1. INFLUENCES SHAPING EVALUATION The Farm Business Resilience Program Rebecca Heath John Noonan, Roy Murray-Prior Christine Storer, Melanie Strawbridge

2. The FBR Program FBR Farm Planning Stronger Rural Commun- ities Farm Social Support Farm Family Support Farm Exit Support Beyond Farming Pilot of Drought Reform Measures Building Farm Businesses 1 of 7 programs Risk management approach Develop strategic plans Grants to implement

3. The FBR Program Five modular workshops Addresses environmental, social, financial & production aspects Optional ‘kitchen table’ Facilitated adaptive process

4. The Evaluation Coordinated by an evaluation team Three key purposes –Provide data to help improve –Monitor program progress –Provide evidence to justify program

5. The Evaluation Owen JM (1993) Program Evaluation, Forms and Approaches. A: Development National Review of Drought Policy B: Design Program logic C: Process Questionnaires Debriefs Structured feedback sessions D: Management Questionnaires Output / process indicators E: Impact Immediate Questionnaires Interviews Mid-long term TBA Masters project Continuous improvement Justification Monitoring

7. 60 facilitators 170 workshops 700 participants (400 farm businesses)

8. 170 workshops 60 facilitators Western Australian Government (Department of Agriculture and Food) Farm Business Resilience Program Management Team (Curtin Uni) M&E team Program delivery team Program development team Policy team Facilitation T&D team Farmer liaison team Farm business selection & grant management Australian Government (Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry)

9. Complexity Agricultural setting Issue being addressed – drought and a changing climate Ultimate success reliant on participant decisions and actions

10. Rapid roll-out JanFebMarAprMayJuneJulyAugSepOctNovDecJan - Apr 20102011 6 groups 26 groups 4 pre tests Training Planning

11. Expectations Program outcome vs policy outcome Program = immediate ‘attitude’ change Drought policy = social, environmental, economic change What was wanted vs what was funded

12. Learnings Integrate evaluation into program at start Fund medium to long-term impact Shared evaluation understanding Stakeholder needs vs expectations