Mid Term Evaluation for Integrated Livestock and Crop Conservation Programme (ILCCP)

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2008-2013, Bhutan
Evaluation Type:
Project
Planned End Date:
03/2010
Completion Date:
12/2010
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
16,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document ToR_ MTR_ILCCP_2010.pdf tor English 69.75 KB Posted 696
Download document Midterm evaluation ILCCP.pdf report English 917.82 KB Posted 915
Title Mid Term Evaluation for Integrated Livestock and Crop Conservation Programme (ILCCP)
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2008-2013, Bhutan
Evaluation Type: Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 12/2010
Planned End Date: 03/2010
Management Response: Yes
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
Evaluation Budget(US $): 16,000
Source of Funding: GEF
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: Yes
  • Joint with GEF, RGoB, UNDP
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Team Leader
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: National Biodiversity Centre, Ministry of Agriculture
Countries: BHUTAN
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 Project Design
2 Prioritization of Outcomes
3 Prioritization of Products and Sites
4 Coordination with Relevant Stakeholders
5 Project Management & Administration
1. Recommendation: Project Design
Management Response: [Added: 2011/02/06]

The project design is relevant as it addresses many high priority products across four agro-ecological zones for in situ and ex situ conservation. In addition, the project approach addresses cross cutting priority issues such as awareness, poverty reduction, gender equity, local governance, and capacity development. Despite these positive aspects, the project design has elements which need review to ensure successful and efficient implementation in the second half of the project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
In order to improve the quality of project monitoring and reporting, the MTE recommended a review of the project Log Frame to incorporate Outputs and associated SMART Indicators. The revised log frame should build in the project?s ?mainstreaming? component.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/02/07]
PMT (NBC, Departments, Districts) and UNDP CO 2011/01 Completed Endorsed by 4th PB meeting held on January 14, 2011.
2. Recommendation: Prioritization of Outcomes
Management Response: [Added: 2011/02/06]

The project has seven outcomes and 31 outputs to implement in situ and ex situ conservation measures in eighteen sites across fourteen commodities. Considering the total project budget, and the Human Resources at the PMU, this is a broad mandate that poses administrative and monitoring challenges. Based on the availability of budget and achievement to-date under various outcomes, it has been recommended to prioritize activities during the second half of the project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Based on interviews with selected farmer groups, the project?s activities are resulting in increased yields through provision of improved inputs and management training. However, due to production limitations, not all activities are achieving the objective of in situ conservation. A detailed impact survey is required to assess the impact on yield enhancement.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2012/09/04]
PMT (NBC, DoA, DoL, DAMC) 2012/06 Completed Impact survey completed in most of the project sites. PMU will continue to monitor the commodities identified for conservation in the project sites as a regular intervention from the government.
The project should give high priority to achieving sustainable results in Outcomes 4 & 5 in collaboration with DAMC. The PMU should hold a strategy workshop with the guidance of DAMC and participation of DoL, DoA, and RDCs to devise tangible product marketing strategies and time bound marketing Action Plans.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/08/22]
PMT (NBC, DAMC) 2011/06 Completed DAMC has formally agreed to draw marketing strategy for potential commodities from the ILCCP sites. Meeting convened with stakeholders in April 2011.
the project should actively engage PPD to seek guidance in the development of a National Biodiversity Policy. In addition, the project should seek ways of contributing to the development of ?National Food Security and Nutrition? policy.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/08/22]
PMT (NBC, PPD) and GNHC 2011/06 Completed The project actively collaborates with PPD & NOP of MoAF. Co-financing and technical support provided through the project to draft National Biodiversity Policy; Food and Nutrition security Policy; and National Organic Strategy.
The project has undertaken important national and local activities to raise awareness on importance of agro-biodiversity. A survey is recommended to assess increase in awareness levels
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2012/04/15]
PMT 2011/12 Completed DAMC has formally agreed to draw marketing strategy for potential commodities from the ILCCP sites. Meeting convened with stakeholders in April 2011.
3. Recommendation: Prioritization of Products and Sites
Management Response: [Added: 2011/02/06]

