M&E plan Indonesian – Dutch programme on food security ... · M&E plan Indonesian – Dutch programme on food security: ... frozen poultry products ... consumers prefer and produce

M&E Plan D&P Indonesia

1

M&E plan

Indonesian – Dutch programme on food security:

poultry & dairy sector

Version 28112015

Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen

UR


2

Abbreviations

CDI Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen UR

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

WP Work Package

ASG Animal Sciences Group at WUR, the Netherlands

CVI Central Veterinary Institute at WUR, the Netherlands

DG Director General

DGLAHS Directorate General for Livestock & Animal Health Services, Indonesia

EKN Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands

FAPET Faculty of Animal Science at IPB, Indonesia

FEMA Faculty of Human Ecology at IPB, Indonesia

IPB Institut Pertanian Bogor (Agricultural Institute Bogor)

MSM Maastricht School of Management, the Netherlands

WUR Wageningen University & Research, the Netherlands


3

Contents

Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................ 2

Introduction about the programme ............................................................................................... 4

1. Work Package 1: Consumer awareness .................................................................................. 5

1.1 Theory of Change ........................................................................................................ 5

1.2 Monitoring .................................................................................................................. 7

2. Work package 2: Poultry Processing .................................................................................... 10

2.1 Theory of change ....................................................................................................... 10

2.2 Monitoring ................................................................................................................ 11

3. Work package 3: Poultry farming systems ............................................................................ 16

3.1 Theory of Change ...................................................................................................... 16

3.2 Monitoring ................................................................................................................ 17

4. Work Package 4: Dairy feed improvements ........................................................................... 22

4.1 Theory of change ....................................................................................................... 22

4.2 Monitoring ................................................................................................................ 23

Monitoring and Evaluation ......................................................................................................... 29

Communication and reporting .................................................................................................... 29


4

Food Security

When people have access to sufficient, safe and

nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life at all

times, we speak of ‘food security’. Commonly, the

concept of food security includes both physical and

economic access to food. The Dutch food security

support foresees outcomes in one or more of the

following areas: (a) sustainable increase in food

production; (b) more efficient markets for agricultural

and food products; (c) improved access to healthy and

safe food; (d) an enabling environment for agribusiness

development.

Introduction about the programme

The Governments of Indonesia and the Netherlands work together on strengthening the food security

situation in Indonesia. This bilateral food security programme centres on the priority commodities

identified by the Indonesian Government, including vegetables, fish, poultry meat and dairy products.

For the latter two commodity sectors the Animal Sciences Group (ASG) of Wageningen University &

Research (WUR) in the Netherlands had prepared a general work plan and cost estimate in September

2013. The Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Jakarta (EKN) thereupon contracted ASG to

implement the inception phase of this programme. The inception phase started on 1 November 2013 and

was concluded by the end of March 2014.

The food security programme in the poultry and dairy sectors is implemented in close cooperation with

the Directorate General for Livestock and Animal Health at the Ministry of Agriculture (DGLAH of the

MoA). The focus will be on West Java as main production and sourcing area of dairy and poultry meat

products for Jakarta and other main urban centres. The supply chain partners – comprising input

suppliers, primary producers, processing companies, traders and consumers – will be the main target

groups of this programme. The overall goal of the livestock components of the Dutch – Indonesian

programme on food security and agribusiness development in the livestock sector was formulated as

follows:

⇒ Viable models for domestic production and supply of affordable, nutritious and safe animal-based

products are developed.

With the development and testing of these

models the programme contributes towards

higher income levels of Indonesian

smallholder producers and improved access

to affordable and safe animal protein

products among urban consumers. This is

in line with the overall aims and strategies

of the Indonesian policy on self-sufficiency

in the production of major agricultural

commodities and the Dutch policies on food

security (see

text box).

This programme exists of three work packages (WP):

1. WP 1: Consumer awareness and supply chain initiatives

2. WP 2: Improving poultry processing standards

3. WP 3: Poultry farming systems

4. WP 4: Dairy feed improvements

The following sections describe for each work package (WP) the Theory of Change (ToC) and this will be

monitored. The ToCs have been developed in consultation with the WP leaders. They map how we think

that change happens within the different work packages. A workshop with all WP leaders was held in

order to explore linkages between the work packages and to learn from one another. The ToC for each

WP is first illustrated visually and in the case of WP 1 followed by a narrative explaining the logic from

top to bottom. After the ToC, we outline how results will be monitored within the different work

packages.


5

Increased number of urban

consumers that desire to

consume cooled and

frozen poultry products

Consumer campaign

implemented

Increased consumer

intention to buy

cooled and frozen

poultry products

Middle and higher

income segment of

consumers in

Jakarta region

Increased consumer

awareness of cooled

and frozen poultry

products

Schuttelaar

Directorate of

Veterinary Public

Health at DGLAH

Governorate of DKI

Jakarta

LEI Wageningen UR

IPB FEMA

Indonesian PR

company

Indonesian

consumer

organisation

Accreditation

bodies for halal

certification

Slaughterhouses Retail Associations

Other

stakeholders

Impact

Outcome

Output

Target group

Implementers

Developing the

consumer campaign

Activity

Developing the

communication

plan

Implementing the

consumer

campaignSteering committee

approves consumer

campaign

Government support for the design and

implementation of the campaign

Poultry meat will remain at a

similar price level (in relation to

other food products and

keeping the inflation in mind).Increased number of urban

consumers buy cooled and

frozen poultry meat

Beyond the

scope of

this projectThere will be no scarcity or a

significant food safety crisis;

consumer behaviour will change

during times of food crises.

