Photo Credit Goes Here

Photo credit: Name/Organization

FROM DATA TO DECISION-MAKING:

UTILIZING EVALUATIONS AND REPORTING TO INFORM

STRATEGY

Justin Lawrence, Feed the Future Knowledge Driven Agricultural Development (KDAD)

AGENDA

Project One: Learning from E

• Challenge

• Approach

• Resilience Findings

• Landscape Changes

Project Two: Learning from M

• Challenge

• Approach

• Resilience Findings

• Landscape Changes

Group Discussion

How have you observed FFP BFS or other

donor use evaluations? Monitoring data?

(Be brutally honest)

RESULTS FRAMEWORK

1) What interventions improve the ability of vulnerable households to withstand (stable consumption and protected assets) common and extreme shocks affecting their economic activities? In what ways?

2) What interventions strengthen the ability of vulnerable households to recover (regain consumption levels and rebuild lost assets) from common and extreme shocks?

3) To what extent do different interventions to promote market access (such as promoting access to markets with lower risks and lower entry barriers) generate the participation of poorer households?

4) What interventions on both the “Push” (social protection) and “Pull” (value chain deepening) sides improve the participation of the poor in value chain activities?

5) Do safety net programs promote greater participation of poorer households in prudent risk taking and more remunerative economic activities?

6) Have interventions changed risk-reduction strategies pursued by men and women to cope with shocks (health-related, agro-climatic, economic, socio-political)?

7) Have FTF strategies to generate overall economic growth improved livelihoods of the poorest and most vulnerable populations? What are the most effective economic growth strategies for incorporating the poor and vulnerable?

CHALLENGE 1

Collecting and Analyzing the Universe of Evaluations

TOOLS

• Used qualitative analysis tool Dedoose

• Similar to NVIVO and other qualitative analysis packages -

coding and analysis functionality

• Collaborative, cloud based and relatively inexpensive

• Learning Agenda is a matter of independent and dependent

variables. Created distinct codes for each variable

• “To what extent do different interventions to promote market access (such as promoting access to markets with lower risks and lower entry barriers) generate the participation of poorer households?

• Parent and Child Codes. Example:

• Resilience (Parent)

• Safety Nets (Child)

CODING APPROACH

KNOWLEDGE

DRIVEN

FEED THE FUTURE

AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

FINDINGS

41 evaluations examined how

productivity interventions

affect resilience. Access to

markets a necessary

component to lead to excess

yields to income.

Photo: David Mutua, USAID

Market access requires

social cooperation,

such as Village

Savings and Loan

Associations (VSLA),

but building social

capital is a necessary

component.

Photo: Gina van Schalkwyk, USAID/SATH

New stress-tolerant

varieties help farmers

diversify economic stream

in crops unable to be used

before

Photo: Hector Santos

Photo: Umesh Shrestha,

Hariyo Ban Program, CARE Nepal

Training is key to

building trust and

capacity. It is

critical to

participation of the

poor.

Photo: Partner-CRS Credit-AShaw

A program in Kenya included farmers in value chains and engaged CBOs to increase employment. In this project, the formation of farmer groups into business organizations enabled poor dairy producers to increase their bargaining power. Through the CBO, “more than 1,000 jobs, [were created] 200 of them permanent.”

CHALLENGE 2

Using Feed the Future Monitoring to inform Feed the Future programs.

1. Project Summary (One short paragraph listing project context, geographic location (for BFS

mechanisms), purpose, scope, key approaches, and goals. Mention the main beneficiaries and key

stakeholders/partners—one option is to modify/update the OP narrative.)

2. FY15 Performance (Discuss significant FY15 results and key FY15 actions. Describe the main

beneficiaries. Why are the results important?)

3. Successes (What were the key resources, actions, or environments that enabled your successes? How

is the IM adapting to capitalize on these successes? How will successes lead to desired outcomes?)

4. Challenges (What posed the greatest obstacles to achieving desired outcomes? These might include

internal challenges (e.g., project management issues) or external challenges (e.g., country context). Please

strive to be honest and thorough in your assessment of challenges, so that other projects might learn from

your experiences.)

6. Description of Expected FY2016 Activities (Only required for BFS IMs. Describe FY16 activities from

the activity work plan, FY16 indicator targets, and relate to project goals.)

CODING STRUCTURE

Four main “root codes”: interventions

(how), results (what), beneficiaries

(who), factors (why)

INTERVENTIONS, RESULTS

• Interventions by the Results

Framework, then more child codes

with frequent interventions.

• Results tied to framework and the

more common whole of government

indicators.

• Usage of weighting: success,

inconclusive, challenge.

BENEFICIARIES, FACTORS

• Beneficiaries key stakeholder types

• Weighted by decimal magnitude

• Factors are reasons that explain

success or set-backs. Can be

country or management.

“The biggest success that xxx has

achieved in FY 15 is reaching out to

more farmers 14,519) using a more

coordinated extension method, in

which facilitators were placed to

provide farmers with extension

services.”

Capacity Building

Farmers Receiving US Assistance

Increase Yields

Extreme Poor

Extension

Market Development

Drought

Coordination

Smallholder Farmers

Farmers

Farmers Receiving US Assistance- Success

Extension

Coordination

Farmers- weighted 5

“The biggest success that xxx has achieved in FY 15 is reaching out to more farmers 14,519) using a more coordinated extension method, in which facilitators were placed to provide farmers with extension services.”

• Policy and Research interventions absent from RF • Low instances of nutrition results as success • Low instances of intervention reaching the vulnerable • Increase opportunities for expanding and strengthening public-private partnerships • Confusion around FTF programming and flexibility • Youth not visible • Integrate nutrition intervention––which is mostly targeted at women––with overall

beneficiaries • Still unclear how FTF country “graduates” Develop more explicit guidance around Mission

engagement in the design phase to improve upon Mission and Central mechanism coordination

• Create resources that better communicate mechanisms available and how each office can strategically contribute to Feed the Future countries

“This section specifies that it is in the

U.S. national security interest to promote

global food security, resilience, and

nutrition…”

- Global Food Security Act

RESULTS FRAMEWORK

GROUP DISCUSSION

• What type of information would you like to see from this data set?

(example: What projects have promising models around trade facilitation in

East Africa)?

• What is the most useful way to package this information (briefs, raw excel

data)?

www.feedthefuture.gov