CISP Harar M & E Framework For RRLH Through IFSA Fedis & GG

CISP – Harar
Monitoring & Evaluation Framework (Draft)
For
RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES

THROUGH AN INTEGRATED FOOD SECURITY APPROACH (RLIFSA)
IN
SELECTED DROUGHT-PRONE PEASANT ASSOCIATIONS
IN
FEDIS & GOROGUTU WOREDAS, E/ HARARGHE ZONE, OROMIA
Prepared for Consultation by:
CISP-Harar
March 2005
Harar
M&E FRAMEWORK OF CISP FOR "RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES THROUGH AN IFS 1
APPROACH (RLIFSA") IN SELECTED DROUGHT-PRONE PAs OF FEDIS & GOROGUTU WOREDAS, E/ HARARGHE: OROMIA
Table of Content
PART ONE
I. BACK GROUND AND INTRODUCTORY NOTE OF THE PROJECT
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

2.1. Objective of the Project
2.1.1. General Objective
2.1.2. Specific Objectives
2.2. Project Activities
2.3. Expected Outcomes/ Impact on the Target Group
2.3.1. Concrete Results of the Project
2.3.2. Expected Impact & Multiplier effect on beneficiaries
2.3.3. Long-term impact
2.4. Beneficiaries and Partnership Analysis
2.4.1. Beneficiaries Analysis
2.4.2. Partnership Analysis
2.5. Project input requirement & cost coverage arrangement
PART TWO
I. M&E FRAMEWORK OF THE PROJECT "RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL

COMMUNITIES THROUGH AN INTEGRATED FOOD SECURITY APPROACH (RLIFSA)"
ANNEXES
ANNEX I: M&E Framework For "RLIFSA"
Annex M&E 1.1: - Information required for program operation monitoring for "RLIFSA"
Annex M&E 1.2: - Conceptual Framework for M&E system development for "RLIFSA"
Annex M&E 1.3: - A M&E Framework Focused on indicators for "RLIFSA"
Annex M&E 1.4: - Summarized M&E plan for "RLIFSA"
Annex M&E 1.5: - Indicative M&E framework for the three aspects of program monitoring
A) Management / Administration Monitoring Framework
B) Financial Performance Monitoring Framework
C) Monitoring Framework For Program Progress
ANNEX II: Organization of the M&E Exercises for "RLIFSA" in Fedis & Gorogutu woredas of
Eastern Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region Ethiopia
ANNEX III: Verifiable Indicators Used for the M&E Exercise Of "RLIFSA" in Fedis & Gorogutu
Woredas of E/ Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region By Component
ANNEX IV: Primary Information Collection Formats for M&E Exercise of "RLIFSA" In Fedis and
Gorogutu Woredas
ANNEX V: Physical Activities Progress Quarterly Monitoring Format
ANNEX VI: Partnership Analysis Tables of "RLIFSA" In Fedis and Gorogutu Woredas
ANNEX VII: Project Logical Framework of "RLIFSA" In Fedis and Gorogutu Woredas
ANNEX VIII: Project Action Plan of "RLIFSA" In Fedis and Gorogutu Woredas
I. BACK GROUND AND INTRODUCTORY NOTE OF THE PROJECT
Project Title: Reinforcing Rural Livelihood through an IFS Approach in Fedis &
Gorogutu Woredas of East Hararghe Zone
Funding Agency: European Commission
Budget Line: 210202
Project Duration: 24 Months
Project Area:
Region: Regional National State of Oromia

Zone: East Hararghe
Woredas: Fedis and Gorogutu Woredas
Mode of Funding: Co financed by the EC and CISP International
Total eligible Cost of the Action Amount requested from EC % of Total Cost of Action
765,387.59 EURO 688,848.83 EURO 90 %
SUMMARY
The principal aim of the project is to “reinforce the livelihoods of rural communities through an
integrated food security (FS) approach (RLIFSA) in the woredas of Fedis and Goro Gutu”.
Through successful accomplishment of the project the FS of target households (HHs) anticipated to
be strengthened through enhancing agricultural production and increasing HH income.
Besides household level impact of the project, CISP envisages the undertaking of integrated project
components which also seeks to reinforce the livelihood of the wider community by: facilitating
access to markets and basic social service; maximization of the communities’ potential in terms of
human capital and natural resources; improving the natural economic base of target communities
i.e. the surrounding environment, thus making it more amenable to rain-fed agriculture and less
susceptible to soil erosion and hence to get enhanced resilience against the occurrence of recurrent
rain failure prevailing in the area.
In order to realize these broad objectives of the project under concern different integrated activities
fall into four components/ categories are designed: Namely: 1) Safety Net/Employment
Generation; 2) Promotion of HH agricultural production/ HH income; 3) HH Asset Building and
4) Capacity Building at both community and institutional level.
The project "Reinforcing Rural Livelihood through an IFS Approach in Fedis & Gorogutu Woredas
of East Hararghe Zone" is expected to positively affect the household economy of a total of 50, 240
community members, of which 7,328 farming households will benefit directly from different
project activities in the three years period of the project.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
2.1. OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT
2.1.1. Overall objectives
As clearly articulated in the project document the overall objective of the project under concern is
to address factors which contribute to widespread and chronic HH food insecurity in the target
PA’s. The problem of HH asset depletion, and the resulting increase in vulnerability, will be
mitigated through the provision of financial, material and technical resources in order to enable
HHs to recover assets and engage in productive activities.
These interventions anticipated strengthening the HHs' livelihood and, by extension, improving
their FS status in sustainable manner. They will also reinforce the capacity of the wider
community in line with the goals of the Government’s “National and Regional Food Security
Strategy”, as well as the criteria set by the European Commission’s (EC) in its “2003 NGO Food
Security Program” call for proposal.
2.1.2. Specific objectives
The precarious nature of FS in the country is a consequence of the extreme vulnerability in which
many Ethiopians live. It is a complex phenomenon, which demands a long-term, multi-sectoral,
integrated approach. CISP has sought to reflect this recognition in its project design. Therefore, the
specific objectives of the project is to reduce vulnerability of structurally food insecure HHs
through rebuilding productive assets at HH and community level, thus rendering them less
susceptible to the effects of climatic, demographic, and market shocks.
In line with the above, the project is also aims at:
 Reduce vulnerability of structurally food insecure HHs through rebuilding productive assets
at HH and community level through appropriate safety net/employment creation measures.
 Improve the level of HH income through enhanced agricultural production and diversified
of on/off farm income generation activities
 Improve the state and maximize the potential of the community’s natural resources through
its sustainable management and use
 Improve access of target HHs and community members to basic social services, such as
primary education, basic health services, safe drinking water, etc
 Reduce levels of illiteracy within target communities.
 Sensitize target communities to the causes and possible solutions of the socio-economic
problems, which curtail their livelihoods.
 Empower target communities, CBOs, and local government structures to undertake local-
level development initiatives effectively through their enhanced participation in project
design and implementation as well as sustainable management of project outputs.
 Enhance the capacity of local government structures in disaster prevention and management
2.2. PROJECT ACTIVITIES
During the participatory rural assessments (PRA), community groups spoke of persistent seasonal
and structural food insecurity and singled out chronic food shortage as the major problem in the
PAs. Extreme natural phenomena and pest infestation are seen as the root causes for the low levels
of HH production. The last few years have considerably strained HHs ability to cope. This has
lead to an impoverishment of assets at all levels.
However, the community identified as the most significant outcomes of the above: lack of oxen
and seed, along with the absence of income opportunities in rural areas. This last results in a low
level of cash income with which to purchase inputs. These are exacerbated by poor soil fertility,
increased erosion, land fragmentation and frequent infestations of pests and weeds. Lack of
productive labor in rural HHs due to demographic characteristics and poor health, along with
large family sizes were also named as impacting negatively on HH livelihoods.
The result is that a significant proportion of HHs living in the target PA’s are unable to meet their
annual food requirement and continue to rely on food rations. In extreme circumstances even
better off households are recipients of relief aid.
Currently, diversified agricultural practices, such as animal husbandry and other on/off farm
activities, are very limited. Recurrent vulnerability leads to intensive risk aversion strategies those
contribute for further aggravation of the problem in the long ran by causing an increased
dependence on natural resource mainly forest. However, these are often inadequate to curtail the
intensify problem in the face of the current situation. The poor coverage of animal health services
also discourages farmers from investing more heavily in livestock.
The target PA’s also lack access to basic social services (primary education, basic health services
etc); knowledge of appropriate hygiene & sanitation practices and access to potable water. Data
collected by woreda Health Offices, suggests that less than 30% of the PA’s population have access
to clean water. Similarly, latrine coverage and environmental sanitation is virtually none. As a
result, water-borne and water-related illnesses rank first among the top ten diseases affecting the
health and labor quality & productivity of the communities.
According to the results of the PRA exercises conducted in all the intervention PAs community felt
needs are as summarized below. Note that priorities, with the exception of point one; demonstrate
a slight variation across the target PAs.
 Food shortage,
 Lack of potable water,
 Lack of oxen and other agricultural inputs,
 Limited income diversification opportunities & lack of marketable products
 Land shortage, fragmentation, and soil erosion
 Poor access to health services and to local markets,
 Lack of proper animal health services and forage for livestock,
 Lack of domestic energy source due to clearance of forests & wood land, and
 Low coverage of education & training and other social services mainly primary health care
Based on information above, and in conjunction with the overall objectives of the Ethiopian
government and the EC guidelines, the CISP team jointly with woreda experts and community
members designed the following activities to meet the needs highlighted by the target PA’s and
anticipated to help regenerate the communities’ exhausted livelihoods.
2.2.1 SAFETY NETS:
The activities proposed under this component attempt to strengthen the community’s physical
assets in the form of environmental rehabilitation and social infrastructures, whilst at the same
time providing significant paid employment to members of vulnerable HHs within the community.
The employment generation component of these activities is expected to provide 8 months (at 20
day x month, 4 months x year) of paid employment to a total of 1,766 individuals across both
woredas.
Accordingly, a total of 134,644 Person Days (PDs) employment will be generated which will result
the transfer of significant volume of financial resource to target communities in the form of wage
payment and minor physical inputs. As a result the target 791 beneficiary HHs will earn about
112.15 EURO each which will enable them to obtain major productive assets through purchase
from local markets. There follows a breakdown per activities, as well as per direct beneficiaries for
each woreda:
2.2.1.1 Biological and Physical soil and water (S&W) conservation activities:
Out of the total labor opportunity to be generated about 71.5 % will be for a number of integrated
soil & water conservation activities. These will focus primarily on physical and biological natural
resource conservation methods. Accordingly, 603 individuals i.e. 228 and 375, respectively in Fedis
and Goro Gutu will benefit from 20 days x month of employment for four months each year over
the two year period.
Along with the opportunity to earn cash income, the safety net will also physically advantage
target HHs who will benefit from various soil and water conservation activities. These activities
seek to make the environment more amenable to rain-fed agriculture by limiting soil erosion and
improving seed and water storage management across both woredas.
For a detailed list of activities, volume of work and person days generated, please see the table
below.
No. Fedis Woreda Goro Gutu

List of Activity Volume Total PD List of Activity Volume Total PD
1 Nursery Mgt 1 2,000 Gully Re-vegetation 7 Hectare 3,500
2 Hill Side Terrace 20 KM 5,000 Planting of Bunds 90 Km 1,440
3 Check Dam Const. 2 Km 2,000 Seedling Planting 50,000 1,000
4 Micro Basin Const. 50,000 10,000 Compost Making 120 pit 1,200
5 Pond Maintenance 3 9,000 Soil Bund 40 Km 6,000
6 Seed Collection 45 Kg 900 Stone Bund 42 Km 10,500
7 Gully Re-vegetation 15 Hec 7,500 Hill Side Terrace 30 KM 7,500
8 - - - Bench Terracing 10 KM 5,000
9 - - - Check Dam Const. 6 KM 6,000
10 - - - Trench Construction 5,000 3,335
11 - - - Eye Brows Const 3,000 1,500
12 - - - Micro Basin Const. 20,000 4,000
13 - - - Water Canal Const. 2,050 M3 2,735
14 - - - Pitting 50,000 3,335
15 - - - Pond Construction 1 3,000
Total 36,400 Total 60,045
2.2.1.2. Social infrastructure development
Out of the total funds allocated for safety net activities about 28.5 % will be used for the
construction and maintenance of different social infrastructures. Namely: road construction, road
maintenance, school rehabilitation, ventilated improved Latrine (VIP) Construction, spring
development, and the construction of roof catchments. Out of this amount of money 72.7% will go
directly to target laborers as wages, whilst the remaining 27.3 % will be used for the procurement
of industrial materials required to undertake construction and rehabilitation works.
Accordingly, 184 individuals in Fedis, and 68 in Goro Gutu, will benefit directly from six months
(i.e. 20 PD/ Month/ individual) of employment and from the resulting income. The wider
community is also expected to benefit indirectly from the improved service delivery by the project
through the construction & maintenance of infrastructures. These activities will be carried out in
all target PA’s.
For details of activities and employment opportunities generated X woreda, please see the
following table:
No. Fedis Woreda Goro Gutu