Consumers participating in the first

consumer survey are easily to be

traced and found for the second

survey

A division of regions for the

consumer Campaign is possible, so

that a group is exposed to the

campaign and another group is not

exposed. This is important to have a

control group.

Impact analysis, including

baseline and endline done on the

impact of the consumer

campaign

Chain parties involved in this project will

succeed in developing a cooled poultry

chain that can deliver cooled poultry meat

(availability & affordability).

Sufficient resources (interviewers

and other professional staff, funds,

IPads for computer aided data

collection and compilation, etc.).

Chain parties involved in this project will

succeed in developing a cooled poultry

chain that can deliver the safety and

quality standards that (future) Indonesian

consumers prefer and produce sufficient

to meet the market demand of Jakarta.

Assumptions

Sphere of interest

Sphere of

influence

Sphere

of

control

Evaluation and

dissemination activities

under this WP

Communication

plan developed

Consumer campaign

developed

Communicate results to relevant

stakeholders

Results communicated to relevant

stakeholders as in input for discussions on

policies, laws and regulations that support

the transition towards consumption of

cooled and frozen poultry meat

Other WP

Consumer survey

done in inception

phase

Baseline and endline

reports

1. Work Package 1: Consumer awareness 1.1 Theory of Change


6

Narrative – Consumer Awareness

Work package 1 will work on increasing awareness of cooled and frozen poultry meat among middle and

higher income consumers in the Jakarta. Awareness is regarded as a precondition for stimulating

intentions to buy cooled and frozen poultry meat. Stronger intentions will contribute an increased

number of consumers will desire cooled and frozen poultry meat. These three determinants of behaviour

are the main focus of WP 1.

It should be noted that the actual buying of cooled and frozen poultry meat is beyond the scope of this

project as this depends largely on availability and pricing of cooled and frozen of poultry meat. The other

components of this project aim to contribute to availability of cooled and frozen poultry meat, though.

Furthermore, it is assumed that once the middle and higher segments buy cooled and frozen poultry, the

lower economic segments will copy this behaviour.

A key output of the WP package is a consumer campaign. The campaign is expected to influence

awareness, intention and desire to consume cooled and frozen poultry meat. The campaign will be

targeting the middle and higher income segment of consumers in the Jakarta region. The campaign will

be based on the insights gained through a consumer survey that was conducted during the inception

project’s inception phase.

The extent of the impact of the consumer campaign on awareness, intention and desire, will be studied

with an impact analysis comparing baseline findings with end-line findings (a before and and after

design).

The findings of the baseline and end-line studies will communicated and discussed with the relevant

stakeholders so that they can be used as input for discussions on policies, laws and regulations that

support the transition towards consumption of cooled and frozen poultry meat (also in other WPs).

For the campaign to lead to awareness, intention and desire for cooled and frozen poultry meat the

following assumptions are relevant:

- Chain parties involved in this project will succeed in developing a cooled poultry chain that can

deliver cooled poultry meat (availability & affordability).

- Chain parties involved in this project will succeed in developing a cooled poultry chain that can

deliver the safety and quality standards that (future) Indonesian consumers prefer and produce

sufficient to meet the market demand of Jakarta.

The implementing partners of the campaign are: LEI Wageningen UR; Schuttelaar; IPB FEMA;

Indonesian PR company and an Indonesian Market Research company.

Other relevant stakeholders include the Indonesian consumer organisation, retail associations,

producers organisations, directorate of veterinary public health at DGLAH, association of

slaughterhouses, governorate of DKI Jakarta, governates in the direct surroundings of Jakarta and the

accreditation bodies for halal certification.


7

1.2 Monitoring NUMBER RESULTS VERIFIABLE

INDICATORS MEANS OF VERIFICATION WHO IS

RESPONSIBLE WHEN REQUIRED

BUDGET

Outcome 1 Increased consumer awareness of cooled and frozen poultry meat (=outcome “consumer awareness on food safety and quality of poultry meat increased” in MoC; food safety and quality has been replaced by cooled and frozen based on research

during inception phase)

Awareness of cooled and frozen poultry meat among middle and higher segment of urban consumers

Awareness Intention Desire (Action) (AIDA) study Activity Impact analysis, including baseline and endline done on the impact of the consumer campaign

Questionnaire to be developed in WP 1 - Gemma

Baseline: October 2015 Endline: December 2016

Already budgeted in WP 1

Outcome 2 Increased intention to buy cooled and frozen poultry meat among consumers (= linked to outcome indicator “increased number of urban consumers demand safe poultry products” in MoC) (= related to impact indicator “consumption

levels of quality dairy and poultry meat among poor segments of urban consumers increased” in MoC)

Intention to buy cooled and frozen poultry meat among middle and higher segment of urban consumers

