iority

area

s; 2.

Indica

tors a

re no

t nec

essa

rily pl

aced

in th

e sam

e hier

arch

ical p

ositio

ns oc

cupie

d in t

he R

F (th

is is

of no

cons

eque

nce)

but w

ill be

repo

rted a

s anti

cipate

d by

the R

F; 3.

The

over

all ob

jectiv

e (go

al) in

dicato

rs ar

e not

includ

ed in

the t

able,

sinc

e FAR

A re

sults

just

only

contr

ibute

Annex 1FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018 39FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)Ov

erall

:a)

Pe

rcenta

ge in

creas

e in n

umbe

r of

indivi

duals

, gro

ups a

nd

orga

nizati

ons

direc

tly af

fected

or

reac

hed b

y FAR

A int

erve

ntion

s (d

isagg

rega

ted by

gend

er)

1.1 N

umbe

r of C

ountr

ies w

ith A

R4D

agen

das b

eing i

nflue

nced

by th

e ou

tcome

of fo

resig

ht stu

dies

1.1.1

Numb

er of

majo

r stud

ies

unde

rtake

n with

the s

uppo

rt of

the F

ores

ight S

uppo

rt Un

it esta

blish

ed in

the F

ARA

Secre

tariat

• Nu

mber

of co

mpeti

tively

co

mmiss

ioned

time-

boun

d for

esigh

t stu

dies (

1.1.2.

1)

b)

Perce

ntage

incre

ase i

n co

re

comp

etenc

ies, c

apab

ilities

and

capa

cities

for in

nova

tion a

mong

tar

geted

(indiv

idual,

org

aniza

tiona

l/ int

er-o

rgan

izatio

nal a

nd/ o

r ins

titutio

nal)A

R4D

actor

s

1.1.2

Numb

er of

new

integ

rated

pla

nning

and r

isk as

sess

ment

tools

for ag

ricult

ural

deve

lopme

nt an

d for

e sigh

ting

c) De

gree

of st

akeh

older

satis

factio

n wi

th FA

RA pe

rform

ance

and q

uality

of

prod

ucts

and s

ervic

esd)

Le

vel o

f ann

ual c

ontrib

ution

s by

Afric

an G

over

nmen

ts an

d ins

titutio

ns to

FARA

fund

ing

1.1.3

Numb

er of

long

-term

conti

nenta

l an

d sub

-regio

nal a

gricu

ltura

l re

sear

ch an

d inv

estm

ent

initia

tives

estab

lishe

d with

full

priva

te-se

ctor e

ngag

emen

t

PAEP

ARD:

Opin

ion of

key a

ctors

(e.g.

EC

and A

UC of

ficial

s, lea

ders,

expe

rts,

etc.)

abou

t the p

otenti

al co

ntribu

tion o

f the

type

s of p

artne

rships

conc

eptua

lised

an

d pro

moted

by P

AEPA

RD to

ward

s the

ac

hieve

ments

of M

DGs.

1.1.4

Numb

er of

natio

nal a

nd

inter

natio

nal a

gricu

ltura

l de

velop

ment

scen

arios

asse

ssed

ag

ainst

differ

ent a

ppro

ache

s and

pe

rspec

tives

• Nu

mber

of co

untry

-CAA

DP

imple

menta

tion p

lans r

eview

ed an

d fou

nd to

embr

ace A

R4D

conc

ept

(SSA

-CP)

• De

gree

of in

teres

t and

avail

abilit

y of

Afric

an an

d Eur

opea

n sta

keho

lders

to en

gage

in A

R4D

multi-

stake

holde

r plat

forms

1.1.5

Numb

er of

iden

tified

prior

ity

area

s in A

frican

agric

ultur

e for

the

appli

catio

n of e

merg

ing

scien

ce an

d tec

hnolo

gy


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Relev

ance

of th

emes

in th

e pa

rtner

ships

prom

oted/

facil

itated

/ me

ntore

d by P

AEPA

RD to

sta

keho

lders

(par

ticula

rly “u

sers”

)

1.1.6

Numb

er of

iden

tified

prior

ity

inves

tmen

ts ne

eded

to m

ake

scien

tific a

dvan

ces i

n Afric

an

agric

ultur

e pos

sible

• Pe

rcepti

on of

non-

tradit

ional

actor

s of

their r

oles i

n the

partn

ersh

ips

prom

oted/

facilit

ated/

mento

red b

y PA

EPAR

D

1.1.7

Numb

er of

colla

bora

tive

prog

ramm

es an

d inv

estm

ents

supp

orted

by th

e Afric

an sc

ience

ini

tiativ

e

• St

akeh

older

s inc

reas

ingly

reco

gnise

the

adde

d valu

e of th

e S3A

[Con

tent

of the

S3A

and i

ts im

pleme

ntatio

n ar

rang

emen

ts re

flect

the op

inion

s of

stake

holde

rs an

d pro

vide

accu

rate,

relev

ant, v

erifia

ble da

ta an

d info

rmati

on, a

nd gu

idelin

es th

at sta

keho

lders

and t

heir p

artne

rs ca

n us

e to m

ake d

ecisi

ons]

(1.3.

2.1)

• Po

sition

ing of

MDG

s and

othe

r ob

jectiv

es of

Afric

an-E

urop

ean

comm

on in

teres

t and

mutu

al be

nefit

in Eu

rope

an an

d Afric

an fu

nding

pr

ogra

mmes

targ

eting

agric

ultur

al inn

ovati

on

1.1.8

Numb

er of

tools

for g

ende

r ma

instre

aming

deve

loped

as on

e of

the fo

cal a

reas

in in

terac

tions

an

d par

tnersh

ips am

ong f

arme

rs,

rese

arch

, edu

catio

n, ex

tensio

n an

d agr

i-bus

iness

orga

nizati

ons

UniB

RAIN

• Pe

rcenta

ge in

creas

e in n

umbe

r of

comm

ercia

l viab

le en

terpr

ises

estab

lishe

d dire

ctly a

nd in

direc

tly

throu

gh U

niBRA

IN ac

tivitie

s •

Perce

ntage

incre

ase i

n num

ber o

f job

s cre

ated d

irectl

y and

indir

ectly

thr

ough

UniB

RAIN

activ

ities

1.2 N

umbe

r of fu

nctio

nal p

artne

rships

an

d plat

forms

for a

gricu

ltura

l inn

ovati

on an

d tra

de am

ong A

frican

sta

keho

lders,

and b

etwee

n the

m an

d nor

thern

and s

outhe

rn pa

rtner

s es

tablis

hed.

