1. BRAVO: Barrier Removal Assessment and Viability Overview
A tool for assessing the feasibility and impact potential of Rare project plans
Dashanbao Nature Reserve
Economics
Technical
Cultural/Political
Impact & Metrics
Assessment of costs, funding/revenue sources and potential income substitution factors related to the specific Barrier Removal Solution
Assessment of technology availability, training required, and the effectiveness of organizational partners involved with the Barrier Removal Solution
Assessment of Barrier Removal Solution drivers and barriers that arise from cultural norms and political landscape
Assessment of the overall impact of the Barrier Removal Solution and the viability of current metrics to measure that impact

2. BRAVO: Executive Summary
What: Summarize in less than 100 words:
Reduce threats to Black necked crane by changing overgrazing behavior in the Reserve through improve grassland variety , improve grass quality, increase grazing capacity, promote battery farming.
Who: Summarize in less than 50 words:
Dashanbao Nature Reserve, Zhaoyang Agriculture Bureau, Dashanbao township government, and local communities will cooperate to run the project.
When: Summarize in less than 75 words:
July2009-July2010, plant hectares grass and build hectares of fence.
Oct 2009-Dec 2009, technical training
How: Summarize in less than 75 words:
Promote battery framing in local communities by advertisement activities.
BRAVO Scores
SG: Original impact score on this page was On the last page it was The correct score appears to be 3.25
Feasibility Score: 3.5
Impact Score: 3.25

3. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Economics (1 of 3)
Criteria
Explanation
Score
Costs
Preliminary projected costs(CNY)
1.Prepare phrase:
Transportation fee: 50.00/person/day*4person*6days=
Food and accommodation: : 80.00/person/day*4person*6days=
2. Implementation phrase:
Plant grass: /hectare*533.6hectares=
Build fence:2998.5/hectare*53.36 hectares =
Training fee: /time*2times=
3. Evaluation phrase: Experts fee:
Total budget:
Predictability of cost burden
1 = Costs are ambiguous and unpredictable; = Costs are predictable and manageable
(Use 1-4 scale) Provide brief narrative outlining how rigorous costs estimates in (1) are. If possible give variance where costs may be ambiguous and/or unpredictable.
3.6
Cost per behavior changed (ie per person in target audience
How much will you spend per person, in your targeted audience for behavior change? For instance, if your barrier removal strategy costs $100,000 and you are targeting 1000 fishermen, than figure is $100 per fisherman. $
Average Score

4. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Economics (2 of 3)
Criteria
Explanation
Score
Revenues
Description of revenue streams
Fundraising total(CNY): 1. Plant grass: Sources: Dashanbao Nature Reserve
2. Build fence: Sources: Dashanbao Nature Reserve, Rare, Local community
3. Transportation, food and accommodation: Sources: Dashanbao Nature Reserve
4.Training fee: , sources: Rare
Earned income total: 1. Plant grass: Sources: Dashanbao Nature Reserve
2. Transportation, food and accommodation: Sources: Dashanbao Nature Reserve
Percentage of total cost available
1: 0 – 25% 2: 25 – 50% 3: 50 – 75% 4: 75 – 100%
(Use 1-4 scale) In narrative list source and where firm commitments exist. Provide evidence of same in the form of pledge letters etc. “Cost available” means that money is available or has been committed in a timeframe conducive to the speedy and practical implementation of the program. If unknown, write unknown.
3.4
Likelihood of fundraising success
1 = Very low likelihood of raising the necessary funds; 4 = Likelihood of raising necessary funds almost a certainty
1. Dashanbao Nature Reserve will provide plant grass fee; 2. Building fence fee not confirm; 3. Transportation, food and accommodation will provide by Dashanbao Nature Reserve, 4. Rare will provide training fee.
3.5
Fundraising timing
Provide estimated time (in years and months) needed to raise funds not currently available. If timing of available funds is critical to the success of your project then write narrative of any timing issues that might be important to consider. July,2009 3
Funding Alignment
1 = Funding timeline is not aligned with project timeline; 4 = Funding timeline is well-aligned with project timeline
1. Already got fund of planting grass from Dashanbao Nature Reserve, 2. Rare’s BR fund will arrive according to project timeline.
Sustainable Funding
1 = Unsustainable funding source; 4 = Very sustainable funding source
Not sure
3.2
Profit/(Loss)
Difference between Revenues and Costs
What is your Total Revenue minus Total Costs? Describe how you will handle the difference:
Average Score
3.43

5. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Economics (3 of 3)
Criteria
Explanation
Score
Income Substitution (if applicable)
New income source relative to old income
1 = Income source is reduced by 20% or more; 4 = Income source is increased by 20% or more
(Use 1-4 scale) If income substitution is a key barrier, and barrier removal involves providing an alternative form of income for community members, indicate whether or not the alternative income will exceed former source of income. Provide details on new income source and programs, infrastructure, and support that need to be in place to help secure alternative income source.
1-4
New income source sustainability
1 = New income source is unsustainable; 4 = Income source is highly sustainable
(Use 1-4 scale) Describe details around the dependability of the alternative income and its sustainability in the long term. Provide details on the needed support, structures, organizations needed in order to increase probability of sustainable income from alternative income source.
Average Score

6. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Technical (1 of 2)
Criteria
Explanation
Score
Technology
Attainability &
Availability
1 = Technology and/or required assistance needed is unavailable; 4 = Technology is attainable and third-party assistance, if required, is available
Dashanbao Nature Reserve started to plant grass since 1990s, they master the technology. If required, Zhaoyang Agriculture Bureau veterinary station will provide assistance. 4
Technology assistance
1 = Technology assistance is required, yet not available; 4 = Technology assistance is significant and available
Zhaoyang Agriculture Bureau veterinary station will provide assistance.
Appropriate for circumstances
1 = Available technology is not appropriate for circumstances; 4 = Acquirable technology is suited for circumstances
Acquirable technology is suited for circumstances
Average Score

7. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Technical (2 of 2)
Criteria
Explanation
Score
Organizational Ability
Capacity /
Barrier Removal Partner support
1 = BR Partner does not exist or is not willing to support the project; 4 = There exists a willing Barrier Removal Partner
Rare will provide BR fund and technical support, Dashanbao Reserve will provide CM expense, Zhaoyang Agriculture Bureau and Dashanbao township government will support the project
3.7
Barrier Removal Partner’s ability to drive change
1 = BR Partner lacks a track record of driving behavior; 4 = BR partner has a proven track record of driving behavior
BR partner has a proven track record of driving behavior
3.5
Budget planning and cost efficient execution
1 = BR Partner has not demonstrated sufficient budget planning skills and cost efficient execution of plans; 4 = BR Partner has proven proficiency in budget planning and cost efficient execution of past plans
Already finish the budget planning.
3.6
Average Score
Other Partners
Other critical partners
1 = Other partners do not exist or will not be impactful 4 = Other partners are available and capable of assistance
1.Zhaoyang Agriculture Bureau and Dashanbao township government will provide technical support to the project;
2. Dashanbao Reserve will support the project on community survey, evaluation.

8. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Cultural/Political (1 of 2)
Criteria
Explanation
Score
Community Leadership
Leaders and influencers in the community
1 = Dearth of strong leaders and influencers in the community; 4 = Visible leaders with clout to drive behavior
(Use 1-4 scale) In the narrative list any critical groups or individuals who might be brought to bear to facilitate the adoption of the barrier Removal strategy. (These will likely have been identified during the Pride Planning Process) The list can be refined in the quantitative survey that follows the BRAVO. If unknown, write unknown.
Local community leader 3
Leadership willingness to endorse
1 = Unwilling to get on board with project; 4 = Firm commitment from leadership to help drive change efforts
(Use 1-4 scale) Where such leaders exist, what evidence (if any) currently exists to show that they may be willing to endorse BR adoption? If reticence is known to exist, why is this? If unknown, write unknown.
Firm commitment from leadership to help drive change efforts
3.2
Average Score
3.1

9. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Cultural/Political (2 of 2)
Criteria
Explanation
Score
Political Environment
Current legislative and legal landscape
1 = Legislative and legal restrictions will hamper efforts; 4 = Legislative and legal framework will aid program
Legislative and legal framework will aid program 4
Ability to drive legislative change
1 = Lack of knowledge regarding political environment and unclear timeframe for advocacy; 4 = Depth of political knowledge and ability to push for appropriate changes within a given timeframe
Depth of political knowledge and ability to push for appropriate changes within a given timeframe
3.4
Average Score
3.7
Values and Norms
Assessment of norms
1 = Plan is unconcerned with political and cultural norms 4 = Plan assesses and takes into account the values and norms governing the political and cultural environment
Plan assesses and takes into account the values and norms governing the political and cultural environment
3.5
Ability to address normative obstacles
1 = Normative obstacles are too formidable to be overcome; 4 = Obstacles are manageable and a clear tack to address them is employed
Obstacles are manageable and a clear tack to address them is employed 3
3.25

10. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Impact and Metrics (1 of 2)
Criteria
Explanation
Score
Conservation Impact
Likelihood of conservation impact
1 = Conservation impact is unlikely to be achieved; 4 = Conservation impact is very likely to be realized
Conservation impact is very likely to be realized
3.1
Impact
sustainability
1 = The conservation impact goal is unlikely to be sustained in the long-term; 4 = The impact goal should be viable in the long-term
The impact goal should be viable in the long-term 3
Average Score
3.05

11. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Impact and Metrics (2 of 2)
Criteria
Explanation
Score
Tipping Points
1st Tipping Point
Finish plant hectares of grass by 2009.
Finish build hectares of fence by Dec conduct 3 main grazing area.
Finish training to local villagers by July,2010. cover population, reduce overgrazing by promoting battery farming. 4
2nd Tipping Point
3.2
3rd Tipping Point
Average Score
3.4
Metrics
Measurable outcomes
1 = The program lacks clear metrics or are difficult to measure; 4 = The program has established clear, measureable metrics
By the end of the project, if the free range farming reduce 2/3. then the project is successful.
3.3

12. Barrier Removal Assessment and Viability Overview (BRAVO) Composite Score
Category
Subcategory
Score
Average
Category Score
Feasibility
Economics
Costs
3.6
3.52
Revenues
3.43
Income Substitution
Technical
Technology 4
3.7
Capacity / Organizational Ability
Other Partners
3.5
Cultural / Political
Community Leadership
3.1
3.35
Political Environment
Cultural Norms
3.25
Feasibility Score
Impact
Impact and Metrics
Conservation Impact
3.05
Tipping Points
3.4
Metrics
3.3
Impact Score
SG: Original Impact Score was listed as 3.6, but I wasn’t sure where this came from
Enter average scores in the right hand column. Then take the feasibility score and enter it into Miradi and the Impact score and enter it into Miradi. Where either score is below X for either feasibly or impact, consider the strategy to be inappropriate and assess the need to conduct a second BRAVO that reviews a different strategy.

13. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Risk Factors
Consequence
Mitigation Strategies
Some of villagers refuse to battery farming
Mow grass couldn’t meet the need of battery farming.
Overgrazing is out of control, we can’t estimate the threats to Black necked crane and the wet land.
Go back to free range farming.
Enhance advertisement , otherwise we need to make community regulations.
Enhance advertisement , let the community know the advantage of battery farming. Increase plant grass area.
List any risk factors, consequences and mitigation strategies that may need to be adopted.

14. BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Authors and approvals
Name
Org
Zhong Xingyao
Dashanbao Nature reserve
Director
Ji Yangshan
Vice director
Dao Meibiao CM
Chen Shixue
Zhaoyang Agriculture Bureau