AIDA study Activity Impact analysis, including baseline and endline done on the impact of the consumer campaign


Baseline: October 2015 Endline: December 2016


Outcome 3 Increased number of urban consumers that desire to consume cooled and frozen poultry products (= outcome indicator

“increased number of urban consumers demand safe poultry products” in MoC)

Perceptions (desire) of cooled and frozen poultry meat among middle and higher segment of urban consumers

AIDA study Activity Impact analysis, including baseline and endline done on

the impact of the consumer campaign


Baseline: October 2015 Endline: December

2016



8

NUMBER RESULTS VERIFIABLE INDICATORS

MEANS OF VERIFICATION WHO IS RESPONSIBLE

WHEN REQUIRED BUDGET

Output 1

Consumer campaign implemented (= output indicator

“consumer education and awareness campaign developed and implemented in MoC) (=related to outcome “improved marketing systems in respective supply chains”) Activity Implement consumer campaign

Publication of the campaign

Review of publication of the campaign

Steering committee approves consumer campaign

Gemma October 2015 – November 2016

No budget required to check whether

this has been published

Output 2

Consumer campaign developed (= output indicator “consumer education and awareness campaign developed and implemented in MoC) Activity Develop consumer campaign

Consumer campaign ready to be implemented

Review of consumer campaign materials to be launched

Gemma September-October 2015

No budget required to check whether this has been developed

Output 3

Communication plan developed (= needed for output indicator “consumer education and awareness campaign developed and implemented in MoC) Activity

Develop communication plan

Communication plan Review of communication plan document

Gemma March – September 2015

No budget required to check whether this has been developed


9




Output 4

Consumer survey on purchasing behaviour of poultry meat done

(= related to output indicator “better understanding of consumer behaviour”)

Consumer survey done Report on consumer survey Gemma January 2014 (during inception

phase)

No budget required to check whether

this has been done

Output 5

Baseline and endline report on impact analysis of the consumer campaign Activity Impact analysis including

baseline and endline done on the impact of the consumer campaign

Baseline and endline report finished

Review of baseline report Gemma Baseline report: ready by November 2015 Endline

report: ready by end of project


Output 6

Results communicated to relevant stakeholders (= linked to outcome indicator “policies, laws and regulations implemented that support the transition towards a safer poultry

production and consumption based on documentation and dialogue” in MoC) Activity Communicate results of impact analysis to relevant stakeholders

Joint closing meeting of the project (not budgeted for in WP1) with relevant stakeholders.

Minutes of meeting Frank End of the project

Overall project budget


10

2. Work package 2: Poultry Processing

2.1 Theory of change


11


INDICATORS MEANS OF VERIFICATION WHO IS


BUDGET

Impact 1 Reduction of poultry slaughtering pollution in the city (= linked to impact indicator “reduced poultry meat related food safety incidence” in MoC) (=linked to outcome indicator “Increased animal welfare and food safety in the broiler sub-sector in West Java”)

# and kind of reported incidents of poor food safety at slaughter houses at wet markets in Jakarta

Food surveillance inspection reports from public health inspectors in Jakarta

Frank and Peter will meet with Governor to see who is responsible for data collection and reporting what kind of data is being collected in Jakarta - September, 2015

Baseline: September tbd Endline: June 2017

To be defined

Impact 2 Increased quantity of poultry meat marketed (retail) that meets food safety standards (= impact: “urban consumers access to safe animal protein products increased” in MoC) (=outcome indicator “More poultry meat marketed that meet safe certified standards” in MoC) (= related to impact indicator “consumption levels of quality

dairy and poultry meat among poor segments of urban consumers increased” in MoC) (=related to outcome “improved marketing systems in respective supply chains”)

Volume of certified poultry products leaving participating slaughterhouses

Collect and review records from participating slaughterhouses

Peter to organise collection and review records slaughterhouses and report

Baseline: once slaughterhouses are selected Endline: June 2017

Review records: tbd

Outcome 1 (NKV =

Veterinary Public Health Authority)

Improved waste management and good hygienic practices in the slaughter plant (e.g. handling of ice for cooling)

(=output “improved poultry processing standards and practices (safety and quality)” in MoC) (= linked to output indicator “Policies, laws and regulations implemented that support the transition towards a safer poultry production and consumption

Number of NKV certificates issued to participating slaughterhouses

# participating slaughterhouses that render blood and have waste water treatment Number of water treatment plants

Review records NKV participating slaughterhouses Visits to participating

slaughterhouses to survey and observe current processing practices

NKV collect info from contact provincial veterinary public health

authority and report on this Peter to organise visits and interviews of managers (survey) Peter to describe

Baseline: once participating slaughterhou

ses are selected Endline: June 2017

Review NKV records: tbd Observation

visits and survey: tbd


12




(based on documentation and dialogue)” in MoC)

installed at participating slaughterhouses

# participating slaughterhouses whose waste is re-used (collected)

processing practices incl. waste (water) treatment based on

data collected and report

Outcome 2 Improved skills and knowledge among slaughterers at pilot facilities (=linked to output indicator “approaches and capacities for

promoting food safety standards are in place in Western Java” in MoC)

