1. WLI ANNUAL REPORT 2013 GUIDELINE Bezaiet Dessalegn b.dessalegn@cgiar.org

2. Introduction  WLI in country __X_: Overall objective and linkage with national objectives Site Description  Location (map and coordinates), site characterization, bio-physical and socio-economic targets, and areas for up-scaling WLI ANNUAL REPORT 2013

3.  Context – in relation to national policies, site characterizations, maps, etc.  Maps WLI ANNUAL REPORT 2013 (11/12-10/13)

4. MAPS

5.  Strategic activities for knowledge exchange and enhancement  Field date collection and processing –bio- physical, livelihood studies, etc.  Key findings and recommendations – WLM and livelihoods SUMMARIES

6.  Page limits  References  Appendices  2013 Workplan indicating activities complete or incomplete  Final FTF indicator reporting  Full listing of participants in trainings (including identification of gender: M/F)  Questionnaires or check-lists used for socio-economic data collection  Specification of equipment used for biophysical measurement  Compiled datasets (or list of Excel tables available separately)  Technical reports on modelling activities  Completed scientific publications  Outlines for future scientific publications  Webpages, brochures or other outreach materials developed  High quality photographs to be used in promotional materials

7.  Workplan 2014  Up-scaling and complementary activities to be supported from other sources  Strategy for development of full WLI Country Program NEXT STEPS

8. FEED THE FUTURE INDICATORS

9.  Indicators selected for monitoring and evaluating the President’s global hunger and food security initiative  M&E system for tracking and measuring change, helping to pinpoint where, when and how the processes of change facilitated through project interventions are occurring (or not). FEED THE FUTURE INITIATIVE

10. Seven indicators selected from a comprehensive list of performance indicators (57 indicators)  Number of hectares under improved technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance  Number of farmers and others who have applied new technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance  Number of individuals who have received USG supported short-term agricultural sector productivity or food security training  Number of food security private enterprises (for profit), producers organizations, water users associations, women's groups, trade and business associations, and community-based organizations (CBOs) receiving USG assistance  Number of stakeholders implementing risk-reducing practices/actions to improve resilience to climate change as a result of USG assistance  Number of new technologies or management practices in one of the following phases of development: (Phase I/II/III – under research/field testing/made available for transfer)  Gross margin per unit of land, kilogram, or animal of selected product WLI - FEED THE FUTURE (FTF) INDICATORS

11. Individuals within the target area that receive direct benefits (i.e., goods or services) from the program) including Individuals who receive training or benefit from program-supported technical assistance or service provision PROJECT BENEFICIARIES

12. FTF REPORTING TEMPLATE

13.  Feed the Future recognizes the role of women in agriculture as being critical to increasing agricultural productivity, reducing poverty and improving nutrition, and is therefore interested in monitoring how its benefits and services are distributed among females and males.  5 of the 7 indicators selected for WLI require disaggregation by sex (e.g., male, female). The requirement relates to both technology and management practices indicators (4.5.2-2 and 4.5.2-5), and to all five data points for gross margin (4.5-15).  A sex disaggregation of "joint" can be used in those cases where men and women share equally in decision-making regarding the use of land. “Joint” is not applicable to situations in which a male makes the management decisions about the land and a female mainly provides labor.  who makes the decision(s) on what to plant and how, when to harvest, which inputs to purchase and how to use them GENDER

14.  For number of hectares (4.5.2-2), the area planted is counted each time it is cultivated with one or more improved technologies or practices during the reporting year. For example, if a farmer applies an improved technology or practice to a plot that is cultivated three times during the reporting year, the area of the plot is counted each time and reported as a sum. AGGREGATION