1.2.1

Numb

er of

insti

tution

al, po

licy

and m

arke

t inno

vatio

ns

(gen

erate

d by e

xistin

g inn

ovati

on

platfo

rms)

that h

ave b

een

identi

fied a

nd di

ssem

inated

• Em

pirica

l evid

ence

on w

hethe

r AR

4D w

orks

(cha

nges

in pa

ttern

s of

inter

actio

n, lin

kage

s and

socia

l ca

pital;

leve

ls of

awar

enes

s and

ac

cess

to in

forma

tion t

o tec

hnica

l an

d ope

ratio

nal is

sues

; leve

ls of

know

ledge

, skil

ls, at

titude

and

prac

tice o

f AR4

D pr

oces

ses a

nd

rese

arch

issu

es; p

erfor

manc

e of

innov

ation

s [tec

hnolo

gical,

socia

l, po

licy,

marke

t], nu

mber

s rea

ched

and

their p

erce

ption

s) (S

SA-C

P)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)SS

A-CP

• Pe

rcenta

ge in

creas

e in a

dopti

on

and r

elian

ce on

IAR4

D (e

.g.

incre

ase i

n inv

olvem

ent o

f no

n-tra

dition

al ac

tors i

n AR4

D)

1.2.2

Numb

er of

best

prac

tices

do

cume

nted a

nd di

ssem

inated

thr

ough

agric

ultur

al inn

ovati

on

platfo

rms

• Gu

idelin

es, p

rincip

les, m

ethod

s an

d too

ls for

imple

menti

ng A

R4D

and f

or de

signin

g, im

pleme

nting

an

d ana

lysing

socia

l exp

erim

ents

(SSA

-CP)

• Da

tabas

es –

proc

ess,

outco

me an

d im

pact

indica

tor va

riable

s (SS

A-CP

)•

Perce

ntage

incre

ase i

n inv

estm

ent

towar

ds su

ppor

ting A

R4D

proc

esse

s •

Perce

ntage

incre

ase i

n hum

an an

d ins

titutio

nal c

apac

ity fo

r inno

vatio

n am

ong A

R4D

actor

s

1.2.3

Perce

ntage

of C

GIAR

pr

ogra

mmes

that

are

syste

mica

lly lin

ked w

ith C

AADP

co

untry

prog

ramm

es

• De

gree

of al

ignme

nt of

the C

GIAR

cli

mate-

smar

t agr

icultu

re re

sear

ch

prog

rams

(and

the n

umbe

r of

thema

tic pr

opos

als de

velop

ed fo

r co

llabo

ratio

n) w

ith th

ose o

f the

Afric

an re

sear

ch in

stitut

ions (

NORA

D Pr

opos

al)1.2

.4 Nu

mber

of fo

resig

ht pla

tform

s es

tablis

hed a

nd op

erati

onal

at su

b-re

giona

l leve

l

• Nu

mber

of m

ulti in

stitut

ional

fores

ight

platfo

rms e

stabli

shed

and f

uncti

onal

(1.1.

3.1).

1.2.5

Numb

er of

agr

icultu

ral

techn

ology

Inno

vatio

n Plat

forms

(IP

s) es

tablis

hed

• Nu

mber

and d

iversi

ty of

(Eur

opea

n, Af

rican

) stak

ehold

ers (

indivi

duals

an

d org

aniza

tions

, disa

ggre

gated

by

stak

ehold

er ca

tegor

y) mo

bilise

d (P

AEPA

RD)

• Nu

mber

of pr

opos

als su

bmitte

d to t

he

calls

(stat

istica

l ana

lysis)

(PAE

PARD

)

• Nu

mber

of pa

rtner

ships

initia

ted,

supp

orted

, men

tored

(thr

ough

the c

all

proc

ess,

and t

hrou

gh th

e fed

erati

ng

theme

s app

roac

h lea

d by F

Os )

(PAE

PARD

)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Numb

er of

partn

ersh

ips th

at ha

ve

subm

itted e

ligibl

e pro

posa

ls to

fundin

g mec

hanis

ms (P

AEPA

RD)

• Re

plica

tions

of A

R4D

proc

esse

s an

d IPs

, inclu

ding n

umbe

r of IP

s es

tablis

hed i

n non

-SSA

-CP

coun

tries

(SSA

-CP)

1.2.6

Numb

er of

prog

ramm

es fo

r im

pleme

nting

prior

ities i

n cou

ntry

and r

egion

al AF

SIPs

desig

ned

with

techn

ical b

acks

toppin

g su

ppor

t by t

he C

GIAR

1.2.7

Numb

er of

map

ping t

ools

and

analy

tical

reso

urce

s app

lied f

or

CAAD

P–CG

IAR

prog

ramm

e ali

gnme

nt1.3

Num

ber o

f par

ticipa

nts re

ache

d, pa

rticipa

ting o

r con

tributi

ng to

inn

ovati

on pl

atfor

ms, c

onsu

ltatio

ns,

works

hops

, mee

tings

(indiv

iduals

, ins

titutio

ns d

isagg

rega

ted

by

coun

try, r

egion

, gen

der, s

take

holde

r ca

tego

ry)

1.3.1

Numb

er of

effec

tive p

ortal

s for

sh

aring

less

ons a

nd ex

perie

nces

to

supp

ort th

e wor

k of m

ulti-

stake

holde

r agr

icultu

ral R

&D

partn

ersh

ips (1

.2.2)

• Nu

mber

of tim

es th

e web

site a

nd bl

og

have

been

acce

ssed

(disa

ggre

gated

by

regio

n/ co

untry

) (PA

EPAR

D)•

Numb

er of

page

s (we

bsite

and b

log)

visite

d (PA

EPAR

D)•

Numb

er of

orga

nizati

ons r

egist

ered

on

the w

eb si

te (P

AEPA

RD)

1.3.2

Numb

er o

f insti

tution

s and

pr

ogra

mmes

using

the

e-Ca

pacit

y plat

form

in tar

get

coun

tries (

2.2.3)

• Nu

mber

of e-

Capa

cities

powe

r use

rs tra

ined (

2.2.1.

1)•

Numb

er of

live a

nd op

erati

onal

e-Ca

pacit

ies po

rtals

of pa

rtner

or

ganiz

ation

s (2.2

.1.1)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)1.3

.3 Nu

mber

of N

ARS

supp

orted

an

d refo

rmed

into

mult

i-dis

ciplin

ary,

multi-

institu

tiona

l an

d mult

i-stak

ehold

er le

arnin

g an

d inn

ovati

on sy

stems

thro

ugh

holis

tic an

alyse

s, re

views

and

monit

oring

(2.4.

3)

• Nu

mber

of ta

rgete

d cou

ntries

who

se

NAIS

have

been

asse

ssed

(2.4.

2.1)

• De

gree

of im

prov

emen

t in

comp

etenc

y, ca

pacit

y and

capa

bility

in

Afric

an in

stitut

ions t

o plan

and

imple

ment

prog

ramm

es an

d poli

cies

(NOR

AD P

ropo

sal)

• De

gree

of ad

optio

n of C

SA pr

actic

es

(inclu

ding s

treng

thene

d ser

vice

indus

try) (

NORA

D Pr

opos

al)1.3

.4 Nu

mber

of le

arnin

g plat

forms

de

velop

ed an

d the

ir use

fac

ilitate

d at n

ation

al, su

b-re

giona

l and

conti

nenta

l leve

ls (2

.4.6)

1.3.5

Numb

er of

men

and w

omen

us

ing th

e lea

rning

platf

orms

(2

.4.7)

• Nu

mber

of pe

ople

traine

d (by

regio

n/ co

untry

and b

y stak

ehold

er ca

tegor

y) (P

AEPA

RD)

• Nu

mber

of sc

ientis

ts tra

ined a

t MSc

de

gree

leve

l (PST

AD-D

ONAT

A)•

Numb

er of

rese

arch

and e

xtens

ion

staff w

ho ha

ve re

ceive

d sho

rt-ter

m tra

ining

(PST

AD-D

ONAT

A)•

Numb

er of

train

ing ev

ents

(total

nu

mber

of tr

aining

days

) (PA

EPAR

D)