Skill and knowledge improvement needs reported by participating slaughter plants

# of trained slaughterhouse staff (managers and employees) that show improved skill and knowledge

SWOT analysis (visits to participating slaughterhouses to survey and observe current processing skill and knowledge)

Evaluation of training (evaluation forms) Visits to participating slaughterhouses to survey and observe processing skill and knowledge

Ferry to report on SWOT analysis (Richard Merxs) Ferry to organise evaluation of

training and report Peter to organise visits and interviews of managers (survey) Peter to describe processing skill and knowledge and report

Baseline: once participating slaughterhouses are

selected Immediately after training: once staff members are trained Endline: June 2017

SWOT analysis: Evaluation of training:

Observation visits and survey: tbd

Outcome 3

Improved insights among

government (nat, prov, loc) in economic, environmental and chain consequences of modernising slaughtering practices (=linked to output indicators “better understanding of socio-economic drivers of current practices” in MoC) (= linked to output indicator “Policies, laws and regulations

implemented that support the transition towards a safer poultry production and consumption (based on documentation and dialogue)” in MoC)

Level of

understanding of employment, costs, income, logistics, blood/water pollution of modernising practices among key government officials

Interviews with government

officials at different levels (national, province, district)

Ferry to organise 3-

4 interviews Ferry to describe insights and report

Mid-term:

September 2016

Interviews

officials: tbd


13




Outcome 4 Improved skills and knowledge among advisors and inspectors (= output indicator “approaches

and capacities for promoting food safety standards are in place in Western Java” in MoC)

Skill and knowledge improvement needs reported by

Department /Ministry

Evaluation of training (evaluation forms)

Peter to organise evaluation of training and report

Immediately after training: once staff

members are trained

Evaluation of training:

Output 1

Management of slaughterer plants have received advice and business support (= linked to output indicator “realistic and competing supply models developed for hygienic slaughtering practices”

Activity Advice on hygiene, waste management and management of a slaughter plant

# of managers of slaughterer plants that have received advice on hygiene and waste # of managers of slaughterer plants

that have received business plan support

Reports from advice meetings and business plans reviews

Ferry & Peter September 2016, 2017

Output 2 Business plans for small and medium slaughterhouses (linked to outcome indicator “Economic viability of improved practices in broiler sub-sector” in

MoC) (=linked to output indicator “realistic and competing supply models developed for hygienic slaughtering practices” in MoC) Activity Asking 5/6 slaughterhouses what they want/need support with Developing business plans for specific slaughter plants

# of business plans developed by poultry slaughter plants

Business plans documents

Ferry September 2016

Output 3

Knowledge development with BPPT (=linked to output indicator “evidence based models documented and innovations brought to scale”)

Memorandum of Cooperation Reports/presentations on BPPT tested waste improvements

Review MoC & other documents

Peter September 2016


14




Activity Partners sign MoU. Facilitate presentations of improvements

Output 4 Staff of slaughter plants have been trained on hygiene and waste management (=linked to output indicator “approaches and capacities for promoting food safety standards

are in place in Western Java” in MoC) Activity: Implementing the capacity building programme for slaughters

# of plants of which the staff is trained # participants in training

Attendance list including names, plant name, gender, age, position/ function / responsibility in the plant

Peter September 2016, 2017

Output 5

Modules and materials for capacity building programme developed

(=linked to output indicator “poultry curriculum developed”) Activity Developing modules and materials for capacity building

# and type of material developed

Review Training material documents

Peter September 2016

Output 6

Multi-stakeholder meetings Activity Facilitate meetings with

government, slaughter-houses, private sector to inform about scenario study and business plans

# and type of meetings/workshops # of public and

private sector partners informed on outcome of scenario studies

Minutes of meetings and workshops

Peter & Ferry in cooperation with Centras

September 2016


15




Output 7 Scenario study including policy advice about improvement of the poultry meat supply chain

(=linked to output indicators “better understanding of socio-economic drivers of current practices” Activity Studying different scenarios for their impact on employment, costs, transport and environment

Results of scenario study are captured in a presentation or

report

Scenario study report presented to steering committee

Ferry

September 2015

Output 8

District advisors of food safety control authority (NKV) trained Activity Training inspectors and auditors of food safety control authority (NKV)

# and type / level of Staff trained by age and gender

Attendance list including names, department, gender, age, position/ function / responsibility in the department


Output 9

Provincial inspectors of food safety control authority (NKV) trained

Activity Training inspectors and auditors of food safety control authority (NKV)

# and type / level of Staff trained by age and gender

Attendance list including names, department, gender, age, position/ function /

responsibility in the department



16

3. Work package 3: Poultry farming systems

3.1 Theory of Change


17

3.2 Monitoring NUMBER RESULTS VERIFIABLE INDICATORS MEANS OF VERIFICATION WHO IS


BUDGET

Impact 1

Increase in broiler farmers’ income from broiler business for selected broiler farms

(=similar to impact “Increase in dairy and broiler farm households’ income” as in MoC) (=linked to impact indicator “Increased annual farm income over the year”)

Estimate of annual income of the broiler farm (based on feed margin per 100 broilers

per round)

Baseline among selected broiler farmers through data recording sheet.