The project targets six livestock and seven crop species in 18 sites spread across eight districts. The number of commodities targeted by the project when compared to the total budget allocated shows that at the project end, instead of seeing significant impact on a few select commodities, the project?s impact would be thinly distributed amongst a large number of commodities, thereby having implications for sustainability.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Recommended to undertake a prioritization exercise with key stakeholders including DoA, DoL, and DAMC to select commodities and sites where successful activities can be continued.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/02/07]
PMT (NBC with DoL, DoA and DAMC) 2010/12 Completed Prioritization of commodities and sites have been taken up with DoL, DoA and dzongkhags. This has been reported in the 4th PB meeting.
4. Recommendation: Coordination with Relevant Stakeholders
Management Response: [Added: 2011/02/06]

The RGoB and various associated departments of MoAF take complete ownership of the project. The DoA, DoL, and RDCs have been active project participants in the project through provision of extension staff, attending key project meetings and activities, and participating in project offered trainings. Due to its transition phase in the first half of the project, the DAMC has only been marginally involved in project activities. Also, the project has not yet actively engaged the PPD, the key implementing partner for Outcome 6.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The success of in situ conservation depends upon sustainable market linkages; it is recommended that the project actively engages the DAMC as a major stakeholder to implement Outcomes 4 and 5. Two key measures to be undertaken in this regard include a) incorporation of project activities in the DAMC?s first Annual Work Plan 2011 and b) inclusion of project prioritized products in DAMC?s overall Marketing Strategy.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/02/07]
PMT 2010/06 Completed PMT has resolved this issue in the 4th PB meeting.
To mainstream agro-biodiversity conservation into national policy, there is an urgent need to develop close collaboration with PPD. Key activities recommended include a) seeking assistance from PPD on formulation of National Biodiversity Policy and b) seeking ways of contributing to the National Food Security and Nutrition Policy currently being drafted by the PPD. Both these activities will ensure project sustainability as they would provide a systematic mechanism of incorporating agro-biodiversity conservation into key policy documents of the RGoB.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/02/07]
PMT 2011/01 Completed The PMT actively collaborates with PPD/MoAF in the formulation of the policies.
As the PMU staff members have additional responsibilities, whereas managing the extensive activities of ILCCP is a full time engagement, it is recommended that additional PMU staff is hired.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/02/07]
PMT (NBC, DoA, DoL, PPD) 2010/12 Completed Internal arrangement within the PMT has been made.
5. Recommendation: Project Management & Administration
Management Response: [Added: 2011/02/06]

The M&E section of the project document has set out elaborate planning and reporting guidelines with in-built mechanisms for course correction over the life of the project. However, there is no provision for an overall impact assessment of project activities. Due to the unique nature of this project, such an assessment will identify lessons learnt in the context of Bhutan and will feed into future agro-biodiversity conservation programming of UNDP and GEF and the policy and planning of the RGoB.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Improved monitoring and reporting procedures should be followed by the PMT using standardized formats and ensuring that quantifiable results of activities are recorded. The project?s Monitoring system should be revised to report quantitative information and an overall impact assessment of project activity should be included in the M&E Framework.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/02/07]
PMT (NBC), UNDP & GNHC 2010/12 Completed ILCCP activities have been incorporated into the government?s M & E framework ? PlaMS/MYRB/ PEMS.
The project has already faced considerable delay in release of funds, resulting in serious implications for in situ crop related activities. To avoid these delays, it is recommended that a discussion takes place between UNDP and PMU where the exact cause of the delay is pointed out and corrective measures are identified, where possible.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/02/07]
PMT, UNDP & GNHC 2011/01 Completed This has been assured through early preparation of AWP.
The transfer of field staff poses a major hindrance to success of project activities. It is advised that the DoA and DoL make an effort to minimize transfers of extension staffs in targeted districts and Gewogs until June 2012. Where transfers are imminent, some notice may be given to the PMU to enable project management to plan an effective change.
[Added: 2011/02/06] [Last Updated: 2011/08/22]
PMT in consultation with PB 2011/06 Completed This has been addressed in consultation with DoL/DoA and PPD of MoAF.

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org