Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI 360 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC 20009 Tel: 202-884-8000 Fax: 202-884-8432.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI 360 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC 20009 Tel: 202-884-8000 Fax: 202-884-8432."— Presentation transcript:

1 Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax: Website: FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators Food for Peace Monitoring and Evaluation Workshop for FFP Development Food Assistance Projects

2 Session Objectives Understand: 1.The importance of annual monitoring 2.The different categories of annual monitoring indicators 3.Which indicators are applicable to your program 4.How data can be collected for the indicators FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

3 PART 1 OF 2 Introduction to the FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

4 Demonstrate progress Mid-course corrections Program planning Reasons To Do Annual Monitoring FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

5 Updated Food for Peace (FFP) indicator list More standardized and quantifiable More aligned with Feed the Future (FTF) and State Department (F) indicators New FFP program-specific indicators introduced Indicator Revision Process FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

6 CATEGORY Agriculture and Livelihoods Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition (MCHN) Resilience Gender TOTAL Indicator Categories FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

7 TOTAL NUMBER Output16 Outcome16 TOTAL32 Output Versus Outcome Indicators FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

8 TYPE TOTAL NUMBER Required (R)2 Required if Applicable (RiA)30 Total of 32 annual monitoring indicators Indicator Types FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

9 “Required for all development programs” Required (R) Indicators FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

10 1.Number of vulnerable households benefiting directly from USG assistance 2.Proportion of female participants in USG-assisted programs designed to increase access to productive economic resources (assets, credit, income, or employment) Required (R) Indicators FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

11 “Required if applicable for all development programs that have relevant interventions” Required if Applicable (RiA) Indicators FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

12 Read applicability criteria Ask yourself: Should we collect this indicator? RiA: When Are They Applicable? FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

13 Are you working on value chains? Example: Gross margin per hectare, animal or cage of selected product Example of an RiA Indicator FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

14 Example: Value of agricultural and rural loans Are you increasing access to credit? RiA: Another Example of Applicability FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

15 1.Revised Food for Peace (FFP) Indicator Handbook (forthcoming early 2015) 2.Feed the Future (FTF) Indicator Handbook: Definition Sheets 3.FFP Annual Indicator Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS) 4.State Department (F) Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS) 5.Feed the Future (FTF) Agricultural Indicators Guide* 6.FFP and FTF Beneficiary-Based Survey Guide* (forthcoming Q4 2014) * Covers only four “challenging” agricultural indicators Where to Find Guidance FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

16 Data Collection for the FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators PART 2 OF 2 FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

17 Data collection for annual monitoring indicators is the responsibility of the Awardees Who’s Responsible? FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

18 1.Gross margin per hectare, animal or cage of selected product 2.Value of incremental sales (collected at farm level) attributed to USG implementation 3.Number of hectares under improved technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance 4.Number of farmers and others who have applied improved technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance All four indicators are RiA All four indicators are for agriculture program components Four Challenging Agriculture Indicators FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

19 Complex Changes in beneficiary base Measurement challenges Why Challenging? Five components of gross marginIncremental sales compares two years with different number of beneficiaries in each year Measuring hectares through farmer recall or farmer estimation is unreliable FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

20 How to collect data for the four challenging FFP indicators (if applicable to program) How to collect data for the remaining FFP indicators DECISION #1 DECISION #2 Decision Process FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

21 How to collect data for the four challenging FFP annual monitoring indicators Decision #1 FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

22 The four challenging indicators require special consideration during data collection Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Impact on Data Collection FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

23 1.Routine monitoring 2.Beneficiary-based survey How to collect data for the four challenging annual monitoring indicators: Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Methods of Data Collection FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

24 Continual process Part of routine program activities (often the case for FFP projects) Managed by internal program staff Infrequent activity “Stand-alone” activity External technical expertise needed (usually) Routine monitoringBeneficiary-based survey Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Two Data Collection Options FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

25 TimeResources Data quality Difficulty to implement Routine monitoring Beneficiary- based survey Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Advantages and Disadvantages FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

26 Use routine monitoring (whenever possible)! Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Recommendation FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

27 1. Appropriate scenario 2. Sufficient resources 3. Sufficient time Four Challenging FFP Indicators: When to Consider Beneficiary-Based Surveys? FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