After implementation of new elements or concept, experimental houses and control houses will be followed using the data recording sheets.

Medion (farm supervisors with broiler farmers -

collect data) WUR assist development form and data analysis

Baseline: 2015 Q3

After intervention: 2016 Q4

Subresult 1.3 and 1.6

Outcome 1

Improved productivity and animal welfare in poultry production farming systems

(=similar to outcome “Improved productivity of poultry and dairy production farming systems” in MoC) (=linked to “50% of broiler farmers trained and supported by the programme will have a >30% productivity increase”)

Percentage of broiler farmers trained and supported by the

programme that has a productivity increase Productivity increase indicators: 1. feed conversion ratio 2. Body Weight at earlier

age 1. body weights sat laughter

age 3. profits 4. costs Animal welfare indicators:

1. Broiler temperatures 2. mortality

Baseline among selected broiler farmers through data recording sheet.

After implementation of new elements or concept, experimental houses and control houses will be followed using the data recording sheets.

Medion (farm supervisors with broiler farmers -

collect data) WUR assist development form and data analysis

Baseline: 2015 Q3

After intervention: 2016 Q4

Subresult 1.3 and 1.6

Outcome 2

Improved poultry production practices (=output “improved smallholder poultry production practices” in MoC) (=output in MoC and indicator of the outcome “improved marketing systems in the

respective supply chains”)

# trained farmers that apply Animal Focused Management (AFM)

Review if the forms for animal behaviour observations are filled in correctly

Sander Medion farm supervisors with broiler farmers

Baseline: 2015 Q3 After intervention: 2016 Q4


18

NUMBER RESULTS VERIFIABLE INDICATORS MEANS OF VERIFICATION WHO IS RESPONSIBLE


Outcome 3 Increased commercial uptake of

improved broiler house model (related to indicator of the outcome “Enhanced sustainability in the broiler and dairy sub-sectors” in the MoC) (=linked to “increased number of farmers part of effective and economically viable supply chain arrangements in dairy and poultry sectors” in MoC?) (=linked to outcome indicator

“economic viability of improved practices in broiler sector is proven’ in MoC) (=related to outcome “improved marketing systems in respective supply chains”)

# of farms that adopt the

model in 2016-17

Sales and client records Medion

Phone survey broiler farms

Medion with

assistance from WUR

2017 TBD

Outcome 4 Increased insight into effective innovations in broiler farming practices (broiler farm model) (=linked to output indicator

“best practices are developed and analysed”) (=linked to outcome indicator “economic viability of improved practices in broiler sector is proven’ in MoC)

Documentation on innovations # and types of visitors at Medion pilot farm

Review documentation Register visits and keep recording

Sander Medion

2017 throughout

tbd

Outcome 5 Increased AFM knowledge and skill among selected broiler farmers (= a step in between the

outcome “farmers selling broiler farmers according to GAP standards”)

# of trained broiler farmers that show improved skill and knowledge after training

Assessment of knowledge by means of a knowledge test before and after training for broiler farmers

Sander, Medion PTC+

Before and after training

Linked to Subresult 3.1

Outcome 6 Increased capacity to support innovations by broiler farms among private and public service providers

# of trained trainers # of relevant graduates from targeted vocational training institutes

Review records ToT Review records targeted vocational training institutes

Medion Participating training institute

2017 tbd

Outcome 7 Improved vocational training # participating vocational training institutes

Records participants Sander 2017 tdb


19



Output 1 Report on results of prototype

farms (= output indicator of “improved information for supply chain partners and support organisations in the broiler and dairy sub-sectors” in MoC) output indicator “best practices are developed and analysed” in MoC)

(=linked to output indicator “evidence based models documented and innovations brought to scale”)

Activity: Evaluate outcome of prototype

pilot broiler farms

Reports with data available

on: • Financial return on

investment • Mortality rates • FCR • Weight of broilers at

slaughter age • Animal health indicators • Productivity indicators

Individual reports to each

participating broiler farmer Report with overall results

Sander, Medion 2016 Q3

Q4

Subresult

1.8

Output 2 Broiler house prototypes constructed Activity: Construction of broiler house prototypes at selected broiler farms

Permits issued Building is completed

Review records on permits Review records on building plans Observations

Medion 2016 Q3 tbd

Output 3 Report on improved design of broiler house Activity: Assess current performance among selected broiler farms

Report approved by partners Report approved by partners Sander , medion 2016 Q2 tbd

Output 4 Broiler farm managers at selected broiler farms trained in AFM

(=linked to output indicator “broiler farmers trained in GAP+” in MoC � where GAP

has been replaced by AFM) Activity: Train broiler farmers

# of participating broiler farmers trained

Reported satisfaction with training trainees

Attendance list including names, name of employer / business, gender, age, position/

function / responsibility Satisfaction questionnaire among trained broiler farmers (survey monkey)

Medion 2015 Q3- 2016 Q4

Linked to subresult 3.1


20



Output 5 Individual business innovation

plan for selected broiler farms developed (=linked to outcome indicator “increased number of farmers part of effective and economically viable supply chain arrangements in poultry sector” and “economic viability of improved practices in broiler sector is proven’ in MoC)