• Ca

pacit

y of k

ey st

akeh

older

s str

ength

ened

(PST

AD-D

ONAT

A)

• Nu

mber

of F

ellow

s and

Ass

ociat

e Fe

llows

indu

cted i

nto th

e Aca

demy

(1

.1.2.1

)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Numb

er of

partic

ipants

(indiv

iduals

an

d ins

titutio

ns di

sagg

rega

ted by

co

untry

, reg

ion, g

ende

r, stak

ehold

er

categ

ory)

reac

hed,

partic

ipatin

g, co

ntribu

ting t

o the

platf

orm

cons

ultati

ons,

works

hops

, train

ing,

and t

he qu

ality

of dis

cuss

ions a

nd

outpu

t (1.1

.3.1)

• Nu

mber

of N

ARS

rese

arch

ers a

nd

rese

arch

man

ager

s par

ticipa

ting

in AR

4D tr

aining

and m

eetin

gs

(SSA

-CP:

1.2.2

.1)•

Numb

er of

stak

ehold

ers (

indivi

duals

an

d ins

titutio

ns di

sagg

rega

ted by

ca

tegor

y) re

ache

d, pa

rticipa

ting,

contr

ibutin

g to t

he st

udies

(3.1.

1.1)

• Nu

mber

of pa

rticipa

nts (b

y cou

ntry,

regio

n, ge

nder,

stak

ehold

er ca

tegor

y) an

d qua

lity of

disc

ussio

ns (c

onten

t, lev

el of

contr

ibutio

n, sa

tisfac

tion o

f pa

rticipa

nts w

ith ou

tput)

from

the

works

hops

(3.1.

1.2)

• Nu

mber

of ex

perts

enter

ed in

da

tabas

e, dis

aggr

egate

d by

sub-

regio

n, ge

nder

and c

atego

ry (3

.1.1.3

)•

Numb

er of

stak

ehold

ers (

indivi

duals

an

d ins

titutio

ns di

sagg

rega

ted by

ca

tegor

y) re

ache

d, pa

rticipa

ting,

contr

ibutin

g to t

he FA

RA m

oder

ated

deba

tes an

d othe

r eve

nts (3

.1.1.3

)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Numb

er of

Afric

an sc

ientis

ts wi

th be

tter u

nder

stand

ing, a

nd en

gage

d in

rese

arch

on cl

imate

chan

ge

adap

tation

-mitig

ation

spec

ific is

sues

(N

ORAD

Pro

posa

l)•

Numb

er an

d typ

e (div

ersit

y) of

stake

holde

rs inv

olved

(par

ticipa

ting

in de

bates

or co

ntribu

ting t

o do

cume

ntatio

n) in

revie

w of

natio

nal

and r

egion

al inv

estm

ent p

lan(s)

with

re

gard

to ex

isting

or pl

anne

d res

earch

on

clim

ate-sm

art a

gricu

lture

relat

ed

techn

ical a

nd po

litica

l eco

nomy

as

pects

(NOR

AD P

ropo

sal)

• Nu

mber

and c

ompe

tencie

s of

scien

tists

in Af

rican

unive

rsitie

s and

re

sear

ch in

stitut

es, a

nd pr

actiti

oner

s in

the w

ider a

gricu

ltura

l inno

vatio

n sy

stem

(AHC

-STA

FF)

• Nu

mber

and d

iversi

ty of

stake

holde

rs inv

olved

(par

ticipa

ting i

n deb

ates

or co

ntribu

ting t

o doc

umen

tation

) in

revie

w of

natio

nal a

nd re

giona

l inv

estm

ent p

lans a

nd de

velop

ment

of ca

pacit

y dev

elopm

ent s

trateg

ies an

d pr

opos

als(A

HC-S

TAFF

)In

tegr

atin

g ca

pacit

ies fo

r cha

nge:

by m

aking

the d

iffere

nt ac

tors a

ware

of ea

ch ot

her’s

capa

cities

and c

ontrib

ution

s, an

d he

lping

them

to ca

pitali

se on

their

relat

ive co

llabo

rativ

e adv

antag

es fo

r mutu

al be

nefit

while

also

stre

ngthe

ning t

heir o

wn

huma

n and

insti

tution

al ca

pacit

ies


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)2.1

Num

ber o

f insti

tution

s ado

pting

FA

RA-in

itiated

inter

venti

ons o

r me

chan

isms f

or id

entify

ing,

artic

ulatin

g and

/ or a

ddre

ssing

ca

pacit

y nee

ds

2.1.1

Numb

er of

agrib

usine

ss

innov

ation

s pro

moted

to

the co

mmer

cialis

ation

leve

l (U

niBRA

IN)

• Nu

mber

of in

cuba

ted st

art-u

ps

gene

ratin

g sur

plus w

ithin

two y

ears

of inc

ubati

on

• Re

venu

e gen

erate

d by s

tart-u

p inc

ubato

rs fro

m Un

iBRA

IN ac

tivitie

s•

Numb

er of

exist

ing bu

sines

ses t

hat

are s

uppo

rted t

o exp

and,

diver

sify

and e

nter n

ew m

arke

ts•

Numb

er of

assis

ted bu

sines

s re

portin

g inc

reas

ed in

come

/ de

creas

ed co

st of

prod

uctio

n/

decre

ased

oper

ation

al tim

e•

Numb

er of

farm

-fami

lies b

enefi

tting

as su

pplie

rs to

supp

orted

ag

ribus

iness

es2.1

.2 Nu

mber

of ag

ribus

iness

gr

adua

tes su

ppor

ted to

deve

lop

into e

fficien

t entr

epre

neur

s (U

niBRA

IN)

• Nu

mber

of jo

bs (p

erma

nent,

tem

pora

ry) cr

eated

by U

niBRA

IN

activ

ities

• Nu

mber

of jo

bs (p

erma

nent,

tem

pora

ry) cr

eated

in ex

isting

bu

sines

ses a

s a re

sult o

f UniB

RAIN

int

erve

ntion

s•

Numb

er of

unive

rsity

grad

uates

(BSc

, MS

c) tha

t ben

efit fr

om im

prov

ed

agrib

usine

ss ed

ucati

on th

roug

h int

erns

hips,

attac

hmen

ts an

d re

viewe

d agr

ibusin

ess c

urric

ulum


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Numb

er of

unive

rsity

grad

uates

(B

Sc, M

Sc) w

ho ha

ve es

tablis

hed

own b

usine

sses

with

supp

ort

from

incub

ators

withi

n one

year

of

grad

uatio

n•

Numb

er of

unive

rsity

grad

uates

(BSc

, MS

c) em

ploye

d with

in six

mon

ths of

gr

adua

tion

2.1.3

Numb

er of

new

agrip

rene

ursh

ips

and b

usine

ss pa

rtner

ships

ca

talys

ed (U

niBRA

IN)