28 Large program size Farmer recall/estimation is considered unreliable; direct measurement is preferred Lack of direct contact between program and beneficiaries Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Appropriate Scenarios for Beneficiary-Based Surveys Difficult to achieve ideal of visiting all beneficiaries with routine monitoring Example: measuring hectares Example: contact with outside agricultural organizations under a market facilitation approach FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

29 Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Sufficient Resources for Beneficiary-Based Surveys

30 Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Sufficient Time for Beneficiary-Based Surveys

31 Within the option of “beneficiary- based survey,” there are several different possible approaches. Four Challenging FFP Indicators: There Is No “One” Survey Type FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

32 Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Different Survey Approaches

33 Feed the Future (FTF) Agricultural Indicators Guide (September 2013) Food for Peace (FFP)/ Feed the Future (FTF) Beneficiary-Based Survey Guide (forthcoming Q4 2014)  Definitions  What data to collect  How to collect data  How to analyze data Four Challenging FFP Indicators: Resources to Help Decide FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

34 How to collect data for the four challenging FFP indicators (if applicable) How to collect data for the remaining FFP indicators DECISION #1 DECISION #2 Decision Process FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

35 How to collect data for the remaining FFP annual monitoring indicators Decision #2 FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

36 1.Indicators related to entities: private enterprises, stakeholders, loans, MSMEs, and communities/villages 2.Indicators related to infrastructure 3.Indicators related to MCHN Remaining FFP Indicators: How to Categorize Remaining Indicators FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

37 Indicators related to entities (private enterprises, stakeholders, loans, MSMEs, and communities/villages): Several indicators (e.g., number of food security private enterprises (for profit), producers organizations, water users associations, women's groups, trade and business associations, and community-based organizations receiving USG assistance) Remaining FFP Indicators: Indicators Related to Entities FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

38 How this is done will vary by program Will usually need a mechanism that is separate from the program monitoring system Can collect data through direct contact with the entities or Can collect data via site observation (for a few of the indicators only) Remaining FFP Indicators: Indicators Related to Entities FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

39 Three indicators: 1.Total increase in installed storage capacity (m 3 ) 2.Kilometers of roads improved or constructed 3.Number of market infrastructures rehabilitated and/or constructed Can collect data through program records Remaining FFP Indicators: Indicators Related to Infrastructure FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

40 Indicators Can collect data through direct contact using community health volunteers or outreach workers via routine monitoring OR Can collect data through direct contact via beneficiary-based surveys Note: Health Clinics do not tend to distinguish program beneficiaries from non-beneficiaries, so not recommended to collect data from HCs Remaining FFP Indicators: Indicators Related to MCHN FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

41 In most cases, you will need a combination of data collection activities, occurring at different times. All Indicators: Overall Recommendations FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

42 No simple answer that works across all programs Spend time during program design to figure out what is best for your program All Indicators: Overall Recommendations FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

43 If considering a survey, remember... Surveys are resource-intensive and require specialized technical expertise! Make sure sufficient money in budget before deciding to use a beneficiary-based survey… and expect to use external contractors Best to use routine monitoring whenever possible instead All Indicators: Overall Recommendations FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

44 Food for Peace (FFP) Indicator Handbook (forthcoming early 2015) Feed the Future (FTF) Indicator Handbook: Definition Sheets rs_sept2013_2_0.pdf rs_sept2013_2_0.pdf FFP Annual Indicator Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS) 0Indicators.pdf 0Indicators.pdf State Department (F) Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS) Feed the Future (FTF) Agricultural Indicators Guide FFP and FTF Beneficiary-Based Survey Guide (forthcoming Q4 2014) References FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators

45 This presentation is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the support of the Office of Health, Infectious Diseases and Nutrition, Bureau for Global Health, United States Agency for International Development (USAID); and the Office of Food for Peace, Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance, United States Agency for International Development (USAID), under terms of Cooperative Agreement No. AID-OAA-A , through the Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA), managed by FHI 360. The contents are the responsibility of FHI 360 and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. FFP Annual Monitoring Indicators


Download ppt "Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI 360 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC 20009 Tel: 202-884-8000 Fax: 202-884-8432."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google