Activity: Develop business innovation plans with selected broiler farmers

# of individual business

plans developed # business plans with cost estimate of improvements

Review business plans Sander, Medion 2016 Sub result

1.4 Linked to subresults 2.3; 2.4; 2.5

Output 6 Report on broiler farmer capacity development needs (=linked to output indicator “better understanding of socio-economic and financial drivers for current practices”)

Activity: Assess current performance among selected broiler farms

Approved report on need assessment of farms

Review and approval by project partners

Sander, Medion 2015 Q3 tbd

Output 7 Trainers trained Activity: Train trainers of broiler farmers

# of trainers trained Reported satisfaction with

training trainees

Attendance list including names, name of employer / business, gender, age, position/ function / responsibility Satisfaction questionnaire among trained broiler farmer

trainers (survey monkey)

Sander, Medion 2016 tbd


21



Output 8 Specific ToT and materials for

broiler farming developed (=linked to output indicator “poultry curriculum developed”) Activity: Develop broiler farmer training of trainers modules and materials

Approved training materials

Practical broiler farming guide for general use

Review and approval by project

partners

Sander, Medion 2016 Q3-

2017Q2

Sub result

3.3

Output 9 Report on broiler farming

service providers capacity development needs Activity: Assess current capacity development needs among selected training broiler farming service providers (private and public)

Approved report on need

assessment of farms

Review and approval by project

partners

Sander 2015 Q3 tbd

Output 10 Specific modules on animal

focused management (AFM) materials for broiler farming developed Activity: Develop broiler farmer training of trainers modules and materials

Approved training program

Training material includes a scoring lists for AFM parameters

Review and approval of training

materials

Sander 2015 Q3 –

2016 Q4

Linked to

subresult 3.1

Output 11 Report on need for improvements in curriculum of

vocational training institutes Activity: Assess current curriculum of vocational training institutes

Approved report on assessment of curriculum of

vocational training institutes

Review and approval by project partners

Sander 2016 tbd


22

4. Work Package 4: Dairy feed improvements

4.1 Theory of change


23


INDICATORS MEANS OF

VERIFICATION WHO IS RESPONSIBLE


Impact 1

Increase in dairy farm households’ income (=similar to impact “Increase in dairy and broiler farm households’ income” as in MoC) (=linked to impact indicator

“Increased annual farm income over the year”)

gross revenue : Annual income from milk sales of farmers in selected farmer groups

Data (amount of milk * milk price) from dairy coop on milk sales from farmers in selected farmer groups

WUR-LR/TNI: Data to be collected and processed by field officers

Baseline: 2015 specific month End-line: 2017 specific month

Estimated base- and end-line plus evaluation : €108.000

(=linked to impact indicator “level of investment in farming system”)

net income: Gross margin (IDR) Milk minus Feed = Milk revenue – total feed costs (including feed costs of non-producing animals) of farms in selected farmer groups

Data (feed costs and income from milk sales) from dairy coop on feed purchases and milk sales Farm survey among

selected farmers

WUR-LR/TNI: Data to be collected and processed by field officers WUR-LR/TNI: Third party implementing survey


See impact 1 above

Total net income: Net income from dairy farming on demo farms

Data on all costs and income from dairy farming captured in farm accounts kept by demo farmers

WUR-LR/TNI: Data to be collected and processed by field officer


Part of project implemen-tation cost

Outcome 1

Improved cow productivity (=similar to impact “Increase in

dairy and broiler farm households’ income” as in MoC)

Average kg milk per cow per day on farms in

selected farmer groups

Data (average amount of milk

delivered/ no of cows in milk) from dairy coop Farm survey among selected farmers

WUR-LR/TNI: Data to be collected and

processed by field officer WUR-LR/TNI: Third party implementing farm survey

Baseline: 2015 specific month

End-line: 2017 specific month

See impact 1

(linked to outcome “improved productivity of poultry and dairy production farming systems”) (=linked to outcome indicator

“>25% higher and more consistent level of milk production per cow”)

Average milk production per cow per day on selected demo farms (9*2 farms)

Data collected by means of milk production recording at farm level


Monthly records



24


MEANS OF VERIFICATION

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE


Average reproduction status of cows on selected demo farms (9*2 farms)

Data to be collected from breeding records to be kept at farm

level

WUR LR/TNI: Data to be collected and processed by field

officer

to be processed annually

Part of project implemen-

tation cost

Outcome 2

Improved feeding practices adopted (=linked to outcome indicator “improved feed rations adopted by >50% of dairy farmers at cooperatives or in farmers groups included in the programme”)

No of farmers who adopted improved feeding practices (including improved rations) in selected farmer groups

Farm survey WUR-LR/TNI: Third party implementing farm survey


See impact 1

(=linked to outcome indicator “improved fodder supplies used by >50% of farmers at cooperatives or in farmers’ groups included in the programme”)

Types of improved feeding practices (e.g. concentrate feed utilization; use of improved foragers, better crop residue utilization) adopted in selected farmer groups