• Nu

mber

of in

nova

tion i

ncub

ators

deve

loped

outsi

de th

e init

ial w

inning

co

nsor

tia ba

sed o

n the

UniB

RAIN

mo

del

• Nu

mber

of in

nova

tion i

ncub

ators

for

which

estab

lishm

ent is

in th

e pipe

line

• Nu

mber

of ad

dition

al un

iversi

ties

taking

up U

niBRA

IN im

prov

ed

agric

ultur

al ed

ucati

on pr

oduc

ts oth

er

than r

evise

d cur

ricula

• Nu

mber

of ad

dition

al un

iversi

ties

taking

up U

niBRA

IN re

vised

curri

cula

• Nu

mber

of p

rogr

amme

-wide

publi

c go

ods/

servi

ces f

unde

d thr

ough

inc

ubato

r con

tributi

ons (

UniB

RAIN

: 2.1

.1.3)

2.1.4

Numb

er of

men

and

wome

n inv

olved

in th

e new

ag

ripre

neur

ship

and b

usine

ss

partn

ersh

ips (U

niBRA

IN)

• Nu

mber

of (m

ale, fe

male,

youth

) gr

adua

tes (B

Sc, M

Sc) t

hat b

enefi

t fro

m im

prov

ed ag

ribus

iness

ed

ucati

on th

roug

h inte

rnsh

ips,

attac

hmen

ts an

d rev

iewed

ag

ribus

iness

curri

culum


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Numb

er of

(male

, fema

le, yo

uth)

unive

rsity

grad

uates

(BSc

, MSc

) who

ha

ve es

tablis

hed o

wn bu

sines

ses

with

supp

ort fr

om in

cuba

tors w

ithin

one y

ear o

f gra

duati

on•

Numb

er of

(male

, fema

le, yo

uth)

unive

rsity

grad

uates

(BSc

, MSc

) em

ploye

d with

in six

mon

ths of

gr

adua

tion

2.1.5

Numb

er of

inno

vativ

e outp

uts,

expe

rienc

es an

d pra

ctice

s sh

ared

and s

caled

up

• Nu

mber

of fa

rmer

s and

othe

r sta

keho

lders

havin

g acc

ess t

o pro

ven

techn

ologie

s (PS

TAD-

DONA

TA)

• Nu

mber

of IP

TAs e

stabli

shed

and

oper

ating

(PST

AD-D

ONAT

A)•

Numb

er of

func

tiona

l mult

i-sta

keho

lder p

artne

rships

estab

lishe

d ar

ound

IPTA

s (PS

TAD-

DONA

TA)

• Le

vel o

f stak

ehold

er sa

tisfac

tion

with

the te

chno

logies

and i

nnov

ation

(P

STAD

-DON

ATA)

• St

akeh

older

s inc

reas

ingly

adop

t gu

idelin

es fo

r cro

ss-co

untry

shar

ing

of les

sons

that

resu

lt in b

etter

youth

an

d wom

en’s

emplo

ymen

t poli

cy

formu

lation

(2.1.

2.2)

• Nu

mber

of do

cume

nted s

takeh

older

va

lidate

d pov

erty

redu

ction

tec

hnolo

gies a

nd in

nova

tions

(2

.3.1.2

)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)2.1

.6 Nu

mber

of A

frican

For

um fo

r Ag

ricult

ural

Advis

ory S

ervic

es

(AFA

AS) a

nd TA

E pr

ogra

mmes

int

egra

ted as

part

of the

who

le ag

ricult

ural

innov

ation

syste

m in

Afric

a

• Nu

mber

of e-

capa

cities

relat

ed

servi

ces d

elive

red t

o stak

ehold

ers b

y AF

AAS

(2.1.

2.3)

• Nu

mber

of st

akeh

older

s req

uesti

ng

servi

ces o

f AFA

AS th

roug

h the

e-

capa

city n

etwor

k (2.1

.2.3)

2.1.7

Numb

er of

TAE,

exten

sion,

rese

arch

and b

usine

ss

prog

ramm

es ac

tively

integ

rated

in

the im

pleme

ntatio

n of c

ountr

y CA

ADP

prog

ramm

es2.1

.8 Nu

mber

of an

alysis

repo

rts

docu

menti

ng ev

idenc

e to

supp

ort in

creas

ed in

vestm

ents

in ca

pacit

y stre

ngthe

ning

• St

akeh

older

s inc

reas

ingly

adop

t re

comm

enda

tions

for a

ddre

ssing

hu

man c

apac

ity ne

eds t

o ach

ieve

proje

cted y

ields

(2.4.

1.1)

• Nu

mber

of ke

y com

modit

ies id

entifi

ed

in ea

ch of

the c

ountr

y-NAF

SIPs

an

d pro

gram

mes w

hose

yield

gaps

an

d pro

ducti

vity p

rojec

tions

have

be

en de

termi

ned a

nd do

cume

nted

(AHC

-STA

FF)

• Am

ount

(and

quali

ty) of

loca

l, cir

cums

tance

-spec

ific hu

man c

apita

l an

d pro

ducti

vity d

ata an

d info

rmati

on

disse

mina

ted an

d bein

g use

d in

coun

try an

d reg

ional

level

prog

ramm

e an

d poli

cy de

sign,

and e

valua

tion

exer

cises

(AHC

-STA

FF)

2.1.9

Numb

er of

gen

der

disag

greg

ated e

viden

ce-b

ased

an

alysis

repo

rts a

vaila

ble


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)2.1

.10 N

umbe

r of b

est p

racti

ces f

or

techn

ology

intro

ducti

on an

d dis

semi

natio

n re

viewe

d and

im

prov

ed to

inco

rpor

ate al

l leve

ls of

the ag

ricult

ural

value

chain

2.1

.11 N

umbe

r of m

ethod

ologie

s for

mo

nitor

ing in

stitut

ional

chan

ge

deve

loped

, vali

dated

and

popu

larise

d2.1

.12 N

umbe

r of b

est p

racti

ces f

or

huma

n and

insti

tution

al ca

pacit

y-str

ength

ening

, teste

d and

scale

d up

2.2 N

umbe

r of in

stitut

ions

(disa

ggre

gate

d by

cate

gory

) who

se

capa

city d

evelo

pmen

t nee

ds ha

ve

been

asse

ssed

and/

or su

ppor

ted

(enh

ance

d kn

owled

ge, s

kills

and

attitu

des o

f indiv

iduals

deli

vere

d th

roug

h tra

ining

wor

ksho

ps;

chan

ges i

n or

ganiz

ation

al de

sign

and

cultu

re, a

ccou

ntab

ility,

resp

onsiv

enes

s , tr

ansp

aren

cy a

nd

effic

iency

)

2.2.1

A fun

ction

al ca

pacit

y da

tabas

e on

sour

ces o

f agr

icultu

ral R

&D

expe

rtise i

n and

outsi

de A

frica

• Ev

idenc

e of e

xisten

ce of

inve

ntorie

s of

avail

able

and r

equir

ed

comp

etenc

ies, k

nowl

edge

and s

kills

(AHC

-STA

FF)

• Ev

idenc

e of e

xisten

ce of

inve

ntorie

s of

avail

able

and r

equir

ed hu

man

reso

urce

s by l

evel

of tra

ining

, ge

nder,

and c

ommo

dity v

alue c

hain

(AHC

-STA

FF)