List of Activity Volume Total PD List of Activity Volume Total PD
1 Road Construction 5 KM 10,000 Road Construction 4.5 9,000
2 Road Maintenance 10 KM 5,000 Road Maintenance - -
3 School Rehabilitation 4 4,285 School Rehabilitation 1 1,071
4 VIP Construction 4 2,857 VIP Construction 1 715
5 Spring Development - - Spring Development 1 986
6 Roof Catchments Con. 3 2,571 Roof Catchments Con. 2 1,714
Total 24,713 Total 13,486
2.2.2. PROMOTION OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND INCOME
As brought to light during the PRA needs assessments, another constraint, which undermines HH
agricultural production and income, is lack of basic inputs. On account of the ongoing and chronic
nature of the current FS situation, this lack has been intensified by the necessity to engage in
prolonged and unsustainable coping mechanisms. This has led to the sale and consumption of
basic assets, including livestock and seeds.
In addition, the variety of seed traditionally used by farmers has its drawbacks. Typically they take
a long time to mature and have a poor resistance to water stress, weeds and pests.
Therefore, in order to allow farmers in the project area to recover and enable them to diversify
their agricultural production, there is a need to provide improved and appropriate seed varieties,
at least as transitional mechanisms of support.
Absence of market infrastructure, improved storage facilities and marketing cooperatives impacts
significantly on the price farmers can ask. This is particularly noticeable in the current, diminished
returns brought by high value products such as onion and other vegetables.
In order to regenerate production, as well as increase the level of income obtained from it,
interventions have been designed to provide improved/appropriate inputs, as well as the technical
support necessary to maximize the outputs market value.
2.2.2.1 Provision of improved seed varieties:
The improved seeds will be a mix of hybrid and pre-screened landraces varieties. The former
anticipated to guarantee a higher yield over two harvest. However, yield decreases significantly
after the second year. Therefore, it will be emphasized during the technical training and extension
that seed from the second harvest should not be stored and replanted.
However, despite the above-mentioned shortcoming of hybrid seeds, it is felt that two good
harvests will provide a much needed production increment and will help to stabilize HH food
security over a period. Sales of surplus are expected to provide much needed household income.
It is roughly estimated that about 70 % of the seed to be delivered to be pre-screened landraces

varieties. Starting second year these seeds are anticipated to be produced by farmers in the project
area, particularly in Goro Gutu and effort will be made to maintain the sustainability of the seed
multiplication mechanism.
These measures are expected to be:

 Coherence with existing government policies and guidelines
 Need to ensure long term sustainability to quality seed supply in the locality
 To adapt lessons learnt from other previous initiatives in the area
 To directly support a given number of vulnerable farmers in the course of the
project life.
In this connection, the above-indicated cash for work activities will enhance the seed purchasing
power of target communities in the two woredas.
From this specific activity a total of 4,300 farmers i.e. 3,700 from Fedis and 600 from Goro Gutu, are
expected to benefit directly.
For detail of seed-type, amount, area of farm land to be covered, and number of beneficiaries
please see the following table.
No Type of Seed by Unit Volume No. of Target Amount/ Total Area to Remark
. Woreda Farmers Farmer be Covered
Fedis
Sorghum “Gubiye” Qt 80.0 1,600 5 KG 800 Hectare
Maize “Catomany” “ 100.0 1,600 6.25 KG 400 Hectare
Maize local “Bukri” “ 35.0 500 7 KG 125 Hectare
Ground Nut “ 125.0 250 50 KG 31.25 Hectare Inter crop
Haricot Bean “ 80.0 1,600 5 KG 800 Hectare Inter crop
Goro Gutu
Sorghum “Ali Sheko” Qt 10.0 400 2.5 Kg 100 Hectare
Maize local “Bukri” “ 6.25 200 3.125 KG 25 Hectare
Haricot Bean “ 37.5 600 6.25 KG 125 Hectare Inter Crop
2.2.2.2. Production and Provision of fruit and forage seedlings:
The project will support the development of forage and agro forestry at both HH and community
level as a means of diversifying livelihoods and encouraging small animal husbandry. 150 KG of
different forage seeds and 50,000 different fruit seedlings will be delivered to 300 HH in Fedis and
25 HH in Goro Gutu.
The beneficiaries of the forage seeds are those to whom livestock will also be delivered. The fruit
seedlings will be delivered to HHs with irrigable land in Mede Hinchine PA of GG Woreda only.
In areas where woreda nurseries regularly provide subsidies seedlings to farmers, the project
proposed to prepare seedling for planting in the existing nurseries. However, in areas where the
nurseries are not easily accessible to target farmers the project is anticipated to promote private
nurseries for the preparation of bulk of seedling for plantation be farmers.
The fruit seedling provision contains elements of income generation and seeks to benefit as many
HH as possible. Therefore, farmers will be selected to prepare the seedlings on their farm plot and
make them ready for planting. They will then be purchased by the project and redistributed to
other vulnerable HH who will benefit from the end produce. The project will support both groups
by providing necessary inputs like seeds, nursery implements, and basic technical skills.
2.2.2.3. Provision of Vegetable Seeds:
The project will also deliver onion seed to farmers in Fedis and sweet potato seed to those living in
Goro Gutu. Onions were singled out by community as an important crop with high retail value.
Its sale substantially increases HH income. Sweet potatoes are considered an important
component of FS, as it becomes the staple during times of shortage. Increasing their production
will contribute to raising HH cash income, as well as stabilizing HHs FS in times of stress.
Currently the majority of HHs lack seed for both vegetables. This is the consequence of continued
production failure over the course of the last 3-5 years. As a result, there is a critical need for
external support to provide a ‘start-up’ after such chronic depletion of economic resources.
Therefore, in order to enable farmers regain their normal production cycle the Project intends to
deliver 250 Qt of onion seed and 200 Bunch of sweet potato seed to 500 farmers living in Fedis and
200 in Goro Gutu. This activity will require 31.25 Hectare of land for the Onion seed, as well as 12.5
Hectare of land for Sweet Potato production.
2.2.2.4. Promotion of improved storage facilities:
At present farmers are unable to maintain the necessary vegetable-seed stock for future seasons.
The community indicated that this is due to the perishable nature of vegetable seed stock, as well
as the lack of necessary technical skills and the financial capacity at community level for improved
and cost-effective vegetable- seed storage.
This short-coming forces farmers to purchase seed at higher costs. In some cases the price for seed
rises more than 10 times the price to be gained from the same amount of vegetable product. This
means that frequently they are unable to engage in the production of these high-value products.
Due to these difficulties farmers in the target communities recommended that the project consider
the construction of vegetable-seed storage facilities and introduction of improved vegetable
storage techniques. This will allow them to maximize their PA’s special propensity for these crops.
After considering the needs expressed by the community and evaluating the situation from
different perspectives, CISP feels that providing seed storage facilities will aid the sustainability of
the Project’s outputs.
Therefore the Project will construct seven seed storage facilities, one X PA. The support of the
project in this regards will be in the purchase of the necessary construction materials and hire the
skilled labor. The unskilled labor will be delivered directly by the beneficiaries.
A total of 650 HHs, 500 from the five intervention PAs in Fedis and 150 from the two in Goro Gutu,
will benefit directly.
2.2.2.5. Support the establishment of Vegetable sellers’ cooperatives:
The communities highlighted the fact that vegetable-producers from both woredas are not earning
full potential income from the sale of their products. This is primarily due to their difficult access
to local markets. Because of this they remain reliant on local dealers coming directly to the PAs,
purchasing the good and then transporting them directly to market. This arrangement
considerably lowers the producers bargaining power, forcing them to accept prices as low as 50%
under what they could make if they were able to sell their product directly at local markets.
However, the relatively high market costs incurred if they attempt to sell their product on an
individual basis makes this an unviable alternative.
Therefore, if farmers are to sell at competitive prices, their bargaining power must be increased
and the high cost of marketing their vegetables decreased. The road rehabilitation/construction
planned under intervention will make access to local markets easier, whilst under this intervention
the Project proposes to support the creation of vegetable-sellers cooperatives in each of five target
PAs in Fedis.
2.2.3 HOUSEHOLD ASSET BUILDING
This activity focuses on developing and broadening household’s assets. The PRA showed that lack
of productive assets at HH level is considered a major impediment to stable and sustainable
livelihood security. Lack of them significantly diminishes the HHs ability to cope external shocks.
In order to redress this, the Project proposes to support resource-poor HHs through the
replenishment of livestock need for production. This intervention will not only allow HHs to
diversify their livelihood options and earn some cash income from the sale of product surplus, but
it will also benefit HH nutritionally allowing them to supplement their diets with valuable
proteins. The project will also promote bee keeping in some viable areas in Goro Gutu woreda.
This activity will benefit a total of 792 resource-poor farming HHs, 550 living in all five of Fedis’s
PAs and 242 in the two PAs of Goro Gutu. For detailed information on the a type and number of
livestock to be deliver, number of target beneficiaries, and budget required please see the
following table:
No Woreda Type of No. to be No. of Budget required Target Group

Livestock delivered target HHs in EURO
I Fedis
1 Farm Oxen 150 150 12,000.00 Poor Farmers
2 Local Goat 300 150 3,900.00 Poor Farmers
3 Heifer 100 100 10,000.00 WHHs
4 Poultry 900 150 4,050.00 WHHs
Sub Total I 550 29,950.00
No Woreda Type of No. to be No. of Budget required Target

Livestock delivered target HHs in EURO
II Goro Gutu
1 Farm Oxen 60 60 4,800.00 Poor Farmers
2 Local Goat 100 50 1,300.00 Poor Farmers
3 Heifer 40 40 4,000.00 WHHs
4 Poultry 480 80 2,160.00 WHHs
5 Bee Hives 12 12 3,360.00 Potential Farmers
Sub Total II 242 15,620.00
Total 792 45,570.00
2.2.4 COMMUNITY TRAINING, AWARENESS CREATION & EXPERIENCE SHARING
These activities aim to support and build the technical knowledge, physical ability and practical
capacity of the target community in general, and the direct beneficiaries in particular so that to
enable them to fetch the maximum possible output from the project activities planned. Their main
aim is to reinforce good practices, which promote food/livelihood security at both levels. The
trainings and material support provided will strengthen community ownership of the project,
improve its effective implementation as well as the future sustainability of its outputs.
Various sensitization and awareness-raising activities will help to improve the quality of
communities’ human resources and help develop their collective cache of knowledge. These
activities will be implemented in all seven PAs. For details of the activities and trainings to be
undertaken, target groups, and number of beneficiaries for each action by woreda, please see the
following table:
No Type of Training Woreda Round No. of Benef. Target Groups

1 Awareness creation on crop Fedis 4 4,000 Beneficiary Farmers
Production and Protection G/ Gutu 4 2,400 of seed provision
Total 6,400
2 Training on LS Management and Fedis 2 400 Beneficiaries of LS
Forage Development G/ Gutu 2 150 provision
Total 550
3 Awareness creation on S&W Fedis 4 4,000 Farmers
conservation & Environmental. G/ Gutu 4 2,400
Protection Total 6,400
4 Awareness creation on Hygiene, Fedis 2 40,250 Women
Sanitation & Environ. Health G/ Gutu 2 9,900
Total 50,150
5 Training of traditional birth Fedis 1 25 TBA Women
attendants G/ Gutu 1 10
Total 35
6 Para-Vet Training: Fedis 2 15 Goat credit
G/ Gutu 2 5 Beneficiaries
Total 20
7 Animators Training: Fedis 2 25 Safety Net
G/ Gutu 2 10 beneficiary Farmers
Total 35
8 Promotion of participation of Fedis 5 PAs 2 yrs 4,822 Women Children
women in education in G/ Gutu 2 PAs 2 yrs 1,000 b/n age 7-14
Total 5,822
9 Experience sharing visit on S&C Fedis 1 25 Safety Net
G/ Gutu 1 20 beneficiary Farmers
Total 45
2.2.5. SUPPORT THE CAPACITY OF DP & M AT WOREDA LEVEL
East Hararghe zone in general, and the target woredas in particular, are among the most
structurally food insecure areas in a country defined by chronic food insecurity.
The rural community in most parts of the zone depends on mixed farming systems. Crop
production is the major economic activity, supported by animal husbandry. However the product
of both remains heavily dependant on favorable weather conditions.
Recurrent food stresses in rural areas of the zone is fast becoming the norm. This undesirable
situation has increased the vulnerability of the farming community to relatively minor external
shocks. The food crises experienced over the last few years are the result of the communities’
inability to deal with these shocks.
However, despite the predictable nature of crises in the area, the government response, as well as
that of other concerned local and international bodies is not as effective and timely as it could be.
One reason for this is the limited capacity of local government structures to reliably assess, analyze
and predict crises. This lack of capability impacts the rural community who are then left to deal
with the brunt of the crisis unassisted. Experience suggests that it is imperative to develop the
prediction, planning, implementation and evaluation capacity of local government structures,
particularly in the area of DP&M, if this situation is to be avoided.
In order to address this, the Project seeks to incorporates activities designed to fill some of the
capacity gaps at woreda-level government Line Departments.
These activities will improve DP&M’s ability of target woredas to predict and respond to drought,
thus reducing its impact on vulnerable groups in the project area. It will also contribute to the
smooth and successful implementation of other Project activities. (For detail list of activities, and
volume of work please, see the following table)
No List of Actions Unit No. of Unit Target Groups