See impact 1

Number of farmers using the improved quality

concentrate feeds in selected farmer groups

Farm survey WUR-LR/TNI: Third party implementing

farm survey

Baseline: 2015 specific month

End-line: 2017 specific month

See impact 1

Types (quality) of specific concentrates used on farms in selected farmer groups



See impact 1

(=linked to outcome indicator “higher nutritional value of feed

rations for dairy cattle”)

Types (quality) of rations fed to different categories

of cows (on the demo farms (2*9))

Recording and analysis of data of

regular weighing and sampling of rations (quality assessment)

WUR-LR/TNI: Data to be collected and

processed by field officer

monthly Part of project

implemen-tation cost

Outcome 3

Economic viability of improved rations are proven (=related to outcome indicator “economically viable supply chain arrangements in dairy and poultry sectors”)

Feed costs (fodder/ concentrate) per kg milk Margin: Income from milk- feed costs

Review of records of feed and milk production and financial accounts at demo farms


2015, 2016, 2017 Part of project implemen-tation cost


25



WHO IS RESPONSIBLE


Outcome 4

Improved fodder supply and fodder management (=linked to output ”Increased

high quality fodder production and supply”) (=linked to output indicator “pilots implemented; improved fodder supply (including through new area forage production, improved cultivation& utilisation”)

Quality of fodder produced and processed based on scores on quality tests and

productivity data of new forage species, quality of crop residues, silage in selected farmer groups

Reports of testing results

WUR-LR/IPB Data to be collected and processed by IPB -

FAS

2016, 2017 Part of project implemen-

tation cost

Cost fodders (new forages, silage) per kg

Cost analysis WUR-LR/ IPB (data to be collected and

analysed)

2016, 2017 Part of project


(=linked to outcome indicator pilots implemented: “improved fodder supply”)

Amount of fodder produced and fed at the demo farms

Analysis of production and feeding

WUR-LR: Data to be collected and processed by field officers


# farms where fodder management takes pace:

inputs and outputs in relation to fodder production on demo farms are monitored

Recording of measurements at

demo farms

WUR-LR: Data to be collected and

processed by field officers

2015, 2016, 2017 Part of project


Outcome 5

Improved concentrate supply (=linked to outcome “increased quality and availability of complete feed supplies for dairy farms”)

Quality test results of improved concentrate feed production (by different types)

Reports of feed test results and production

TNI in cooperation with coop and partners

2015-2017 Part of project implemen-tation cost

(=linked to output indicator improved feed available, farm tested and evaluated”

Amount of concentrate produced by cooperative (by types)

Analysis of production by cooperative

WUR-LR/TNI: Data to be collected at coop


Outcome 6

Economic viability of production of good quality concentrate (=linked to output indicator

“viable supply chain for good quality feed supply organised”)

Income from concentrate sales versus concentrate marketing and production

costs at coop level

Calculations of costs and revenues

TNI (data to be collected by field officer)

2015- 2017 Part of project implemen-

tation cost


26



WHO IS RESPONSIBLE


Outcome 7

Improved supply of ingredients for concentrate feed

Availability of raw materials secured

Contracts with suppliers

TNI 2015, 2016, 2017 Part of project implemen-

tation cost

Quality test of raw materials

Reports of testing results: proximate analysis, energy Ca, P, aflatoxin level

TNI (in cooperation with field officer, Master Lab)


Compare cost per feed nutrient unit: - IDR/gram Crude Protein

(by DM) - IDR / K Cal ME

Nutrition cost analysis TNI (data from Master lab and dairy coops)

2015, 2016, 2017 Part of project implemen-

tation cost

Outcome 8

Increased knowledge of extension workers and staff feed production regarding feeding dairy cattle and feed production linked to output “improved information for supply chain partners and support

organisations in the broiler and dairy sub-sectors”)

Reported use of training insights among extension staff and feed plant staff

Survey among trainees

WUR-LR/TNI: Third party implementing farm survey

2017

See impact 1

Level of knowledge about basic feeding principles and feed formulation and production among extension staff and feed plant staff

Trainee self-assessment of knowledge by means questionnaire

WUR-LR /TNI 2015/6 before and after training


Outcome 9

Increased knowledge of farmers regarding feeding dairy cattle and feed production (linked to output “improved information for supply chain partners and support organisations in the broiler and dairy sub-sectors”)

Level of knowledge with farmers on improved feeding practices increased

Self-assessment in the farm survey among farms in selected farmer groups

WUR-LR/TNI: Third party implementing farm survey

2015 and 2017

See impact 1


27



WHO IS RESPONSIBLE


Output 1

Feasibility system for small scale commercial fodder production

A fodder production system initiated as pilot and introduced by partners

if economic feasibility is proven

Minutes of progress meetings with partners

WUR-LR 2017 Part of project implemen-

tation cost

Output 2

System for improved quality control of raw materials and end products of concentrate

A concentrate quality control system developed accepted and introduced by partners


TNI 2017 Part of project implemen-tation cost

Output 3

Feasibility studied for improvement of facilities

concentrate feed production (=linked to output indicator “better understanding of socio-economic and financial drivers for current practices”)

Feasibility study implemented

Report TNI/Ottevanger/ LEI?