15. THANK YOU

16. Thank you

17.  A sex disaggregation of "joint" can be used in those cases where men and women share equally in decision-making regarding the use of land. “Joint” is not applicable to situations in which a male makes the management decisions about the land and a female mainly provides labor.  who makes the decision(s) on what to plant and how, when to harvest, which inputs to purchase and how to use them  The second new disaggregate category, “association-applied”, can be used when the technology or management practice is applied by a group or association. For example, a group of farmers applies a new fertilizer on a demonstration plot. In this case, the hectares are counted as “association-applied” under 4.5.2-2 (number of hectares) and gross margin (4.5-15). The farmers are counted as one (1) group under 4.5.2-42, Feed the Future’s indicator referring to “groups”.  The association-applied disaggregate is only new for gross margin (4.5-15); it already existed for hectares under improved technology or practices (4.5.2-2).  4.5.2-42 Number of private enterprises (for profit), producers organizations, water users associations, women’s groups, trade and business associations, and community-based organizations (CBO) that applied new technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance.  Feed The Future Agricultural Indicators Guide: Guidance on the collection and use of data for selected Feed the Future Agricultural Indicators. July 2013. ` NEW CATEGORIES

18.  Two of the four indicators covered in this guide require measurement of the area under production – gross margin (4.5- 15) and hectares under improved technologies or management practices (4.5.2-2). In both cases, the relevant measure for crops and aquaculture ponds is hectares, often converted from local units. For gross margin, this data point represents the unit of production, and is used in the denominator when calculating the commodity-specific gross margin value. For many livestock products, the unit of production is not land-based (i.e., cannot be measured by area), and is therefore reported as the number of animals involved in production; for fisheries, the unit of production is either hectares (for aquaculture ponds) or cages. Pp 14 –different methodologies of measurements for different land types including ponds – tape and compass, GPS, Pacing, farmers’ estimates and remote sensing MEASURING AGRICULTURAL AREA

19.  Preliminaries < 10  Executive Summary 1  Body  Introduction  Site Description  Strategic Activities  Field Data collection and processing  Summary of Analysis  Next steps  References  Appendices  Workplans  FtF Indicators

20.  monitoring uptake of improved technologies and practices  This indicator seeks to measure the number of farmers and others (e.g., farmers, ranchers, producers, entrepreneurs, managers, traders, processors (individuals only), natural resource managers) that are applying improved technologies or management practices promoted through USG-supported programs, disaggregated by whether or not the farmer had begun applying the technology or practice for the first time within the reporting year (new) or whether s/he had begun using it in the year prior to the current reporting year and continues to apply it in the current reporting year (continuing), and by sex. In the Feed the Future context, it is assumed that any “new” technology is an “improved” technology.

21.  Application is the use of technology or management practice by a farmer or other producer over at least one crop season or equivalent production period in the case of livestock or fisheries. Adoption is the use of technology or management practice by a farmer or other producer in a sustainable way over an extended period of time.  New vs. continuing: Both the number of hectares (4.5.2-2) and the number of farmers (4.5.2-5) indicators require disaggregating by whether a technology or practice promoted by the project to improve productivity was applied for the first time during the reporting year (new) or whether it was applied in the current reporting year and in the previous reporting year (continuing), i.e., over two consecutive years.  For number of farmers (4.5.2-5), “new” indicates that, as a result of USG assistance, a farmer first applied the technology or practice during the current reporting year; it does not refer to whether a farmer was previously familiar with a technology or management practice (i.e., whether or not it was “new” to him/her). A farmer is only counted once, regardless of how many improved technologies or practices s/he applies in a reporting year.  “Continuing” indicates that, as a result of USG assistance, a farmer applied the technology or practice in the previous reporting year and is continuing to apply it in the current reporting year. In those cases where a beneficiary farmer was already applying an improved technology at baseline, they are counted as “continuing” if they continue to apply the technology or practice promoted through your current program activities during the reporting year. A farmer must apply a technology or practice over two consecutive years (i.e., the current and previous reporting years) to be considered as “continuing”. For example, if a farmer applied the technology or practice in reporting year 1 of a project, did not apply it during the second reporting year, but applied it again in reporting year 3, s/he is reported as “new” in year 1, not applying in year 2, and “new” in year 3.