1 Support Nutritional Surveillance Ass. Round 4 Children >5
2 Training on EW Data Collection/ Analysis “ 1 DAs, HW
3 Support pre/post Harvest Crop Assessment “ 6 WDPPDs
4 Support woreda Relief Operation Years 2 WDPPDs
2.2.6 BUILDING PARTNER’S CAPACITY ON TWO LEVELS: HUMAN & PHYSICAL
Building the capacity of local government institutions and communities remains a priority. This
will enable them to be more effective partners in the identification and implementation of the
national and regional Poverty Reduction and FS Strategy.
CISP proposes to help develop the capacity of partners so as to empower target communities and
enhance the participation of all stakeholders in future development planning.
The proposed activities fall under two categories: Human and Physical, at both community and
project-partner level. These activities will support project partners and target groups through the
provision of material, equipment and technical skills in the area of project planning, TOT,
monitoring & evaluation.
By targeting sector offices, the activities will improve the service-rendering capacity, both in terms
of increased outreach of actions and the quality of service of these offices. Besides this, technical
support will directly contribute to the effective and efficient implementation of the “Integrated
Food Security Projects” to be launched by the Regional Food Security Program.
For detailed types of activities, volume, and target groups by woreda please see the following
tables:
Table: Human Capacity Building
No. Type of Training Unit Volume Target No of Trainees

of work Group Fed GG Total
1. Training on Needs Identification & LD
Project Planning Round 1 expert 12 12 24
2. Training on Project M&E “ 1 “ 12 12 24
3. TOT Training “ 1 “ 9 7 16
Table: Physical Capacity Building:
No Type of Equipment/ Materials Unit Number per woreda Remark

Fedis G/Gutu Total
I Vehicles, Furniture & Equipment
1 Double Cabin Pick Up No 1 1 2 For the Project
2 Motor Bikes “ 3 2 5 LDs
3 Computers with Printer/ UPSs Set 4 3 7 LDs
4 Generator No 1 1 2 RDCO
5 Surveying & Soil analysis Equip. Set 1 1 2 WNRLAO
6 Tape Recorders No 5 2 7 Schools/Clinics
7 Amplifiers “ 5 2 7 “
8 Video Camera “ 1 1 2 DPPC
9 Photo Camera “ 2 1 3 WNRLAO
10 Duplicating Machine “ 1 1 2 For the Project
11 Photo Copy machine “ 1 1 2 For the Project
12 Training Equ/Overhead Projector, etc Set 1 1 2 For the Project
13 Solar Energy Equipment No 1 1 2 2 Clinics
14 School Furniture “ 16 6 22 5 Schools
15 Nursery Materials & Equipment Set 1 - 1 WNRLAO
16 Nutrition Survey Kit “ 5 2 7 WHO
17 Sprayer CP 20 No. 10 4 14 WAO
II. Spare Parts
1 Motor Bike Spare parts Set 3 3 6 For the Project
2 Vehicle Spare Parts Set 1 1 2 LDs
III. Other Material Support
1 Birth Attendant’s Kit Set 25 10 35 Birth Attendants
2 Nursery Materials Set - 5 5 Target Farmers
3 Vet Drugs LS LS LS LS Para-Vets
4 Para Vet Equipment Set 15 10 25 Para-Vets
2.2.7. SUPPORT FOR PARTNERS ASSOCIATIONS
The CBOs working with CISP as partners are relatively new. The one in Goro Gutu was set up,
with CISP support, to manage the irrigation program started under IFSP I and II. Out of the three
CBOs, it is the two CBOs with whom CISP proposes to work in Fedis namely: Terkanefeta
Construction PL. Micro enterprise Association and Jalela Construction PL, Micro Enterprise
Association are new bodies which have only recently come into action.
Under these terms they have been involved in the construction of a number of Farmer training
centers for the woreda Agriculture Offices. In order to undertake this job they had to be licensed
by the Regional state of Oromia Micro and Small Scale Enterprise Development Agency. In line
with this, CISP feels that their current construction mandate and experience will be of value to the
project, as they will be able to advise on & engage in the construction/rehabilitation activates
proposed under the project.
However both associations need to be strengthened since they have different limitations in their
current status. CISP believes that their success is important and can be consider as social resource
capitalization of target communities in the project woredas.
Therefore, as an effort to help the proper growth of these community organizations, it proposed to
support the construction of two offices for the Associations, furnish them and provide the
necessary equipment besides the technical training of construction activities and management
training for the Association's Managing bodies.
Physical Capacity building.

Number per woreda
No Types of Equipment/Materials Unit
Fedis G/Gutu Total
1 Construction of office buildings No. 2 - 2
2 CBO office Furniture Sets 2 - 2
3 Provision of construction equipment partners Set 2 - 2
Human Capacity Building

Target No of trainees
No Types of Training Unit Volume of work
Group Fedis GG Total
1. Technical Training Round 1 Members 24 - 24
2 Management Training 1 " 10 - 10
Total 34 - 34
2.2.8 STUDIES & ASSESSMENTS
CISP believe that an in-depth analysis and comprehension of HH livelihood economy and
community resources is vital if it is to meant to meet the real needs of rural communities through
integrated and interactively designed projects.
Incisive research will greatly complement the implementation of the Project’s activities.
Publications, reports and seminars raise promote the exchange of valuable practical experience
amongst all actors working in the field, as well as raise awareness of the Commission’s joint
involvement and commitment. Therefore, different studies, assessments, Seminars & Publications
related to the project cycle management & achievements will be conducted and results
disseminated to the wider public.
2.3. EXPECTED OUTCOME/ IMPACT OF THE PROJECT ON TARGET GROUPS
2.3.1. Concert result of the Project
The Project’s expected concert results may be divided in four categories:
1) Impact on direct target HHs,

2) Impact on the wider community,
3) Impact at institutional level and
4) Impact of lessons learnt during project implementation. These will be disseminated
through publications, seminars etc to interested parties.
Over the course of the Project, expected results will be rigorously verified using the process and
output monitoring& evaluation exercises for which this M&E Framework is designed as a working
guideline. Brief presentation on the expected concrete results under each categories indicated
above is presented here below.
i) Project Impact on HHs:
At HH level the Project hopes to reinvigorate HH production and asset holding through the
provision of agricultural inputs, trainings on how to maximize their potential and the direct
injection of cash income through Safety Net.
The expected result is a moderate diversification in the ways HH are able to gain their livelihoods
and a strong regeneration of HHs' agricultural potential. In turn, it is expected that this
reinforcement of HH livelihood will have a positive effect on HH FS making it more stable,
sustainable and less vulnerable to shock.
ii) Project Impact at Community Level:
It is expected that the Project will also benefit the livelihoods of the wider community. The Safety
net activities will improve access to market and basic social services, whilst the capacity building
activities will help develop the human resources of the community and increase is cache of
knowledge.
The capacity building activities planned at institutional level, especially those in disaster
preparedness and management will also indirectly benefit the community by making government
line departments more responsive to their needs.
Specifically the Project expects to provide the community with:
 Improved maternal and child health services.

 Better access to education for girls as well as for their brothers.
 Rehabilitation of the natural economic base on which the community depends.
 Improved quality and coverage of government services.
 Timely and effective disaster management response from government and other
external bodies during crisis situation.
 Enhanced level of participation and empowerment in local development endeavor, etc
iii) Project Impact at Institutional Level
The capacity building at government institution level is expected to improve their material,
logistical and technical competencies. In turn, this should enable them to better support the
communities under their jurisdiction. The Project expects to boost institutional efficiency in terms
of cost effectiveness, coverage and quality.
iv) Publications and other outputs
The Project proposes to carry out one comprehensive HH economy survey of the target PAs. This
will improve our understanding of the HH economy, which governs woreda livelihoods and the
coping mechanisms employed during times of stress. This in turn, will enable CISP to better
measure the impact of the Project in real terms, as well as provide a valuable tool for planning
future interventions. The findings of this study, with analysis and recommendations will be
presented in publication form and circulated to all interested parties
Additional published material will be impact assessments and material aimed at promoting
visibility of the Project and its donors. These are expected to incorporate the achievements,
challenges, and lessons learnt over the course of implementation.
These assessment and reports will raise public awareness of the current situation in the target
woreda, as well as of the situation in the E/.Hararghe Zone as a whole. They also aim at informing
the public and other external bodies about CISP and the EC’s joint involvement and commitment
to securing livelihoods and improving FS.
2.3.2. MULTIPLIER EFFECTS
The Project design complements the objectives outlined in the National Sustainable Development
and Poverty Reduction Program and Food Security Strategy of the government of Ethiopia. It also
integrates the recommendations set out by the EC in its country technical paper. In this technical
paper, the Commission clearly reiterates its commitment to complement the government’s actions
in the area of poverty reduction and FS through indirect funding of NGOs in the area of FS.
In CISP’s experience the existing strong partnership, along with the skills and technical knowledge
transferred over the course of participative PCM, contributes greatly to the successful achievement
of project goals and sustainability. CISP hopes the success of this model will be taken up and come
to be proposed as a viable alternative to traditional PCM.
Of particular relevance to the above, is the project's commitment to promote the creation of viable,
recognized grassroots-level organizations. To this end CISP proposes to assist the development
and consolidation of the three relatively new CBOs present in the woredas.
Fedis CBOs are only some months old and currently are able to undertake only a limited mandate.
The Project hopes to build their capacities not only through trainings and active participation in
project implementation, but also through participative knowledge sharing between Fedis and its
older, more experienced, sister- CBO in Goro Gutu.
The TOT and those trainings related to DP&M are so designed to ensure that the knowledge
gained through these may be effectively transferred and is of relevance to other PAs in the target
woredas.
It is expected that the outcome of studies, assessments and surveys will be of value to interested
parties, broadening their understanding of the situation and helping them to better plan their own
surveys, assessments and interventions and replicate relevant lessons in areas of participatory
project cycle management approach.
It is hoped that the Project’s positive achievements will vindicate its design and promote it as a
viable model for future rural development initiatives, whether by CISP or other actors in the field.
2.3.3. LONG TERM IMPACT
The Project is designed so as to ensure maximum sustainability beyond the implementation