2.2.2

A fun

ction

al e-

Capa

city p

latfor

m an

d kno

wled

ge ce

ntre

2.2.3

Leve

l of p

rogr

essiv

e im

prov

emen

t on t

he st

atus

of su

pply

and d

eman

d for

ag

ricult

ural

innov

ation

rese

arch

an

d cap

acitie

s

• Inc

reas

es in

inve

stmen

ts by

targ

eted

institu

tions

and c

ountr

ies in

capa

city

deve

lopme

nt (A

HC-S

TAFF

)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Impr

ovem

ents

in ap

prop

riaten

ess

of de

ploym

ent o

f hum

an re

sour

ces

and p

hysic

al inf

rastr

uctur

e by

numb

ers,

levels

of kn

owled

ge, s

kills

and c

ompe

tencie

s, lin

kage

s and

co

llabo

ratio

ns (A

HC-S

TAFF

) •

Chan

ges i

n the

leve

ls of

acce

ss an

d us

e of k

nowl

edge

, infor

matio

n and

tec

hnolo

gical

adva

ncem

ents,

skills

an

d in o

rienta

tion/

resp

onsiv

enes

s of

capa

city s

treng

thenin

g effo

rts to

ward

s de

mand

(AHC

-STA

FF)

• Ch

ange

s in l

evels

of im

prov

emen

ts in

servi

ce de

liver

y, re

sear

ch ou

tputs,

tra

ined p

erso

nnel,

facil

ities a

nd

struc

tures

, etc.

(AHC

-STA

FF)

2.2.4

Numb

er (a

nd ex

tent o

f sup

port)

of

agric

ultur

al se

ctors

supp

orted

by

Cen

tres o

f Exc

ellen

ce2.3

Num

ber o

f func

tiona

l com

munit

ies

of pr

actic

e for

crea

ting g

ende

r-se

nsitiv

e cap

acitie

s and

addr

essin

g ide

ntifie

d cap

acity

defic

its in

the

desig

n and

imple

menta

tion o

f AR

&D pr

ogra

mmes

2.3.1

Numb

er of

rese

arch

and

capa

city-s

treng

thenin

g init

iative

s ide

ntifie

d, an

alyse

d and

str

ength

ened

• Ev

idenc

e of e

xisten

ce of

stak

ehold

er

and c

ountr

y-end

orse

d com

pend

ia of

actio

ns w

ith ac

tivitie

s tar

geted

on

dema

nd-o

riente

d cap

acity

-str

ength

ening

prior

ities (

AHC-

STAF

F)

• Nu

mber

of pr

opos

als su

bmitte

d for

fun

ding t

o pote

ntial/

pros

pecti

ve

dono

rs(AH

C-ST

AFF)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Amou

nt (a

nd qu

ality)

of lo

cal,

circu

mstan

ce-sp

ecific

huma

n cap

ital

and p

rodu

ctivit

y data

and i

nform

ation

dis

semi

nated

, and

being

used

in

coun

try an

d reg

ional

prog

ramm

es,

polic

y des

ign an

d eva

luatio

n ex

ercis

es(A

HC-S

TAFF

)•

Degr

ee of

impr

ovem

ent in

co

mpete

ncy,

capa

city a

nd ca

pabil

ity

in Af

rican

insti

tution

s to p

lan

and i

mplem

ent h

uman

capit

al de

velop

ment

prog

ramm

es an

d po

licies

(AHC

-STA

FF)

• De

gree

of ad

optio

n of r

ecom

mend

ed

prac

tices

, pro

cedu

res,

etc.

(AHC

-STA

FF)

2.3.2

Numb

er of

new

publi

c–pr

ivate

and p

rivate

–priv

ate

agrip

rene

ursh

ip an

d bus

iness

pa

rtner

ships

supp

orted

to

impr

ove c

urric

ula an

d qua

lity of

lea

rning

2.3.3.

Num

ber o

f use

r-frie

ndly

and

gend

er-se

nsitiv

e ap

proa

ches

for

huma

n and

insti

tution

al ca

pacit

y str

ength

ening

, dev

elope

d and

pr

omote

d esp

ecial

ly am

ong r

ural

comm

unitie

s


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)2.3

.4 Nu

mber

of co

untrie

s acti

vely

supp

orted

in th

e des

ign an

d im

pleme

ntatio

n of C

AADP

co

mpac

ts an

d inv

estm

ent p

lans

2.3.5

Numb

er of

CGI

AR an

d othe

r IA

RCs a

ctive

ly inv

olved

in

prom

oting

succ

essfu

l im

pleme

ntatio

n of C

AADP

pr

oces

ses a

t nati

onal

and

regio

nal le

vels

Enab

ling

envir

onm

ent f

or im

plem

enta

tion:

thro

ugh a

dvoc

acy a

nd co

mmun

icatio

n to g

ener

ate en

ablin

g poli

cies a

nd en

sure

tha

t they

get th

e stak

ehold

er su

ppor

t req

uired

for t

heir i

mplem

entat

ion3.1

Num

ber o

f cou

ntries

and R

ECs

in wh

ich FA

AP pr

incipl

es an

d gu

idelin

es ha

ve be

en em

bedd

ed in

na

tiona

l and

/ or r

egion

al Co

mpac

ts an

d AFS

IPs

3.1.1

Prop

ortio

n of n

ation

al an

d re

giona

l CAA

DP co

mpac

ts wi

th FA

AP pr

incipl

es an

d guid

eline

s em

bedd

ed

• Nu

mber

of co

untry

inve

stmen

ts pla

ns

techn

ically

revie

wed.

• Nu

mber

of A

R&D

FAAP

comp

liant

coun

try pr

ogra

mmes

form

ulated

.

3.1.2

Leve

l of s

tanda

rdisa

tion/

integ

ratio

n and

appli

catio

n of

M&E

syste

m for

trac

king

adhe

renc

e to F

AAP

princ

iples

an

d guid

eline

s in t

he

deve

lopme

nt of

Agric

ultur

al Pr

oduc

tivity

Pro

jects

( APP

s)

• Ev

idenc

e of q

uanti

tative

mea

sure

s in

achie

ving g

oals

and o

bjecti

ves a

nd

exist

ence

of ou

tcome

s to p

rovid

e us

eful c

ommu

nicati

on da

ta ab

out th

e pr

ogra

m (U

niBRA

IN –

2.1.1.

1)

• Ev

idenc

e of a

dequ

acy o

f cap

acitie

s, kn

owled

ge an

d skil

ls to

guide

pr

ogra

m im

pleme

ntatio

n, ful

ly im

pleme

nt ag

reed

proc

edur

es an

d pr

oces

ses(U

niBRA

IN –

2.1.1.

1)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Degr

ee of

imple

menta

tion o

f agr

eed

activ

ities a

gains

t targ

ets (U

niBRA

IN

– 2.1.

1.2)

• Ex

tent (

and t

imeli

ness

) to w

hich M

&E

infor

matio

n is u

sed f

or in

stitut

ing

corre

ctive

mea

sure

s for

iden

tified

bo

ttlene

cks (

UniB

RAIN

– 2.1

.1.2)

• St

akeh

older

s inc

reas

ingly

reco

gnise

the

adde

d valu

e/ en

dorse

/ ado

pt the

re

comm

enda

tions

(3.1.