2016 Part of project


Output 4

Better sourcing of crop-residues developed

Crop residue sourcing improved and applied


WUR-LR 2017 Part of project implemen-tation cost

Output 5

Fodder conservation introduced (silage making)

A fodder conservation system accepted and introduced by partners


WUR-LR 2017 Part of project implemen-tation cost

Output 6

Training materials Modules and materials for capacity building of KUD extension workers and dairy farmers on improved dairy feeding practices and

feed production for feed plant staff

Review and use of existing and newly developed materials

WUR-LR/TNI 2015-2017 Part of project implemen-tation cost

Output 7

Staff feed production of dairy coop trained

Number of staff trained Attendance records by subject – should be kept by the cooperative

TNI 2015 thru 2017


Output 8

Training of field officer, feed

advisor, local DINAS staff

Number of field officer,

feed advisor, local DINAS staff trained by subject

Attendance records

by subject

WUR-LR/TNI 2015 thru 2017

Part of

project implemen-tation cost


28



WHO IS RESPONSIBLE


Output 9

Training of demo farmers Number of demo farmers trained by subject

Attendance records by subject

WUR-LR 2015 thru 2017


tation cost

Output 10

Farmers of selected farmer groups trained

Number of farmers trained by subject




Output 11

Farmers of other farmer groups of Dairy coop trained

Number of farmers trained by subject




tation cost

Output 12

Seminar to disseminate results feed pilots to other dairy coops and stakeholders (=linked to output indicator “better understanding of socio-economic and financial drivers for current practices”)

No of seminars No and types of attendees

Attendance records WUR-LR 2017 Part of project implemen-tation cost

Output 13

Meetings Dairy Cattle Feed Round Table Group to exchange and coordinate with other feed related projects (=linked to output indicator “better understanding of socio-economic and financial drivers for current practices”)

No of meetings No and types of attendees

Attendance records WUR-LR 2016 Part of project implemen-tation cost


29

Monitoring and Evaluation

The results table above provide an overview of how results will be monitored. In some cases this still

needs to be accompanied by dedicated budgets. Each WP is responsible for monitoring its own results.

The reason for this is that we regard monitoring of project results as part of the work package

management responsibilities. The main purpose of monitoring is to steer the implementation process and

to inform all partners on performance. The project manager keeps oversight on this and supports where

necessary.

The main purpose of evaluation is to adjust and improve the projects strategy. It also aims to stimulate

learning by sharing insights within and outside the partnership. For this purpose the project will

undertake an internal Midterm review. This review will be coordinated by the M&E team. A peer review

mechanism will be used to review each other’s strategies and performance. This will be done in a one

day workshop and 1 day preparation by each key team member second half of 2016.

It involves reviewing the logic explained in the Theory of Change (see the previous sections) and

adapting the theory and / or the implementation of the project. During the review stakeholders will

reflect on the following questions:

i. What are the main successes in relation to the issue being monitored during the last half year?

Why?

ii. What are the main challenges in relation to the issue being monitored during the last half year?

Why?

iii. What should be done differently in the future by i) you as a stakeholder; and ii) the project as a

whole? Why? And what has priority?

iv. What advice would you give to someone else trying to do the same things in another area from

the lessons you have learnt?

As part of the end-evaluation of the project, the peer review will be repeated at the end of the project,

mid 2017. In addition, the EKN might hire an external evaluator to conduct an end-of project evaluation.

Each review will result in a user-friendly report that may also be shared outside the partnership. The

M&E team will be responsible for managing the review and the review report.

Communication and reporting

Internal communication within the project team

The project team communicates internally per email, telephone, face-to-face meetings and progress

meetings every few months to update each other on new developments. To share final documents a

google drive folder is used. The project manager is responsible for ensuring M&E information is properly

shared internally.

External communication to other stakeholders / the outside world.

The M&E information collected by the different stakeholders can only be used for the intended purposes if

it is appropriately reported, shared, or communicated to the stakeholders of the Dairy and Poultry

project. The M&E findings of the project could be communicated to all or certain stakeholder groups for

accountability, decision-making as well as knowledge sharing and learning purposes. The project

manager is responsible for coordinating sharing of M&E information externally.


30

Reporting

In order to ensure that reporting requirements are fulfilled; it is important to try and avoid

overburdening the different individuals and organizations that will be involved. Subsequently,

considerable effort should be made to align the project reporting requirements with existing

requirements. Furthermore, reporting on the project should be kept to a minimum and focus only on the

very essential information relating to a particular time period. In line with the overall purpose and

principles of the M&E system; reporting should not be one-way. The project manager is responsible for

ensuring M&E information is properly reported.

Other Communication Mechanisms

Reporting is only one form in which information and knowledge can be communicated. It is highly

beneficial to also use other forms of communication for different audiences. For example; posters,

brochures, videos, radio, social media and events – all of which can have much more impact than

reports. It is recommended that the dairy and the poultry components each discuss internally how to

organise this and to organise a seminar at the end of the project to share main lessons learnt in a

broader setting.

Documents

M&E plan Indonesian – Dutch programme on food security ... · M&E plan Indonesian – Dutch programme on food security: ... frozen poultry products ... consumers prefer and produce