period. Hence the strong emphasis placed on: trainings, at both institutional and community
levels; the provision of physical inputs to improve the capacity of woreda line department offices;
the support and development of CBOs; the improvement of the surrounding environment to make
it more amenable to rain-fed agriculture and enable better access to markets/social services etc
and, particularly, the Project’s commitment to strengthen the relationship between government
departments and the grassroots. (For long-term impact anticipated by the project please see the
presentation made here under.)
i) The Financial Aspect
CISP believes it imperative that the economic and social activities proposed by the Project be
sustainable beyond the implementation period. To this end it proposes to strengthen both the
material and human resources of the institutional departments and communities who will be in
charge of supporting these activities once the Project ends.
At HH level, the Project seeks to regenerate HH agriculture by providing inputs to replace assets
depleted over the course of the end of the project period. It is expected that once target HHs are
provided with the necessary inputs; basic skills training with which to maximize the benefit from
the project support; along with better access to local markets, the economic return on their outputs
will be significant enough to stabilize their livelihoods and generate a small surplus, thus making
the intervention self-sustaining.
The surplus will significantly diminish HH vulnerability to external shocks, making them more
resilient and less dependent on external assistance.
ii) At Institutional Level
The government institutions required for the future management of the Project are already
available. Therefore during its implementation the Project will concentrate on fostering a sense of
Project ownership. It will also focus on building the institutions’ logistics and human resources
capacity, in a bid to improve quality and coverage of services.
Note that besides the direct capacity project support anticipated by the project to project partner
offices, at the end of the Project all physical inputs i.e. materials, equipment, vehicles and
motorbikes, etc will be handed over to the government institutions concerned.
The project also emphasizes the need to create a strong sense of ownership among the beneficiary
communities. It will do this through their full involvement at every stage of the PCM and through
their active contribution in the realization of many of the activities.
CISP is also committed to supporting the development of CBOs and other community
organizations, such as agricultural cooperatives. Training will be provided to capitalize on
communities’ valuable human resources. In line with this, in order to ensure maximum
sustainability, CISP will focus on strengthening the relationship between government institutions
and their rural communities through shared participation PCM.
iii) Policy level
The political situation in the country assumed to remains reasonably stable. Current government
policies, such as the agriculture-led industrial development policy, capacity building strategy,
decentralization policy and the poverty reduction and food security programs, reflect the
Ethiopian government’s commitment to rural development. This attitude creates a cooperative
environment, which greatly assists the development work of NGOs.
The main expected impact of the current Project at Policy Level is the value of the lessons we will
draw from its implementation, as well as the results of the surveys, assessments and studies to be
carried out. This information will disseminate to public in large and expected to serve as one input
among others to the future attempts in design and revision of national and regional level
strategies. In this way, NGO FS programs expected to provide the government with a valuable
cache of experience and information.
2.4. BENEFICIARIES AND PARTNERSHIP ANALYSIS
2.4.1. Beneficiaries Analysis
The selected woredas are the most vulnerable and disaster prone woredas where the majority of
the population are poor. Rural households suffering from poverty are those who are resource poor.
Typically, these households lack access to key productive resources including land, oxen and other
agricultural inputs. Women & female– headed households constitute the majority of this category.
As the participatory wealth ranking exercise conducted at the community level reveals, these
households are categorized as very poor. Besides this, these sections of the society together with
children, elders, disabled community members are the most vulnerable for natural as well as man
made calamities mainly due to lack of access they have to economic/ productive assets and merely
for their socio-economic status in the society.
The Project targets are those HH most vulnerable to food insecurity. These are the HHs least able
to sustain even mild economic, climactic or demographic shocks as indicated above. The project
proposes to regenerate the productivity of these target HHs' by injecting much-needed agricultural
inputs as well as supplying direct cash income, through safety net initiatives.
The integrated natures of the designed interventions is expected to address the multi faceted need
of the target group namely: improve agricultural productivity, enhanced asset holding, and HH
income. The actual target groups are planned to be poor households to be selected through a
participatory approach from these section of the society at the early stage of the project.
The activities planned under safety net are designed to benefit both target HHs, as well as the
entire communities in the intervention peasant associations directly or indirectly through better
access to market and basic social services, as well as maximize the potential of their natural
resources.
To complement this CISP proposes to strengthen the PA’s human resources through a series of
training workshops designed to improve the sustainability of the project and productivity of the
community.
In line with this, CISP seeks to reinforce the relationship between the PA’s and relevant
government line departments and woreda coordination offices through an element of direct
capacity building designed to strengthen the ability of these department to predict, analyze and
mitigate the effects of crises and disasters effectively.
Other project components targeted to institutional capacity building will greatly contribute to the
technical, logistics and human resources capacity building of the line departments and hence,
enabling them to take over and efficiently manage the project outputs upon the phasing out of the
project.
The capacity building activities incorporated in this project are mainly targeted to government line
departments and from this enhanced capacity the over all community in the project woredas are
expected to benefit in the long-run from improved service delivery both in terms of quality and
volume by these organizations.
The successful implementation of the project is expected to directly benefit a total of 7,328 farming
House holds, whilst about 50, 240 community members living in the target PAs of Fedis and Goro
Gutu woredas are expected to benefit indirectly.
2.4.2 Partnership Analysis
As experience thought us, a project is not a one-man activity. Rather, any social and economic
project let it be a big one or a smeller one in terms of its capital, manpower, logistic, and time
requirement indispensably required the active and well organized involvement of all interest
groups. In other words, for effective and timely execution of a project those who are concerned and
those who are going to be affected either positively or negatively shall work with true sense of
partnership.
Therefore, CISP has tried to clearly identify the potential partners, which are expected to have a
direct and indirect interest with the project under concern and specify their role and implication in
the project implementation and out come.
In this effort CISP has tried to identify a number of stakeholders and make a partnership analysis
in order to forecast the stakeholders reaction, expectation, and the implication of their involvement
in the project cycle management.
In line with this, different relevant/ pertinent sectoral departments and offices both at zonal and
woreda level, service giving institutions, community sections/ groups are presented with their
common characteristics. In the annex participation analysis which presents information about:
 Structure/ Status/ Characteristics,

 Problems and constraints attached to the interest groups and institutions,
 Potentials they have,
 Needs and expectations of the stakeholders, and
 The envisaged project reactions are presented for each interest group and institutions of
each interest group.
Underlining the importance of the knowledge, attitude, and action of the different categories of the
project partners, CISP committed itself to work closely with all project stakeholders at all levels in
the entire course of the project cycle management.
For detail information and clear understanding of the anticipated partnership with different
stakeholders, please see the partnership analysis tables attached as annex for this M&E
Framework.
2.5. BUDGET FOR THE ACTION
Percentage
Amount EUR
of total %
CISP International 76,538.76 10%
European Commission contribution approved

688,848.83 90%
Contribution(s) from other European Institutions or EU member states NONE
Contributions from other organizations
Name Conditions NONE
TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS NONE
Direct revenue from the Action NONE
OVERALL TOTAL 765,387.59 100%
PART TWO
MONITORING AND EVALUATION PRAMEWORK

OF
THE PROJECT "RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES
THROUGH AN INTEGRATED FOOD SECURITY APPROACH (RLIFSA)"
* Perceptions of people affected by the work are often more useful than a large
amount of quantities data...
Rationale
A systematic monitoring and evaluation mechanism is a necessary prerequisite to give program

planning and design a direction and to maintain the course of proper implementation of any
development initiative.
In addition to this, monitoring, review and evaluation activities are reliable means by which to
relate project activities to the principles, values, and mission statement of the agencies involved
and to evaluate activity performances visa vise to the local and national development plan and
strategies.
Besides this, the need to know how effective the development activities under progress are and the
economic rational to use the worldwide scarce development resource in efficient manner
necessitate the exercise of systematic M&E procedures badly.
Monitoring is an internal and continuous process of data/ information collection, analysis, and
presentation, which designed to provide constant feedback on the project, problems faced, and the
level of performance with which the program is being implemented.
This continues exercise of monitoring usually shall focus on three broad aspects of the program
under concern. Namely: Management& administration, Finance & Logistics, and program aspects.
In the other hand, Evaluation is a periodic exercise mainly interested on the assessment of the
relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and impact of the interventions in the context of the stated
objectives of the project under concern.
Here, effort shall be done to investigate:
 Whether the initial objectives of the project are still valid or not,
 Whether the project initiatives are still relevant to meet the anticipated objectives
effectively and efficiently in economic terms,
 Are different integrated actions involved in the project result the expected long term
positive impacts on the socio-economic, technological, environmental, cultural,
attitudinal, etc set up of target communities or not, if yes to what extent,
 Are achievements obtained from all the project efforts are sustainable or not, How,
Why? etc
In order to reasonable assess the enquiries indicated above and so many others different types of
evaluation exercises, which are differentiated by timing i.e. ongoing/ mid term/terminal/ ex-post
evaluations and by involvement of different interest groups i.e. internal and external evaluations
shall be conducted on periodic basis and/or as required.
However, what so ever the case every evaluation exercise shall meet the under listed criteria
satisfactory so that to maintain the relevance & effectiveness of the exercise and ensure reliability
of the final out to be resulted.
Among others, the following well accepted criteria for effective evaluation exercise shall maintain.
Namely:
 Participatory nature of the exercise

 Its continues nature
 Focus both on final achievements, failures and the processes how project activities
are managed?
 Incorporate comprehensive quantitative and qualitative data/ information
 Systematic nature of the exercise in its design i.e. free of biasness and use of
effective tools of data/ information collection techniques
 Practical in terms of financial, skill and time requirement, and
 Decision oriented
Here, it is needless to indicate the indispensable need for objectively verifiable indicators for all the
project outcomes for the design of an effective and reliable M&E system and for its meaningful
exercises.
Therefore, underlining all what is stated above and based on the last ten years experience in the
area of rural development operations in East Hararghe, CISP took the initiative to install a
systematic, manageable, effective, and participatory M&E system through drafting of this M&E
Framework.
Through the envisaged M&E system of CISP efforts will be made: -
 To undertake systematic and continuous data collection and analysis about the progress of
specific activities overtime and check whether or not the activities stayed in the anticipated
course,
 To identify strength and weakness encountered in the course of the project implementation,
 To assess, analyzed, and summarized the situation both endogenous and exogenous to the
project environment and predict their potential influences on the project beforehand and
communicate to concerned bodies,
 To undertake periodic review on the progress of the project activities in detail with all the
stakeholders at zone, woreda, and community level,
 To conduct periodic evaluation jointly with the project partners to check whether the
objectives of the project activities have been achieved or not and what immediate impacts
are realized,
 To extract lessons from the practical experience needed to improve the course of the project
implementation and those will be helpful for future project planning,
 To summaries, analyze and compile the information and findings obtained into a
monitoring and evaluation report and communicate the results to concerned bodies i.e. the
project management, zone and woreda partners, the country office and the donor on
periodic basis.
These practices will be expected to facilitate the flow of information among the project
stakeholders trough a continuous feedback arrangement and to obtained a right decision at a right
time for problems to be encountered in the project cycle management.
In addition, the information to be collected about the project and its environment and the views
and attitudes of stakeholders learnt from the process will be used for future project planning,
strategy design, and policy formulation by the NGO, the donor and the government partners.
As tried to indicate above, the M&E exercise with respect to the project "RLIFSA" in Fedis and
Gorogutu will be a participatory action and will involve all the stakeholders at different levels.
Particularly, CISP-project staffs and management, partners at woreda and zone levels and the
target communities are the major elements in this process.
The participation of the later will be both directly as key informants, focus groups, and individuals
and indirectly through representation. Communities might be represented by local government
structures, village level development committees, community representatives, and project
management committees at site level.
The results of the M&E and review exercises will be communicated to interest parties like program
management, project staffs, country office, the donor and the stakeholders at woreda, zone and
regional levels on periodic basis.
In line with this, CISP will submit periodical financial and technical progress reports to the donor
using the required format during implementation period, and terminal implementation report at
the closure of the project. Similarly, in accordance with government requirements, CISP will also
produce quarterly progress report and submit its report to woreda/ Zone FS& DPPD and DPPCs
and the regional FS & DPP Commission.
Monitoring information will be collected on regular basis by CISP woreda coordinators and the
implementing agencies as a continuous process using uniform M&E formats, which are attached as
annexes for this framework and submitted to CISP Harar branch on monthly basis.
The information submitted by these bodies and directly obtained by the M&E officer through field
assessment will be verified, analyzed, and compiled into a monthly monitoring report. The final
outcome of the M&E exercise will be officially communicate to all those concerned at community,
woreda, zone, and regional level through appropriate feed back mechanisms.
Besides, the M&E officer at CISP-Harar branch will keep all the M&E information obtained from
community level, woreda structures and directly from his M&E field activities in organized
manner and present them whenever necessary. This is mainly to use this information as inputs
during periodic internal as well as external evaluation exercises.
The M&E information that will be collected through the above mechanisms will be checked with
the project objectively verifiable indicators presented in the LFW (Logical Frame Work) of the
project, which is attached as annex in this M&E Framework.
This is mainly to judge whether the project implementation process is in line with the anticipated
course or not and to enable the project management bodies to take appropriate measures to
maintain this course on time.
In addition to the internal M&E activities, zone and woreda DPPCs usually conduct periodic
monitoring, review and evaluation missions to NGOs activities underway in east Hararghe zone.
The donor agency i.e. the European Commission is also expected to initiate and undertake its own
monitoring and evaluation exercises on the project under concern through its Ethiopia Delegation
Office.
Usually the co-signatories at regional levels are also undertaking mid-term external evaluation at
the beginning of the second half of the project life and terminal evaluation and impact study at the
end of the implementation. This process will be expected to continue as previous.
With regards to the M&E mechanism to be employed by the project office, different approaches
conventionally accepted for NGO projects will be put in use. These include PRA/ RRA techniques,
Logical Framework Analysis, SWOC (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, and Constraint) analysis,
etc. Particularly, a terminal evaluation missions is also expected to be conducted by using external
consultant based on the interest of the funding agency.
However, despite the different techniques to be employed different quantitative and qualitative
information to be obtained from primary and secondary sources to be collected using the formats
attached with the M&E Framework will be used as input. These information will be collected
through a combined means of data collection techniques like: surveys, assessments, record-
keeping, supervision, case studies, focus group discussions, etc.
Here it is worth mentioning that what aspects of the project are going to be monitor through the
systematic M&E process to be employed. The M&E system will focus to assess, review, and
evaluate mainly the two important aspects of the project. These are the progress/ process of the
project and its impact. In this effort, different aspects of the program namely, the management and
administration aspect, the financial aspect, and the progress of the overall program will be taken
into consideration.
As indicated somewhere above, the monitoring and evaluation system of CISP’s shall be
participatory by its nature. Therefore, in order to insure the participatory nature of the system and
meet all what stated above there will be a joint M&E system development exercise based on this
draft M&E Framework developed by CISP at the project level prior to the commencement of the
project activities.
Here, it is worth mentioning the fact that this draft M&E Framework document is prepared mainly
to facilitate the timely and successful design of the M&E System, which is expected to govern the
joint action of CISP and all its institutional and community level stakeholders in the course of the
monitoring and evaluation exercises through out the life span of the project.
All the necessary materials deemed necessary for the comprehensiveness of this framework like
Project Logical Frame Work, Summary of the Draft Monitoring & Evaluation Framework, Project
Action Plan, Beneficiary and Stakeholders Partnership Analysis Table, and Questioners prepared
for Primary and Secondary Information Collection are prepared and attached with this document.
All these materials are incorporated here with the understanding of the need for a comprehensive
and well-defined working tools for smooth and effective undertaking of the M&E exercises
envisaged. Here it worth mentioning the importance of using the verifiable indicators presented in
the Logical Frame Work attached, in order to able to measure the progress/ changes toward/
against the stated objectives of the project in reliable manner.
The indicators at activity level shall be used to measure the progress of specific activities at one
point in time in the course of the project implementation and those at purpose level are to evaluate
whether the project has achieved its purpose i.e. overall objective or not.
Here it has a paramount importance to indicate that a monitoring and evaluation effort without
reliable and verifiable indicators is a futile exercise and simply total loss of resource. Therefore, in
order to ensure the effectiveness and the reliable nature of the M&E system to be installed, a joint
efforts shall be made to review the set of objectively verifiable process and impact indicators
presented in the LFW.
The indicators presented for different hierarchies of the project objectives as well as input and
output indicators are designed in such a way to meet conventionally accepted indicators criteria.
These are validity, reliability, relevance, sensitivity, specific, cost effective, and timeliness. Besides
this, their presentation in the LFW follows/ satisfies the commonly known indicators presentation
i.e. QQTL (quantity, quality, time, and location) approach.
However, effort shall be made in the process of completing the M&E guideline so that to take a
consideration on the time elapsed between the design of the project and the present and judge
whether the objectively verifiable indicators presented in the LFW are still valid or not. If not, they
shall be revised as per the existing situation in the ground so that to let them serve their purpose
meaningfully.
Hopefully, with the participatory approach to be followed that involve all the project partners
actively, this draft M&E Frame work will further developed by the priceless experience of field
experts from line departments and get its final version for use so that to meet the above stated
purposes of M&E process.
If all the expectations in the development of the working M&E Guideline are meet successfully, the
proposed participatory M&E effort, besides its contribution to strengthen the commitment,
partnership and accountability of all the stakeholders, is expected to contribute to ensure/
maintain the right track in the course of the project cycle management and hence success of the
project in meeting its objective efficiently.
Annex I
M&E Framework
For
"RLIFSA"
Annex M&E 1.3: - A Monitoring and Evaluation Framework Focused on indicators for
"RLIFSA"