1.1)

• Le

vels

of im

prov

emen

t in st

affing

, sta

ff KIS

, infra

struc

ture a

nd

techn

ology

deplo

ymen

t (2.4

.1.2)

• Qu

ality

of M&

E - c

omple

tion o

f tas

ks, in

cludin

g suffi

cient

colle

ction

, an

alysis

, diss

emina

tion a

nd us

e of

valid

, reli

able,

comp

rehe

nsive

mo

nitor

ing da

ta (2

.4.1.2

)•

Degr

ee of

imple

menta

tion o

f agr

eed

activ

ities,

and o

f pro

cess

ing,

disse

mina

tion o

f data

and i

nform

ation

(3

.1.3.1

) •

Leve

l of q

uality

and m

ainten

ance

of

datab

ases

, acc

essib

ility a

nd us

e of

M&E

data

and i

nform

ation

(3.1.

3.1)

• Le

vels

of ali

gnme

nt of

capa

bilitie

s an

d cap

acitie

s, en

gage

ment

and

diver

sity o

f dial

ogue

and r

elatio

nship

s for

plan

ning,

coor

dinati

ng an

d ma

nagin

g M&E

(3.5.

2.1)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Leve

ls of

adop

tion a

nd us

e of

stand

ardis

ed pr

oces

ses (

3.5.2.

1)

3.1.3

Quali

ty of

syste

m for

mob

ilising

tec

hnica

l ass

istan

ce fo

r the

CA

ADP

Tech

nical

Grou

p of

Expe

rts (T

GE)

3.1.4

Leve

l of h

armo

nisati

on of

inv

estm

ents

in Af

rican

agric

ultur

al inn

ovati

on sy

stems

3.1.5

Prop

ortio

n of F

ARA

budg

et re

pres

entin

g new

pan-

Afric

an

agric

ultur

al R&

D ini

tiativ

es

emer

ging i

n res

pons

e to

dema

nd ex

pres

sed b

y FAR

A’s

cons

tituen

ts3.2

Num

ber o

f infor

matio

n and

kn

owled

ge pr

oduc

ts/ pa

ckag

es

(brie

fs, re

ports

, scie

ntific

pap

ers,

pu

blica

tions

and

doc

umen

tarie

s)

prod

uced

and m

ade a

vaila

ble

to sta

keho

lders

(e.g.

inclu

ding

exten

t to w

hich p

aper

s mee

t ag

reed

stan

dard

s, nu

mber

/ pr

opor

tion o

f poli

cy is

sues

whe

re

reco

mmen

datio

ns ar

e lar

gely

endo

rsed,

etc.)

3.2.1

Numb

er of

polic

y ana

lysis

studie

s und

ertak

en an

d evid

ence

ge

nera

ted to

supp

ort a

dvoc

acy

camp

aigns

• Nu

mber

of ke

y poli

cy do

cume

nts

docu

menti

ng/ a

ction

s nee

ded t

o ad

dres

s the

main

barri

ers t

o sca

ling

up ag

ricult

ural

prac

tices

, les

sons

re

lated

to sc

aling

up cl

imate

-smar

t ag

ricult

ure (

includ

ing is

sues

relat

ed to

ge

nder

and i

nter-g

ener

ation

al eq

uity)

sh

ared

, and

/ or t

abled

to th

e AU

conti

nenta

l and

regio

nal p

olicy

, and

pr

iority

settin

g dial

ogue

and d

ecisi

on

in the

conte

xt of

the “S

ustai

ning

CAAD

P Mo

mentu

m” (N

ORAD

Pr

opos

al)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Exten

t to w

hich r

ecom

mend

ation

s fro

m the

stud

y hav

e bee

n ado

pted

and i

ncor

pora

ted in

to the

Scie

nce

Agen

da fo

r Afric

an A

gricu

lture

(N

ORAD

Pro

posa

l)3.2

.2 Nu

mber

of do

cume

nted

succ

esse

s and

failu

res i

n Afric

an

agric

ultur

al R&

D un

derta

ken t

o en

hanc

e evid

ence

-bas

ed C

AADP

po

licy-m

aking

proc

ess

• Nu

mber

of br

iefing

pape

rs (o

n ide

ntifie

d tre

nds a

nd em

ergin

g iss

ues,

utility

of em

ergin

g scie

nces

an

d req

uirem

ents

for us

e, alt

erna

tive

appr

oach

es as

eluc

idated

from

for

esigh

t stud

ies) t

abled

to th

e For

um

and o

ther f

orum

s (1.1

.2.1)

• Nu

mber

of do

cume

nted o

utputs

from

the

estab

lishe

d for

esigh

t plat

forms

(1

.1.3.1

)•

Numb

er of

docu

ments

uploa

ded

on th

e pro

ject r

epos

itory

and m

ade

avail

able

publi

cly (P

AEPA

RD)

• Nu

mber

of co

untry

-bas

ed ca

se

studie

s of s

ucce

ssful

exam

ples o

f sc

aling

up su

staina

ble ag

ricult

ural

prac

tices

, and

the p

olicie

s and

re

sour

ces t

hat w

ere n

eede

d to

over

come

the b

arrie

rs to

scali

ng up

co

nclud

ed (N

ORAD

Pro

posa

l)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)3.2

.3 Nu

mber

of b

est p

racti

ces f

or

enha

ncing

agric

ultur

al inn

ovati

on

in Af

rica,

publi

shed

and

disse

mina

ted

• Nu

mber

of pu

blica

tions

and

know

ledge

prod

ucts

shar

ed (3

.5.2.1

)•

Amou

nt (a

nd qu

ality)

of lo

cal,

circu

mstan

ce-sp

ecific

politi

cal

econ

omy d

ata an

d info

rmati

on

on cl

imate

-smar

t agr

icultu

re

disse

mina

ted an

d bein

g use

d in

coun

try, r

egion

al pr

ogra

mme

and p

olicy

desig

n and

evalu

ation

ex

ercis

es (N

ORAD

Pro

posa

l)3.3

Num

ber o

f stak

ehold

ers

(indiv

iduals

, insti

tutio

ns

disag

greg

ated

by c

ount

ry, re

gion,

ge

nder,

stak

ehold

er ca

tego

ry)

reac

hed w

ith in

forma

tion t

hrou

gh

conti

nenta

l infor

matio

n and

kn

owled

ge-sh

aring

platf

orms

(w

ebsit

es, p

ublic

ation

s, vis

ual a

nd

socia

l med

ia)

3.3.1

Numb

er of

high

-leve

l dele

gates

pa

rticipa

ting i

n eac

h con

vene

d co

ntine

ntal p

latfor

m for

advo

cacy

an

d com

munic

ating

polic

y iss

ues

(at le

ast 3

0% w

omen

)

• Nu

mber

of de

cision

mak

ers

reac

hed t

hrou

gh ad

voca

cy m

ateria

l (d

isagg

rega

ted by

categ

ory)

(PAE

PARD

)•

Numb

er of

decis

ion m

aker

s pa

rticipa

ting i

n pro

ject (

PAEP

ARD)

or

ganiz

ed ev

ents

(disa

ggre

gated

by

categ

ory)

3.3.2

Numb

er of

user

s acc

essin

g the

co

ntine

ntal in

forma

tion-

exch

ange

pla

tform

s (RA

ILS an

d FAR

A po

rtal)

• Nu

mber

of us

ers a

cces

sing t

he

platfo

rm (2

.3.1.1

)

• Nu

mber

of us

ers t

raine

d to u

se an

d ma

intain

the A

frican

AIS

porta

ls (3

.3.1.1

) •

Numb

er of

user

s acc

essin

g inf

orma

tion a

nd kn

owled

ge th

roug

h the

conti

nenta

l por

tals (

3.3.1.