Categories of What to Monitor What to records to Who collects the Who uses the How to use the What decisions can
information keep information information information be made
1. Work plan  Timing of  Monthly/quarter  Project  Project manger Ensure staff and other  Reschedule
Activities activities ly work plans manger  Donor agency resources are available activities and
 Availability of  Work schedules  Supervisors  Supervising deployment of
personnel, government resources as
resources authorities. needed
2. Cost and  Budgeted  Ledger of  Financial  Project manger  Ensure funds are Placement Training
Expenditures amounts, funds on expenditures by officer/accou  Auditor available to execute needs promotions
hand and budget category ntant  Donor agency activities disciplinary action
expenditures,  Receipts  Ensure compliance
 Balance in budget  Bank transactions with funding
by approved cost  Reports of donor regulations
categories  If fee for service,
determine fee structure
3. Staff and  KAP of staff Performance reviews Supervisors Supervisors project Motivate staff and resolve  Quantity to order
supervision  Educational level job descriptions personnel manger personnel employment problems  When to order
of staff resumes of staff director trainers director advise staff on career  Amount to keep
 Salaries and feedback from in reserve for
benefits training attended emergency
 Job performance
4.  Stock registers  Stock registers  Logistics  Project manger  Ensuring availability of  Revise objectives
Commodities  Invoices  Invoices manager Donor agency commodities in stock  Retrain staff
 Field worker  Field worker and distribution to field  Revise LEC
reports reports  Ensure good condition strategy
of commodities  Revise project
strategy & App
5. Results  No. and type of  Client  CBD workers  Field supervisor  Ensure objectives are
services cards/forms  Clinic nurse  Project manger realistic
provided/commo  Clinic registers  Field  Donor agency  Assess quality of
d ities dispensed  Field worker supervisors services provided
 Characteristics of reports  Assess appropriateness
persons of services
served/educated
M&E FRAMEWORK OF CISP FOR "RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES THROUGH AN IFS APPROACH (RLIFSA") IN SELECTED DROUGHT-PRONE PAs OF 28
FEDIS & GOROGUTU WOREDAS, E/ HARARGHE: OROMIA
Baseline Monitoring Mid-Term Final/ Terminal Post project

activity evaluation evaluation (impact)
When? (Schedule)
Why? (Purpose)
To whom? (Reporting)
Indicators? (to be measured)
Who will collect
information?
Who will analyze?
Communication (Feed back
mechanism)
Annex M&E 1.3: - A Monitoring and Evaluation Framework Focused on indicators for "RLIFSA"
Level Indicators Information Information Timing Persons

source collector (Schedule) responsible
Inputs
Process
Out pus
Effects
Impact
Component Activity Indicators Data Methodology/ Person(s) Time Remark

Source Tools responsible frame
M&E FRAMEWORK OF CISP FOR "RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES THROUGH AN IFS APPROACH 29
(RLIFSA") IN SELECTED DROUGHT-PRONE PAs OF FEDIS & GOROGUTU WOREDAS, E/ HARARGHE: OROMIA
Information to be Source of information Use of information

collected on from why for?
Staff/personnel  Performance  Staff/team meetings  Give staff support
issues  Achievement  Staff reviews and feedback
 Absenteeism  Supervisions  Training and staff
 Problems  Informal meetings development
 Expectations  Observation  Improve
 How staff work as management
team practices
 Whether staffing  Modify/clarify job
structures work descriptions
Vehicles  Fuel consumption  Log book of fuel and  Decisions about
 Mileage mileage replacing old
 Repairs  Record sheets of vehicles when they
 New parts repaires and spare become
 Capital and running parts fitted uneconomical to
costs  Records of money run
 Performance spent on each  Compare different
vehicle makes of vehicle
 Meetings with  Check mechanic’s
driver performance re:
 Observation parts fitted,
frequency of
repairs, etc.
 Identify problems,
eg. Excessive fuel
consumption
Supplies  Where to obtain  Suppliers,  Obtain best value
supplies catalogues inventory supplies
 Cost from different of stocks  Obtain supplies on
suppliers  Stock-keeping time
 Stock levels record system  Maintain adequate
 Re-order levels stock levels.
 Items about to run
out
 Time needed to
supply
Information to collected Source of information Use of information

on from why for?
Project budget and Expenditure by project Invoices and vouchers  Predict
expenditure  Expenditure by Budget breakdown expenditure for
budgets head analysis of budget and budgeting
 Balance of budget expenditure, eg using  Compare costs of
remaining this year computer different projects
 Regularly recurring spreadsheets  Identify areas of
items of expenditure, newspapers, banks excessive
et, rent expenditure
 Previous year’s budget  Identify and
and expenditure savings
 Rates of inflation  Compare cost with
 Exchange rates project
achievements to
assess cost-
effectiveness
Staff salaries  Salaries  Staff records  Ensure staff are
 Tax, insurance, etc  Pay slips paid according to
 Annual increments  Salary record pay scale reflecting
 Final pay other nature of job and
payments: eg. Health length of service
allowance, staff loans  Ensure other
payments are
made according to
correct procedures
 Ensure all staff
know what
benefits they are
entitled to
Cash flow analysis  When is cash needed  Cash record  To ensure
for project? system sufficient but not
 Where will cash come excessive cash is
from? (might include available
loan repayments,
community
contributions, etc.)
 What and when are
cash outgoing?
(regular and irregular
Information to be collected on Source of information Use of information why for?
from
Results of  What has been done  Regular records of  Plan future work
activities/  What has not been done but activities  Identify project
project outputs was planned  Supervision reports successes
 What problems have been  Periodic reports  Identify opportunities to
encountered  Meetings, workshops build on strengths
 How the problems have been with staff project  Identify problems and
addressed partners, and people weaknesses, plan
 How the external situation affected by the work strategy
has changed  Staff reviews  Review priorities
 Any other information  Newspapers, radio  Identify training needs
relevant work of project  Informal discussion  Identify need for future
 Observation information or research,
 Surveys review or evaluation
Project inputs  What is needed and where it  From suppliers, other  Plan and schedule
can be found organizations, activities
 When it is needed and when government, etc.  Monitor costs and
it will be available budget accordingly
 Cost
Progress of  Progress to wards achieving  Information about  Modify strategy and /or
program objectives key indicators objectives if necessary
according to  Are objectives still relevant?  Observation  Feedback
objectives  Identify need for review
or evaluation
 Identify need for further
information or
improvements in
monitoring systems
They way the  How are decisions made?  Indicators which  Show need to change
program is  Are the people who are show degree of management style
managed, style supposed to be involved participation  Identify need to change
of work really involved?  Meetings, discussions methods to encourage
 Observation more participation
 Do the partners/people  Identify problems in
affected by the relation ship between
work/program staff feel a partners/people affected
sense of ownership of the by the work/staff, and
program? address them
Background  Have there been any  Surveys  On-going collecting of
information on significant political,  Sources of baseline data which can
target economic, or environmental information about be used to evaluate
population and developments affecting target politics economics progress
context population?  Meetings with other  Response to changing
 Have there been any agencies, government situation, rapid response
developments affecting the officials to emergencies
program?  Observation  Keep in touch with
 How is the population relevant work by other
changing in terms of the agencies, government
characteristics the program is
hoping to influence?
ANNEX II
Organization of the M&E Exercises

For
"RLIFSA" in Fedis & Gorogutu woredas

Eastern Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region
Prerequisites for Effective Monitoring and reporting of the RLIFSA using this M&E framework:
 It is recommended that Regular Monthly meetings are held by the Brach office in Harar to present
and discuss activity progress report, constraints, logistics & financial aspects of the project visa
vise to the objectives and planned activity & out put.
 These should happen on a fixed day every month and be considered as an important work
commitment. Both branch and filed staff should attend. Form the Branch: All Technical Staff &
Accountant. From the field: All woreda Coordinators from the project Area.
 Formal progress reports, using the format provided by the Federal DPPC should be compiled in
time and sent to CISP Addis promptly every three months.
 It is estimated that will take around a week to elaborate the Progress Reports to be prepared using
the DPPC format and around 3 weeks to elaborate the Qualitative Reports to be submitted to the
Donor. However, this last is done only twice X year - i.e. every other quarter.
 Given that Woreda Coordinators now have access to a computer, every information from primary
and secondary sources compiled and analyzed in systematic manner so that to establish a reliable
data base for the project and it is recommended that the monthly FS Report be submitted in soft
copy to CISP-Harar and head office in time.
Progress Monitoring:
This is the monitoring of activity implementation and shall be done on monthly basis at the
meetings and formalized quarterly (every three months) in the formats provided for this purpose.
The quarterly update shall be sent to CISP Addis. It is advisable to use the quarterly format
attached with this document to check the status of activates at the monthly meetings as well.
Impact & qualitative Monitoring:
This mainly concerned with the monitoring of the immediate impact of the intervention made
upon the reporting period and shall assess the quality of the activities in relation to the project's
stated objectives, and most importantly - to the perception of the beneficiary community on them.
This qualitative Monitoring shall be done regularly on a bi-annual basis, unless there is reason for
concern, in which case it might bee useful to carry it out at other times as a spot check
mechanism.
The finding of these exercises shall also compiled into a formal report and sent to CISP Addis,
following the scheme provided, every second quarter. Therefore, this element of the project
monitoring exercise shall be borne in mind and discussed at the monthly meeting as well.
The Qualitative Report summarized in the formats provided shall be accompanied by a detailed
analysis of the immediate impact of the project based on the beneficiaries perception by assessing
the implication of the interventions on individual target HHs and communities. The exercise shall
focus to investigate the immediate benefits target groups enjoyed and the implications of the
program in the medium and long-term livelihood situation of them.
Here it is worth to underline the fact that every monitoring & impact assessment effort shall has
investigate different aspects of the project initiatives, particularly, expected, unexpected, positive
and negative out comes of each actions of the project on the livelihood of target communities.
Major issues/ questions to be assessed on the progress and output monitoring are the following among
others: -
 Are activities physically being implemented as planned i.e. with the time period anticipated and
with the resource allocated for the purpose?
 Are the objectives being reached or is the whole project cycle on its right track?
 Are the objectives still relevant?
 Are we in line with the financial pan-if not do we need to modify/ amend it?
 Is there a way we can be more efficient in the implementation of activities and in terms of cost
effectiveness?
 What are the problems recorded over the last month & how are we dealing with them?
 What are possible problems challenges to be faced in the near future, how much it will affect the
progress of our project and what shall be done?
 It is recommended that field staff maintain a field diary to record observations (quantitative &
qualitative), which can be brought to the monthly meetings and included in the discussion. This
does not need to be formal and should be based on own observation and perception not quantitative
data gathered from secondary sources.
 However, all data obtained by the Branch directly and from woreda coordinators shall be field with
the formats incorporated with this M&E Framework so that to be easily crosschecked with
information obtained from woreda partners and woreda coordinators field diaries. In this course
effort shall be done to check inconsistencies and reconcile the situation through in-depth technical
analysis.
 The monthly FS Report & its implications on future prospect shall be included in the discussion and
if there is any expectation for significance deteriorated on the livelihood situation of the community
in the forthcoming near future. What action can be made from the project or CISP side to reduce the
adverse consequence of the situation both on the life of target groups and the progress of the
project?
Proposed Organization framework for Monitoring reporting:
Report Frequency Purpose Content Responsibility

Management Monthly *Support day to day - Check Input as X plan
Records (Internal) management -Check physical progress of
*Keep track of activities Activates
Quarterly Quarterly- * Assess progress tads - Check progress of Activities - Branch Coordinator
Monitoring every 3 project objectives & as X plan (to coordinate,
months Activities objective - Check & verify quality of direct, collate &
* Analyze devotions 7 expected outputs & results present info in
(To be sent review work plan. against the quantitative data finalized form to
to Addis in * MK periodic qualitative collected. Addis)
Formats analysis of project impact - Check working towards
Provided) based on quantities data stated objectives To be supported by:
Are initial objectives still Branch technical
valid> staff, woreda
-Review financial status and coordinators & Local
check that it meets partners
requirement adjust as
necessary.
(Continued)
Report Frequency Purpose Content Responsibility
Biannual 2X year * Assess the perception of -Check & verify quality of (Same as Above)
Qualitative (to be sent beneficiaries expected out pouts in
Reports to Addis * Assess QUALITY of the comparison to the Beneficiates
following work binge carried out & perception to the Beneficiaries
the scheme Beneficiary satisfaction perception of them.
provided) with it - Check working towards
*Allow Beneficiaries a say stated objectives
in the project Are initial objectives still valid?
Implementation & increase - Do they continue to respond
a sense of involvement & to real needs & concerns as
ownership. expressed by the Beneficiaries -
* Assess progress towards if not, modify accordingly
project & Activities - What at the problems being
objectives encountered and how are they
*Analyze deviations & being dealt with
review work plan
ANNEX III
Verifiable Indicators By Component

To Be Used
For
The M&E Exercise
Of
"RLIFSA" in Fedis & Gorogutu woredas
Eastern Hararghe Zone, Oromia Region
Verifiable Indicators to be used as basis of M&E for CISP "RLIFSA" in Fedis & Gorogutu Woredas by
Component adopted from the Logical Framework of the Project
Program Activities by Component Indicators Sources of Information

I Safety Not/ employment Generation
 Supervision reports
 Progress reports
 Review
meetings/workshops
with
stakeholders/staffs
 Physical observation
 Discussion with
beneficiaries
 Financial/Activity
Document review
 Household socio-
economic survey
reports.
 Crop Ass. Reports
 KAP Study Reports
 Store transaction
records
 Mid-term evolution
reports
 Case study reports
II Promotion of Agricultural production &

Income
Verifiable Indicators to be used as basis of M&E for CISP "RLIFSA" in Fedis & Gorogutu Woredas
(Continued)

III Household Asset Building
IV Community Training & Awareness
Creation
V Disaster prevention & Mgt Support
Verifiable Indicators to be used as basis of M&E for CISP "RLIFSA" in Fedis & Gorogutu Woredas
(Continued)

VI Capacity building
VII Support for partners associations
Annex IV
Primary Information Collection Formats
For
M&E Exercise
Of
"RLIFSA"
In
Fedis & Gorogutu Woredas
To be used for information collection for Biannual M&E Reporting
TEAM: Facilitator ___________________ Recorder __________________

LOCATION: (Peasant Association and Woreda names) _________________
DATE: _________________
RESPONDNTS: (Name /title or group description) ____________________
Process:
1. Introduction: Introduction the team and present the objectives of the M&E exercise describe
the specific objectives process and time limits for the current session.
2. Lead a discussion based on the thermos below. Don not use the outline as a questionnaire but
rather as a guide. Encourage broad participation and allow the discussion to follow areas of interest
other than those listed. Take thorough notes: include quotes.
3. Make use of participatory tools as much as possible. For instance, a seasonal calendar is useful in
stimulating conversation about work schedules/ Constraints, months of food gap. Resource mapping
can help during discussion of access and environmental issues.
4. Conclusion: Repeat again the general objectives of the study and the session. Make appropriate
commitments (for instance to return copies of visual products to the community). thank everyone
for their participation and invite them to future sessions as appropriate.
Topical Outline:
Specific project Objectives: (Focus Group = Community & woreda Officials)
(Table to be filled in by the Recorder based on the Information provided during the focus Group
Discussion )
Community perception of Attainment

Specific Objectives
on a Sliding scale 1-10, where 1= None/Worse &
As stated in the Logical framework
10=totally/Best
1 Reduction in the # of people
Needing External Assistance
2 Increase Level of HH Assets
3 Improved Access to Basic Services
4 Increased Enrollment of girls in
primary Education
5 Increased Community participation
6 Improved Capacity of Line
Departments to Deliver Services.
 Begin with general question about the thoughts on the project- what is good /what is bad- what
are the problems, how could they be solved.
 Do they think it will help them need less outside assistance
 What does being part of the project?
 On average, what does their HH earn X month from it?
 How is this income used?
 Do they think they need extra assistance in the next 6 month

 Have they had any extra assistance in the last 6 months?
II: Promotion of Agricultural Production & Income (Focus group = Community Beneficiaries)
(Table to be filled in by the Recorder based on the Information provided during the focus
Discussions)
Aims of Activity As stated in the Community perception of Attainment on a Sliding

Logical framework Scale1-10 Where 1= None /Worse & 10=Totally/Best
1 Diversification of Crop production
practices
2 Diversification of HH Income sauces
3 Increased HH Income
4 Improved Crop production patterns
 Has this been useful to them?
 What have they learned from it?
 What do they think of what they learnt - was it relevant to them/not relevant to them
 Dot they think they will use what they learned - and how?
 If so what?
 Has it made a difference on what they earn X month?
 If so, is it a lot, medium or a little difference?
 If they have extra income what do they normally spend it one?
 Do they think they will need extra assistance in the next 6 Months?
III: HH Asset building (focus Group= Community Beneficiaries)
(Table to be filled in by the recorder based on the Information provided during the focus Group
Discussions)
Aims of Activity As stated in Community perception of Attainment on a Sliding Scale

the Logical framework 1-10, Where 1= None/worse & 10=totally/Best
1 Increase Level of HH Income
2 Diversify HH Food Basket
 What do they think of the programmer
 Have they had any problems - if so, what? And how could it be made better?
 What benefits do they think they have gained from inclusion in the program?
 Has it increased the level of their HH income?
 If so, what do they generally spent the extra income on?
 Is there more variety in their diet not- if so, what?
 Do they think they will need extra assistance in the next 6 months?
 Have they had any extra assistance; last 6 months?
IV: Community Training & Awareness Creation (Focus Group = Community Beneficiaries)
(Table to be filled in by the Recorder based on the Information provided during the Focus
Group Discussions)
Community perception of Attainment

Aims of Activity As stated in the Logical framework on a Sliding Scale 1-10, where 1=
None/worse & 10= Totally/Best
1 Changed Crop production patterns
2 Improved crop protection practices
3 Improved management of livestock
4 Improved veterinary service for target HHs
5 Improved practice of soil & water conservation
6 Improved personal hygiene & Sanitation practice
7 Increased level of girls participation in primary
8 Reduced morbidity & mortality from communicable disease
 What did they think of the training?
 Did they find it useful? if not, why not? How could it have been made more useful?
 Did they find the trainings relevant? If not, why not? How could it have been made more
relevant to them?
 Do they feel they learned from it, if so what?
 Are they going to use it for anything specific in their everyday life, if so, what?
 Do they feel they have better access to vet services?
 Are there any problems using the vet service, if so, what?
 Is there anyway the vet services could be improved?
 Do they feel there has been an increase in girls access to primary education?
 If not, why not?
 What do they think about this? good/bad-why?
 Are there any problems with this? If so what? And how they be solved?
 Do they think they will need extra assistance in the next 6 months?
V: DPPM Support (Focus Group = Beneficiary woreda Officials & Community)
(Table to be filled in by the Recorded based on the Information provided during the Focus Group
Discussions)
Aims of Activity As Stated in the Community perception of Attainment on a Sliding Scale

Logical framework 1-10, where 1= None/worse & 10= Totally/Best
1 Improved Delivery of Line Dept. to
the community
2 Improved timeliness and reliability of
the Early warnings system
3 Improved effectiveness of woreda
level relief operation, beneficiary
registration, screening & targeting,
follow-up monitoring, etc.
To Woreda Officials
 What do they of the trainings - have they been useful/relevant - if so, how?
 If not, why not? How could they have been made useful/relevant?
 Were there any problems? If do, what? And how they be solved/ the trainings made better?
 Have the trainings impacted on their work, if so, how?
To the Community:
 Do they feel that woreda officials are frequent in their PAs?
 Do they believe woreda officials are concerned about their (the community's) concerns?
 Do they feel that woreda officials respond to their needs?
 If not, why not? what could they do to be better?
 Is delivery of services by woreda officials timely?
 If not, is any justification given to them by the woreda?
 If so, What?
VII: Support to partner Organizations - (Focus Group = Community Beneficiaries) Fedis ONLY
(Table to be filled in by the recorder based in the Information provide during the focus Group discussions)
Aims of Activity As Stated in Community perception of Attainment on a Sliding Scale 1-10,

the Logical framework where 1= None/worse & 10= Totally/Best
Improved Quality of Services
1 provided by Line Dept. to
partners
Improved capacity of partners
2
to be Independent.
 Do they feel that woreda officials support their needs?
 If not, Why not? What could they do to be better? '
 Was woreda support timely?
 Do they feel that CISP supported their needs?
 If not, why not? what could they do to be better
 Was CISP support timely
 How do they feel about their CBO?
 Do they feel it was set up correctly/fairly?
 How could it have been done better?
 Do they feel that they are able to manage it on their own?
 If not, why not? And what could be done to help them feel independent?
 Do they feel it will last once CISP are not longer involve?
 If not, why don't? What could be done to help this happen?
 What do they feel the benefits of the CBO are?
 Has it raised the price of their produce at market?
 If so, on average by how much? If not, why do they think it hasn't? Do they it will in the
longer term?
 Has it improved their HH income at all?
 If so, how?
 Generally, what is the extra spent on?
 Do they feel it has let them improve their diet at all?
 If so how?
 Has the extra income allowed them to access other public services at all
schools/Clinics/Water wells/vet clinics etc
 do they think they will need extra assistance in the next 6 months.
Annex V
Physical Activities Progress quarterly
Monitoring Format
Of
"RLIFSA"
In
Fedis and Gorogutu Woredas
Annex V
Fedis Woreda - Physical Activities
Quarterly progress Monitoring Format - Year 1- 2005/2006
Planned Revised Statues of Activities X Quarter

# List of physical Activities Unit
Quantity Quantity 1 2 3 4
I Safety Nets & EGS
# People targeted under SN & EGS People 228
# PDs Obtained PDs 61,113
Volume of Area Rehabilitated Km2
1.1 Soil & Water conservation Activities
Hill side terrace const Km 20
Check Dam const Km 2
Micro Basin const. Unit 50,000
Pond maintenance Unit 3
Seed collection Kg 45
Gully Re-vegetation Hec 15
Nursery Management Unit 1
1.2 Social Infrastructure Development
Road Construction Km 5
Road Maintenance Km 10
School Rehabilitation Unit 4
VIP Construction Unit 4
Roof Catchments const Unit 3
M&E FRAMEWORK OF CISP FOR "RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES THROUGH AN IFS APPROACH (RLIFSA") IN SELECTED DROUGHT- 49
PRONE PAs OF FEDIS & GOROGUTU WOREDAS, E/ HARARGHE: OROMIA
Annex V: Fedis woreda - Physical Activities & Quantitative Indicators Quarterly progress Monitoring format/ Year 1 - 2005/2006
II Promotion of Agricultural Production
Sorghum (Gubiye) Qt 80
No. of HH targeted HH 1,600
Area coverage of these seeds & seedlings Hct 800
Maize (Catomany) Qt 100
Area coverage of these seed & seedlings Hct 400
Maize (Bukri) Qt 35
No. of HH targeted HH 500
Ground Nut Qt 125
Area coverage of these seeds & seedlings Hct 31.25
Haricot Bean Qt 80
Onion seed Qt 250
Area Coverage Hct 31,25
Forage Seed Kg 138.5
No. of HH targeted No. 300
Area Coverage
Promotion Improved storage facilities Stores 5
Establishment of vegetable sellers cooperative Coops 5
III HH Asset Building
Total Not of HHs targeted HH 550
Ox Animal 150
No of HH targeted HH 150
Goat Animal 300
Heifer Animal 100
Poultry No. 900