1)


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Numb

er of

user

s (by

gend

er,

stake

holde

r cate

gory)

acce

ssing

lea

rning

and i

nnov

ation

platf

orms

an

d/ or

satis

fied w

ith th

e tec

hnolo

gies

and i

nnov

ation

s on o

ffer (

3.3.2.

1)•

Numb

er of

train

ing ev

ents

and

partic

ipants

(by

stake

holde

r cate

gory,

ge

nder

) (3.3

.2.1)

• Nu

mber

of pa

rticipa

nts (a

nd tr

aining

da

ys) b

y cou

ntry/

regio

n, ge

nder,

sta

keho

lder c

atego

ry, ty

pe of

train

ing

(3.3.

4.1)

• Tr

affic a

nd vo

lume o

f tech

nical

infor

matio

n dep

osite

d on t

he w

ebsit

e an

d soc

ial m

edia

page

s•

Numb

er of

gend

er di

sagg

rega

ted

user

s acc

essin

g info

rmati

on on

AR4

D thr

ough

FARA

’s we

bsite

and s

ocial

me

dia pa

ges

• Le

vel o

f rec

ognit

ion of

FARA

at

natio

nal, s

ub-re

giona

l, reg

ional

and

inter

natio

nal fo

ra am

ongs

t dive

rse

stake

holde

rs•

Volum

e of m

edia

cove

rage

for F

ARA

even

ts•

Numb

er an

d qua

lity of

photo

grap

hs in

FA

RA’s

photo

grap

hic lib

rary

• Le

vel o

f ado

ption

of co

mmun

icatio

n str

ategy


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Volum

e of g

ende

r-sen

sitive

tech

nical

infor

matio

n dep

osite

d on t

he m

obile

ap

p•

Numb

er o

f use

rs do

wnloa

ding m

obile

ap

p disa

ggre

gated

by ge

nder

3.3.3

Numb

er of

user

s acc

essin

g DO

NATA

lear

ning a

nd in

nova

tion

platfo

rms

3.3.4

Prop

ortio

n of ta

rgete

d be

nefic

iaries

, NAR

S an

d SRO

s ad

optin

g imp

rove

d inn

ovati

on-

syste

ms ap

proa

ches

• Le

vel o

f sati

sfacti

on w

ith re

liabil

ity of

int

erne

t acc

ess a

nd co

ntent

of the

kn

owled

ge po

rtals

3.4 N

umbe

r of p

latfor

ms us

ed fo

r inf

orma

tion d

elive

ry an

d exc

hang

e3.4

.1 Nu

mber

of co

ntine

ntal p

latfor

ms

estab

lishe

d and

facil

itated

• Nu

mber

of su

bscri

bers

from

differ

ent

categ

ories

of A

R4D

stake

holde

rs en

gage

d in d

iscus

sions

on th

e virtu

al pla

tform

(1.2.

3.1)

• Nu

mber

of th

emes

/ sub

jects

discu

ssed

on th

e D-g

roup

platf

orm

(1.2.

3.1)

• Nu

mber

of pa

rticipa

nts an

d qua

lity

of dis

cuss

ions/

repo

rts fr

om th

e e-

Cons

ultati

ons,

works

hop,

using

the

self-a

sses

smen

t tool

(2.4.

3.1)

• Nu

mber

of pa

rticipa

nts an

d qua

lity

of dis

cuss

ions f

rom

cons

ultati

ve

works

hops

(2.4.

4.1)

• Nu

mber

of pa

rticipa

nts an

d qua

lity of

dis

cuss

ions

• Nu

mber

of st

akeh

older

s (ind

ividu

als

and i

nstitu

tions

disa

ggre

gated

by

categ

ory)

reac

hed,

partic

ipatin

g, co

ntribu

ting t

o the

stud

ies


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)•

Numb

er of

them

atic n

etwor

ks

estab

lishe

d on t

he eR

AILS

onlin

e sy

stem

(3.3.

1.1)

• Nu

mber

of ke

y iss

ues a

ffecti

ng

agric

ultur

al inn

ovati

on ra

ised/

poste

d for

disc

ussio

n thr

ough

the F

ARAn

et on

line D

-gro

ups (

3.3.1.

1)•

Numb

er of

IPTA

s and

mult

i-sta

keho

lder p

artne

rships

arou

nd

IPTA

s esta

blish

ed an

d ope

ratin

g3.5

Deg

ree o

f impr

ovem

ent in

av

ailab

ility o

f ICTs

(mag

nitud

e of

ICT

spee

d an

d ca

pacit

y pe

rform

ance

, reli

abilit

y of in

tern

et

acce

ss, e

quity

, ser

vice

quali

ty,

cost-

effec

tiven

ess)

amon

gst

targe

ted N

ARS

institu

tions

3.5.1

Incre

ase i

n the

numb

er

of int

erlin

ked k

nowl

edge

-ma

nage

ment

porta

ls ad

dres

sing

emer

ging i

ssue

s

• (M

agnit

ude o

f) IC

T sp

eed a

nd

capa

city p

erfor

manc

e of e

xistin

g NA

RS in

stitut

es (P

STAD

-RAI

LS)

• Tr

ained

rese

arch

and e

xtens

ion

staff i

ncre

asing

ly us

e and

main

tain

the A

frican

AIS

porta

l (lev

el of

use

and m

ainten

ance

of A

AIS

by tr

ained

re

sear

ch an

d exte

nsion

staff

?)(P

STAD

-RAI

LS)

• (E

xtent)

NAR

S sh

are k

nowl

edge

an

d info

rmati

on th

roug

h web

sites

, pu

blica

tions

and v

isual

media

(P

STAD

-RAI

LS)

• Le

vel o

f par

ticipa

nts’ s

atisfa

ction

wi

th re

liabil

ity of

inter

net a

cces

s an

d with

the c

onten

t of e

RAILS

(P

STAD

-RAI

LS)

3.5.2

Numb

er of

open

-acc

ess

agric

ultur

al inf

orma

tion p

latfor

ms

inter

-linke

d by R

AILS


Outc

ome i

ndica

tors

Inte

rmed

iate o

utco

mes

(k

ey p

erfo

rman

ce in

dica

tors

)Pr

oduc

ts an

d se

rvice

s (o

utpu

t ind

icato

rs)

Activ

ities

(b

ased

on A

WP&

B 20

14 an

d

proj

ect d

ocum

ents

)3.5

.3 Nu

mber

of ge

nder

-sens

itive

tools

for ca

pturin

g, pa

ckag

ing

and d

issem

inatin

g agr

icultu

ral

infor

matio

n for

trad

e and

inv

estm

ent, i

denti

fied a

nd ap

plied

• Ex

isten

ce of

func

tiona

l co

mmun

icatio

n•

Numb

er, qu

ality

and a

vaila

bility

of

FARA

know

ledge

prod

ucts

and

servi

ces

• Nu

mber

of to

ols fo

r com

munic

ation

an

d info

rmati

on-sh

aring

being

used

/ de

velop

ed3.5

.4 Nu

mber

of kn

owled

ge

mana

geme

nt str

ategie

s int

rodu

ced,

supp

ortin

g ag

ricult

ural

R&D

3.5.5

Prop

ortio

n of id

entifi

ed ne

eds

and c

onstr

aints

in the

func

tionin

g of

innov

ation

platf

orms

at in

tra-

and i

nter-r

egion

al lev

els in

Afric

a, va

lidate

d3.5

.6 Pr

opor

tion o

f intra

-Afric

a ag

ricult

ural

infor

matio

n and

kn

owled

ge sy

stems

that

are

ICT-

base

d

• Nu

mber

of IP

TAs u

sing r

eleva

nt IC

T too

ls in

infor

matio

n and

know

ledge

ma

nage

ment

3.5.7

Prop

ortio

n of F

ARA

cons

tituen

t ins

titutio

ns in

Afric

a, ap

plying

sta

ndar

dised

M&E

syste

ms fo

r int

er-lin

ked a

nd co

mplem

entar

y co

mmun

icatio

n stra

tegies

an

d sys

tems f

or ag

ricult

ural

deve

lopme

nt 3.5

.8 Pr

opor

tion o

f nee

ds an

d de

mand

s for

comm

unica

tion

amon

g agr

icultu

ral k

nowl

edge

sy

stems

for A

frica’s

agric

ultur

e, sa

tisfie

d


AFAAS African Forum for Agricultural Advisory ServicesAfrEA African Evaluation AssociationAAIS African Agricultural Innovation SystemAFSIP Agriculture and Food Security Investment PlanAPP Agricultural Productivity ProjectsAR4D Agricultural Research for DevelopmentARI Advanced Research InstituteAU African UnionAUC African Union CommissionCAADP Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development ProgrammeCGIAR Consultative Group for International agricultural ResearchDAC Development Assistance CommitteeDP Development PartnersDONATA Dissemination of New Agricultural Technologies in AfricaEC European CommissionFAAP Framework for African Agricultural ProductivityFARA Forum for Agricultural Research in AfricaFO Farmers OrganisationGDP Gross Domestic ProductGFAR Global Forum for Agricultural ResearchGUI General User InformationIARC International Agricultural Research CentreICP International Cooperating PartnersICT Information and Communication TechnologyIDEAS International Development Evaluation AssociationIE Impact EvaluationIFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute

Acronyms and abbreviations

Acronyms and abbreviationsFARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018 63FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

IPs Innovative PlatformsIPTA Innovation Platform for Technology AdoptionKIS Knowledge, Information and SkillsMfDR Managing for Development ResultsMDG Millennium Development GoalM&E Monitoring and EvaluationMoU Memorandum of UnderstandingMDTF Multi-Donor Trust FundMTOP Medium-Term Operational PlanMAF Mutual Accountability FrameworkNAIS National Agricultural Innovation SystemNARI National Agricultural Research InstituteNARS National Agricultural Research SystemNARES National Agricultural Research and Extension SystemNEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s DevelopmentNIMES National Integrated M&E SystemNORAD Norwegian Agency for Development CooperationNPCA NEPAD Policy and Coordinating AgencyNSF Networking Support FunctionOECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and DevelopmentPAEPARD Platform for African – European Partnership on Agricultural Research for

DevelopmentPMF Performance Monitoring FrameworkPMP Performance Monitoring PlanPSTAD Promotion of Science and Technology for Agricultural DevelopmentRBM Results Based ManagementR&D Research and DevelopmentREC Regional Economic CommunityReSAKSS Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support SystemRF Results FrameworkS3A Science Agenda for Agriculture in AfricaSDG Sustainable Development GoalSP Strategic PlanSRO Sub-Regional OrganizationSSA Sub-Saharan AfricaS&T Science and TechnologyTBA Time Bound ActivityToC Theory of ChangeTAE Tertiary Agricultural education TGE Technical Group of Experts UniBRAIN Universities, Business and Research in Agricultural Innovation


FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018FARA Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 2014–2018

About FARA

The Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) is the apex continental organisation responsible for coordinating and advocating for agricultural research-for-development. (AR4D). It serves as the entry point for agricultural research initiatives designed to have a continental reach or a sub-continental reach spanning more than one sub-region.

FARA serves as the technical arm of the African Union Commission (AUC) on matters concerning agricultural science, technology and innovation. FARA has provided a continental forum for stakeholders in AR4D to shape the vision and agenda for the sub-sector and to mobilise themselves to respond to key continent-wide development frameworks, notably the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP).

FARA’s vision: Reduced poverty in Africa as a result of sustainable broad-based agricultural growth and improved livelihoods, particularly of smallholder and pastoral enterprises.

FARA’s mission: Creation of broad-based improvements in agricultural productivity, competitiveness and markets by continental-level strengthening of capacity for agricultural innovation.

FARA’s Value Proposition: Strengthening Africa’s capacity for innovation and transformation by visioning its strategic direction, integrating its capacities for change and creating an enabling policy environment for implementation.

• FARA’s strategic direction is derived from and aligned to the Science Agenda for Agriculture in Africa (S3A), which is in turn designed to support the realization of the CAADP vision. FARA’s programme is organized around three strategic priorities, namely:Visioning Africa’s agricultural transformation with foresight, strategic analysis and partnerships to enable Africa to determine the future of its agriculture, with proactive approaches to exploiting opportunities in agribusiness, trade and markets, taking best advantage of emerging sciences, technologies and risk mitigation and using the combined strengths of public and private stakeholders.

• Integrating capacities for change by making the different actors aware of each other’s capacities and contributions, connecting institutions and matching capacity supply to demand to create consolidated, high-capacity and effective African agricultural innovation systems exploiting relative institutional collaborative advantages to mutual benefit while also strengthening their own human and institutional capacities

• Enabling environment for implementation, initially through evidence-based advocacy, communication and widespread stakeholder awareness and engagement and to generate enabling policies, and then ensure that they get the stakeholder support required for the sustainable implementation of programmes for African agricultural innovation

Key to this is the delivery of three Key Results, which respond to the strategic priorities expressed by FARA’s clients. These are:

Key Result 1: Stakeholders determine how the sector should be transformed and undertake collective actions in a gender-sensitive manner

Key Result 2: Strengthened and integrated continental capacity responding to stakeholder demands within the agricultural innovation system in a gender-sensitive manner

Key Result 3: Enabling environment for increased AR4D investment and implementation of agricultural innovation systems in a gender-sensitive manner

FARA’s donors are the African Development Bank (AfDB), the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA), the Department for International Development (DFID), the European Commission (EC), the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD), Australian Agency for International Development (AusAiD), and the World Bank.

Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa 12 Anmeda Street, Roman RidgePMB CT 173, Accra, GhanaTelephone: +233 302 772823 / 302 779421Fax: +233 302 773676 / Email: [email protected]

www.fara-africa.org

Monitoring and Evaluation · 2020-01-22 · Citation: Tizikara, C. 2014. FARA Monitoring and...

Documents

Transcript of Monitoring and Evaluation · 2020-01-22 · Citation: Tizikara, C. 2014. FARA Monitoring and...