IV Capacity building
4.1 Human Capacity building
Training no needs Identification & project planning Round 1
No. of Trainees People 12
TOT Trainees Round 1
No of Trainees People 9
Training on project M&E Round 1
4.2 Physical Capacity building
Vehicles, furniture & Equipment
Double Cabin pick Up No 1
Motor bikes " 3
Computers with printer/ UPSs Set 4
Generator No 1
Surveying & Soil analysis Equip. Set 1
Tape Recorders No 5
Amplifiers " 5
Video Camera " 1
Photo Camera " 2
Duplicating Machine " 1
Photo Copy Machine " 1
Training Equ/Overhead projector etc. Set 1
Solar Energy Equipment No 1
School Furniture " 16
Nursery Materials & Equipment Set 1
Nutrition Survey Kit " 5
Sprayer CP 20 No. 10
Bicycles No 10
Equipment for farmer's Training center Sets 5
List of physical Activities Unit
# Quantity Quantity 1 2 3 4
Spare Parts
Motor Bike spare parts Set 3
Vehicle spare parts Set 1
Other Material support
Birth Attendant's Kit Set 25
Nursery Materials Set -
Vet Drugs LS LS
Para Vet Equipment Set 15
V Disaster prevention & Management Support
Support Nutritional surveillance Ass. Round 2
Training on EW Data Collection/ Analysis Round 1
No. of Trainees Trainees
Support pre/post Harvest crop Assement Round 3
Support woreda Relief Operation Years 2
VI Community Training
Awareness creation on Crop production & protection Rounds 4
# Beneficiaries People 4,000
Training on LS Management and Forage Development Rounds 2
# Beneficiaries People 400
Awarness creation on S&W , & environmental Protection Rounds 4
Awareness creation on Hygiene, Sanitation & Envir. Health Round 2
Training of traditional birth attendants round 1
para-vet Training: Rounds 2
Animators Training Rounds 2
Promotion of participation of women in education in yrs 2
Experience sharing visit on S&C Rounds 1

VII Support to partner Organizations
Physical Capacity building
Construction of Office buildings No. 2
CBO Office Furniture Set 2
Provision of construction equipment for partners Set 2
Human Capacity Building
Technical Training Round 1
No. Trainees People 24
Management Training Round 1
No. Trainees People 10
Annex V: Gorogutu woreda Physical Activities Quarterly Progress Monitoring Format - Year 1- 2005/2006

I Safety Nets & EGS
# People Targeted under SN & EGS People 375
# PDs Obtained PDs 73,531
Volume of Area Rehabilitated Km2
1.1 Soil & Water Conservation Activities
Gully Re-vegetation Hct 7
Planting of Bunds km 90
Seedling planting Unit 50,000
Compost Making Pit 120
Soil Bund Km 40
Stone Bund Km 42
Hill Side terrace const Km 30
Bench Terracing Km 10
Check dam const Km 6
Trench Construction No. 5,000
Eye brows construction No. 3,000
Micro basin const. Unit 20,000
Water canal const M3 2,050
Pitting pit 50,000
Pond construction Unit 1
1.2 Social infrastructure development
Road construction Km 4.5
School Rehabilitation Unit 1
VIP construction Unit 1
Spring Development Unit 1
Roof catchments Const. Unit 2
II Promotion of agricultural production
Sorghum (Ali sheko) Qt 10
Area coverage f these seeds & seedlings Hct 100
Maize (Bukri) Qt 6.5
No. of HH targted HH 200
Haricot bean Qt 37.5
No. of HH targted HH 600
Forage seeds Kg 11.5
No. of HH targted No. 25
Area coverage of these seeds & seedlings
Fruit seedlings Unit 50,000
No. of HHs targeted for both HH 25
Area coverage of these seeds & seedlings
Sweet potato Bunches 200
Area Coverage Hct 12,5
Promotion Improved storage Facilities Stores 2
Establishment of vegetable sellers cooperative Coops 2
III HH Asset Building
Total Not of HHs targeted HH 242
Ox Animal 60
Goat Animal 100
Heifer Animal 40
Poultry No. 480
Promotion Bee Keeping Hives 12

IV Building Capacity
4.1 Human capacity Building
Training on Need Identification & project planning Round 1
No of Training People 12
TOT Training Round 1
Training on project M&E round 1
4.2 Physical Capacity Building
Vehicles, Furniture & Equipment
Double cabin pick up No 1
Motor Bikes " 2
Computer with printer /UPSs Set 3
Generator No 1
Surveying & Soil analysis Equip. Set 1
Tape Recorders No 2
Amplifiers " 2
video Camera " 1
Photo camera " 1
Duplicating Machine " 1
Photo copy machine " 1
Training Equ/Overhead projector etc. Set 1
Solar Energy Equipment No 1
School furniture " 6
Nursery Materials & Equipment Set -
Nutrition survey kit " 2
Sprayer CP 20 No. 4
Spare Parts
Motor bike spare parts Set 3
Vehicle spare parts Set 1
Other Material Support
Birth Attendant's kit Set 10
Nursery Materials Set 5
Vet Drugs LS LS
Para Vet Equipment Set 10
V Disaster prevention & Management support
Support Nutritional surveillance Ass. Round 2
Training on EW Data Collection/Analysis Trainees 1
No of Trainees Trainees
Support pre/post Harvest crop Assement Round 3
Support woreda Relief Operation Years 2
VI Community Training
Awareness creation on crop prod.& protection Round 4
Training on LS management and forage Development Rounds 2
Awareness creation on S&W & Envir. Protection Rounds 4
Awareness creation on Hygiene & Sanitat.Envir. Health Rounds 2
Training of traditional birth attendants Rounds 1
Para-vet Training: Rounds 2
Animators Training Rounds 2
Promotion of participation of women in education in yrs 2
Experience sharing visit on S&C Rounds 1
Annex VI
Partnership Analysis Tables
Of
"RLIFSA"
In
M&E FRAMEWORK OF CISP FOR "RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES 58

THROUGH AN IFS APPROACH (RLIFSA") IN SELECTED DROUGHT-PRONE PAs OF FEDIS & GOROGUTU
WOREDAS, E/ HARARGHE: OROMIA
Annex VI: Partnership Analysis Table
Interest groups Structure/ Status/ Problems & constraints Potentials Need and Expectations Envisaged project reaction
& Institutions Characteristics
Women Non structured, - discriminated - possess high - ease of work load - create better education
individuals with in the negatively indigenous - improved access to access
community, - excess work load knowledge education - design & implement
discriminated due to - low access to - hard worker and - empowerment for income generating
gender bias, with education productive better decision activities
immense indigenous - exposed for harmful - responsible making & - create better access to
knowledge, important traditional practices - better capacity to participation credit
labor force for HHs, - resource poor maintain HHs - improved access to - improved access to
susceptible for external - low decision making integrity economic resources social services
shocks power - potential - to be protected from - empowerment and
participants in harmful traditional awareness creation
development practices
activities if well
considered
Children Non structured, - vulnerable for - potentially - ease of work load - create better education
individuals with in the diseases and other productive - improved access to access
community, external shocks like - early adopters for education - Improved primary
discriminated due to food shortage new ideas and - to be protected from health care
their age, highly - discriminated practices harmful traditional - Improved agricultural
dependant, important negatively - in most cases clear practices productivity and
labor force for HHs, - work load from any bias and - improved health care nutritional status
susceptible for external - low access to open - safe environment
shocks, good entry education - sufficient and
points for new ideas and - exposed for harmful appropriate feeding
practices traditional practices
- low decision making
power
Annex VI: Partnership Analysis Table (continued)
Interest groups Structure/ Status/ Problems & constraints Potentials Need and Expectations Envisaged project reaction
& Institutions Characteristics
Farmers/ Adults Non structured - Less educated - possess high - improved access to - provision of productive
individuals with in the - Lacks modern indigenous knowledge productive inputs inputs on credit basis
community, Productive, knowledge and - hard worker and - improved access to - provision of vocational
with better decision skills productive education/ literacy skills training
making power, control - Low access to - capacity to maintain - Skills training - support the adult
HHs’ productive assets, modern productive HHs integrity - Technical support education/ literacy
less susceptible for inputs - potential participants - Improved access to credit program
external shocks, with - Not well-organized in development - technical support to
immense indigenous - Risk averse activities if well organize farmers in to
knowledge, - Environmental considered cooperatives
hazards - better decision making
power
Line Well structured gov’t - limited logistic - potentially capable to - logistic and other - cover perdiem and
Departments at institutions at zonal capacity coordinate and follow- capacity building support allowances for expert
Zone level level, fully responsible - limited budget up project activities - perdiem and allowance when appropriate
for their respective - lack of effective MIS - helpful to organize for their staff - involve them and work
sectoral activities, - lack of continuous capacity building - to work together at jointly with true sense
relatively have better training to up grade trainings at woreda different stages of the of partnership in the
man power, currently the technical and community levels project cycle management course of the project
restructured by the capacity of staffs - effective to undertake the process of implementation
government technical studies and
zonal level
assessments
Interest groups Structure/ Status/ Problems & constraints Potentials Need and Expectations Envisaged project
& Institutions Characteristics reaction
Zone DPPC and - formally structured - does not have their - High decision making - logistic support - involve them and
Project gov’t organs at zonal own offices, budget power - consultation work jointly with true
Committee level, responsible for and technical staffs - Effective in - to work together at sense of partnership
activities related with - in some cases it is coordinating the different stages of the in the course of the
DP&M and to challenging to get all logistic and technical project cycle management project
coordinate project the responsible capacity of different the process of implementation
activities at zone level, members around line departments for - Consult these gov’t
both are committee and get timely urgent & important organs whenever
structures representing decisions actions necessary in the
different line - all the members are - Can positively course of the project
departments, have high highly committed influence all the implementation
decision making power with their own government structures
with respect to the two organizational at zonal, woreda and
issues, both committees business PA levels
are chaired by the zone
administrator
CISP Formal organizational - the unreliable nature - relatively sufficient - improved staff - staff training
structure, Italian origin of the resource base technical &logistic development strategy - better incentive for
NGO, non profit - limited capacity capacity - diversify its source of staff
making, with no compared to the - qualified & committed fund - design appropriate
political affiliation, local need staffs - build its logistic & project management
strong social acceptance - limited technical - experience in the zone technical capacity & support strategy
at grass root level, with staff - good partnership - need appropriate - work in partnership
good track record in - inadequate staff - jointly design the technical support from its - build its logistic &
working with the development project with head office technical capacity
government partners stakeholders
and CBO
Interest Structure/ Status/ Problems & constraints Potentials Need and Envisaged project reaction
groups & Characteristics Expectations
Institutions
Woreda - Formal Gov’t structures - lack of skilled - mandated by the gov’t - capacity building - provision of on job
Education/ at woreda level, manpower as required legislation to execute both in terms of trainings for
Agriculture/ responsible to plan & - lack of logistic capacity dev’t activities at logistic, finance development workers
health/ execute Dev’t activities at - limited financial woreda level and training and experts
OIDA/ Early woreda level, controlled resource - well organized - involvement in the - cover perdiems and
warning by woreda and regional - lack of appropriate - have skilled manpower whole process of other allowances for
Offices councils/ work closely capacity building though limited in the project cycle partner staffs during
with the community through trainings number management implementation &
- lack of effective - capable to mobilize, monitoring
information net work organize and - provision of
- highly bureaucratic coordinate project transportation facility as
- newly reorganized activities at grass root required
- in efficient MIS level - design a participatory
approach for authentic
partnership among
stakeholders
Vocational Established at woreda - limited number of - furnished with basic - support to possess - support financially to
Training level, formal gov’t blocks/ training halls training equipments remaining training deliver training inputs
centers organizational structure, - lack of some facilities necessary for some equipment and - cover the operational
works to promote like water supply skills training areas facilities cost to run one round
vocational skills training - lack of some training - supplied with the - operational cost to skills training
for adults, area of focus equipment necessary electric run skills - support to train skills
by the gov’t to promote - lack of permanent and power to run machine training/ trainers
the new educational sufficient budget supported trainings personnel/
policy, accepted by local - lack of appropriate skills trainees allowance
community trainers and input
- training for
trainers
Annex VII
Project Logical Framework
Of
"RLIFSA"
In
M&E FRAMEWORK OF CISP FOR "RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES 63

THROUGH AN IFS APPROACH (RLIFSA") IN SELECTED DROUGHT-PRONE PAs OF FEDIS & GOROGUTU
WOREDAS, E/ HARARGHE: OROMIA
ANNEX VII: "Reinforcing the Livelihoods of Rural Communities through an Integrated Food Security Approach"
IN
Selected Drought Prone PAs of Fedis and Goro Gutu Woredas of the East Hararghe Zone"
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
Intervention Logic Objectively Verifiable Sources and Means of Assumption
Indicators of Achievements Verification
Overall Contribute towards  Reduced vulnerability of  Baseline Survey
Objectives enhanced level of target HHs for natural and  HH socio-economic
Household (HH) Food manmade calamities due study
Security situation through to strengthened livelihood  Technical diagnostic
strengthening sustainable situation in the project studies
rural livelihoods of target target area  Ex-Post Impact
communities in seven  Reduced need for external Assessment
structurally food insecure assistances during stress
Peasant Associations in Fedis situation due to increase NB: some of the above
& Gorogutu Woredas of buffering zone/ capacity are to be carried out
EHZ to resilience disaster using diagnostic surveys
and the others through
(NB: Target PAs Fedis/ Tuta PRA technique
Kenisa, Din Haka, Belina
Arba, Riski, & Awgudora
Gemechu/
Gorogutu/ Mede Hinchini,
Kobo Walteha/
ANNEX VII: (Logical Framework: Continued)

LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
Intervention Logic Objectively Verifiable Sources and Means of Assumption
Indicators of Achievements Verification
Specific  Reduced vulnerability of structurally  Reduced number of people  Crop assessment  Political stability will be
Objectives food insecure HHs by rebuilding those need external results maintained at federal,
productive assets at HH level assistances during stress  Woreda Relief regional, and local levels
through appropriate Safety Net/ situation Appeal  The current stability in the
Employment Generation measures  Enhanced level of HH asset  HH socio-economic security situation of the
 Improved level of HH income holding and strengthened assessments project areas will be
through enhanced level of copping capacity during the  Case study reports maintained and it will be
agricultural production and occurrence of external  Mid term internal/ conducive for the
diversified on/ off farm income shocks on going evaluation implementation of the
generation activities  Rehabilitated natural  Terminal evaluation project
 Improved state/ enhanced potential resource base of target  Impact Assessment  As the current project is
of target areas natural resource base localities due to reduced Report embedded in the
through sustainable development, soil erosion & better natural  Diagnostic Survey government of Ethiopia
management & use resource development and Results both at national &
 Improved access of target management Regional level the Gov't
communities to basic social services  Improved quality and NB: most of the above policy & its regulatory
 Enhanced level of women coverage of basic social are to be carried out framework are expected
participation in primary education services like education, using PRA technique to remain consistent for
 Enhanced empowerment of target water & primary health care the duration of the project
communities and CBOs in local  Increased enrollment of  No major natural and/or
development initiatives girls to primary education manmade calamities
 Enhanced capacity and efficiency of  Active participation of occurred & if there is any
local government structures in target communities in the it will be tolerable
DP&M and project planning, M&E, course of local initiatives  Macro economic aspect of
community training.  Enhanced capacity of Line the country will remain
departments on delivery stable
coverage & service quality  No major shift in the
Donor's police expected

LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
Intervention Logic Objectively Verifiable Indicators of Sources and Means of Assumption
Achievements Verification
I. Safety Net/ Employment Generation  No. of HHs targeted under Safety Net
Expected Result
I.1 Within the two years project period 885 poor  No. of PDs labor opportunity obtained
farming HHs i.e. 412 and 443 respectively in by target HHs  Supervision reports
Fedis & Goro Gutu woredas will earn an  Amount of income earned by individual  Progress reports
average of 100.00 EURO as wage income and HHs  Review Meetings/
expected to replenish some of basic productive  Type & number of asset regained by workshops with
assets target HH stakeholders/staffs
I.2 Different but integrated physical & biological  Type and volume of S&W conservation  Physical observation
S&W conservation structures equivalent to activities undertaken and its PD  Discussion with
96,445 Person Days (PD) i.e. 36,400 and 60,045 equivalent beneficiaries
respectively for Fedis & Goro Gutu will be  Volume of area treated & rehabilitated  Financial/ Activity
constructed through S&W conservation practices Document review
I.3 Different social infrastructures construction &
 Type and cost of infrastructures  Household socio-
rehabilitation works amounting 29,140.00
constructed & rehabilitated economic survey
EURO undertaken
 No of users of these infrastructures reports
 Crop Ass. Reports
II. Promotion of Agricultural production &  Type & volume of crop, vegetable, and  KAP Study Reports
Income fruited seeds & seedlings delivered  Store transaction
II.1 Level of crop & Vegetable production will be  No. of HH targeted & Area coverage of
records
improved through improved seed availability, these seeds & seedlings  Mid-term evaluation
particularly improved verities & through  Change in production and income level
reports
better crop production & protection techniques  Type & volume of forage seeds delivered
II.2 Availability of animal feed and forest products  Area covered by forage seed & seedlings  Case study reports
for fuel and construction will be improved  No. of HHs produced their own forage
II.3 On/ off farm diversification of the agricultural
 Level of diversification in production
practice will be improved
practice & income sources
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
Intervention Logic Objectively Verifiable Indicators of Achievements Sources and Means of Assumption
Verification
III. Household Asset Building  No of HHs targeted
EXPECTED RESULTS
III.1 Asset holding of 792 poor  No. & type of livestock delivered
farming households i.e. 550 and  Change on level of productive asset holding of target  Supervision reports
242 HHs living, respectively in HHs  Progress reports
the target PAs of Fedis & Goro  Change on HH income level & source  Review Meetings/
Gutu will be enhanced  Change on HH food basket workshops with
 Increased use of drought animals for farming practice, stakeholders/staffs
IV. Community Training &  Change on crop production & protection practices  Physical observation
Awareness Creation  Improved management of livestock  Discussion with
4.1The level of Knowledge, Attitude,  Improved veterinary service for target HHs beneficiaries
and Practice of target  Improved practice of soil & water Conservation  Financial/ Activity
communities in areas of crop  Improved personal hygiene & Sanitation Practice Document review
production & protection, animal  Increased level of girls participation in primary education  Household socio-
husbandry, soil & water economic survey
 Improved access to safe delivery service
conservation, personal hygiene & reports
 Reduced morbidity & mortality from communicable
sanitation, etc will be enhanced  KAP Study Reports
diseases
 Store transaction
V. Disaster Prevention &  No of nutritional surveillances conducted records
Management Support  Improved timeliness and reliability of the Early Warning  Mid-term evaluation
V.1 The capacity of local government System reports
organs particularly DPPD in the  No. & timeliness of crop assessments  Case study reports
area of disaster prevention and  Effectiveness of woreda level relief operation such as
management will be enhanced beneficiary registration, screening & targeting, follow-up,
monitoring, etc
VI. Capacity Building  Improved logistic capacity of target offices
6.1 The capacity of government  Improved technical expertise of LD staffs on project
offices in service delivery will be planning, M&E and TOT
enhanced both in terms of service  Improved service delivery of LDs in terms of both
coverage & efficiency coverage & quality
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
Intervention Logic Means Required to implement Sources information for action Pre-conditions
the Actions progress & Cost required
ACTIVITIES
I.SAFETY NET/ EMPLOYMENT GENERATION

1.1 Construction of Different physical & biological S&W - Timely release
conservation structures equivalent to 96,445 Person Days of the fund
I. Human Resource
(PD) i.e. 36,400 and 60,045 respectively for Fedis & Goro Sources information for
Gutu I.1 Technical (Local) action progress
1.2.Infrastructures Construction & Rehabilitation  Area Coordinator (one)  Beneficiary list
 5 KM road construction (Fedis)  M&E Officer (one)  Regular records of
 10 KM road maintenance (Fedis)  IEC Officer (one) activities
 Rehabilitation of 5 schools (4 in Fedis & 1 in GG)  Woreda Coordinators (2)  Progress reports
 5 VIP construction (4 in Fedis & 1 in GG)
 One Spring Development in Goro Gutu
 Monitoring & supervision
I.2 Technical (Expatriate)
 Three (12mx8m) Foard Construction in GG  Food Security expert
reports
 Two Roof Catchments construction in GG  Review Meetings/
II. Promotion of Agricultural production & Income I.3 Administration workshops with
2.1. Provision of Different Seeds & Seedlings  Branch Administrator (1) stakeholders/staffs
 Provision of 473.75 Qt of different improved seed  Accountant/Cashier (1)  Physical observation
 Production & distribution of 50,000 fruit & wood seedling  Office Secretary (1)  Discussion with
 Provision of 150 KG Forage seedling  Store Keeper (1) beneficiaries
 Provision of 250 Qt Onion seed  Drivers (three)  Financial/ Activity
 Provision of 200 Bunches Sweet Potato seed  Office Attendant (4) document review
2.2. Other Supports  Guards (Four)
 Promotion of 7 improved vegetable seed storage facilities
 Official correspondences
 Support the establishment of 5 onion marketing I.4 Technical experts from
 Store transaction records
Cooperatives pertinent line departments  HH survey
III. House Hold Asset Building  Crop Ass. Reports
 Provision of 210 Farm Oxen for same number of farmers I.5 Project partners capacity  Mid-term evaluation
 Provision of 400 local goats for 200 women reports
 Provision of 140 Heifers for the same no. of women HHH
 Provision of 1,380 Poultry for 230 Women HHHs (Six each)
 Promotion of Bee keepings for 12 HHs in G/Gutu woreda

LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
Intervention Logic Means Required to Sources information for Pre-conditions
implement the Actions action progress & Cost required
Project Cost
ACTIVITIES
IV. Community Training, awareness creation & Experience Sharing

4.1 Four Round training on crop production & protection for 6,400 Farmers II. Logistics I. Human Resource
4.2 Two Round training on livestock mgt and forage dev't for 550 farmers 2.1 Double cabin Pick Up (2) 1.1 Local Technical
4.3 Four Round awareness creation & sensitization on S&W conservation & 2.2 Motorbikes (five) 58,800.00 EURO
environmental protection for 6,400 farmers 2.3 Computers with Local Administrative
4.4 Two Round awareness creation & sensitization on Hygiene and sanitation accessories (Seven) 69,480.00 EURO
and environmental Health for 50,150 community members 2.4 Generator (two) 1.2 Expatriate Staff
4.5 One Round training on safe delivery for 35 traditional birth attendants 2.5 Surveying & Soil analysis 85,500.00 EURO
4.6 Two Round Training for 20 Par-Vet among from Goat provision beneficiaries equipment (Two Set) 1.3 Perdiem for Mission
4.7 Two Round Training for 35 Animators those supervise Safety Net activities 2.6 Tape recorders (Seven) 20,800.00 EURO
4.8 Two years support for Woreda Education Office activity to promote girls 2.7 Amplifiers (seven) Sub Total I
participation in primary education 2.8 Video Camera (Two) 234,580.00 EURO
4.9 Organization of one Round experience sharing visit for 45 selected farmers 2.9 Photo camera (Two) II Travel
to enable them share better experience on S&W conservation 2.10 Duplicating machine (2) 2.1 Intern. 9,900.00 EURO
V. Capacity Building 2.11 Photo copy machine (2) 2.2 Local 4,200.00 EURO
5.1 Human 2.12 Training Equipment Sub Total II
 One Round training on need identification & project planning for 24 experts (Two Set) 14,100.00 EURO
 One Round Training on project M&E for 24 experts 2.13 Solar Energy equipment III. Equip. & Supplies
 One Round Training on Training of Trainers for 16 Woreda Experts (Two set) 153,640.00 EURO
5.2 Physical 2.14 School furniture (22 Set) IV. Local office Action
 Provision of 5 Motor Bikes for LDs i.e. 3 to Fedis & 2 Goro Gutu 2.15 Motor bike spare part 36,600.00 Euro
 Provision of computers & different Equipments for LDs (see 2nd column) 2.16 Vehicle spare parts V. Other costs, Services
 Provision of other equipments, & 22 set school furniture i.e. 16 Fedis & 6 GG 2.17 Nutrition survey kit (7) 26,400.00 Euro
 Provision of Nursery materials six set (One for Fedis & 5 for GG) 2.18 Birth attendant kit (35) VI. Other Action Cost
 Provision of 7 Nutrition Survey Kit & 35 Birth attendants Kit 2.19 Nursery materials & 247,329.65 EURO
 Provision of vet drugs and Para-Vet equipments equipment for Gov't VII. Sub Total Direct
 Provision of 14 Sprayer (CP 20) 10 for Fedis & 4 for GG nursery (set one) Cost of Action
VI. Support Woreda Disaster Prevention & Management Capacity 2.20 Nursery material for 712,649.65 EURO
VI.1 Support Four Round each Nutritional Surveillance assessments per farmers (set 5) VIII. Admin Max 7%
woreda 2.21 Vet Drug 49,885.48 EURO
VI.2 Organize One Round training on EW data collection & analysis for DAs 2.22 Vet equipment set 25
VI.3 Support Six Round pre/post harvest crop assessments per woreda 2.23 Sprayer CP20 ( fourteen) IX Total Eligible Cost
6.4 Support the relief operation of target woredas for two years period 762,535.13 EURO
Annex VIII
Project Action Plan
Of
"RLIFSA"
In
ANNEX VIII: SUMMARY ACTION PLAN FOR THE PROJECT "RIENFORCING RURAL
LIVELIHOOD THROUGH AN INTEGRATED FOOD SECURITY APPROACH IN
FEDIS WOREDA OF EAST HARARGHE ZONE" Year 2
No. List of Activity by Component Semester 1 Semester 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
6.1 Safety Net
6.1.1 Biological Physical S&W Conservation activities
6.1.2 Social infrastructure development
Road Construction 5km
Road Maintenance 10km
School Rehabilitation
VIP Construction
Spring Development
6.2 Promotion of Agricultural Production &
Income
6.2.1 Provision of improved seed varieties
6.2.3 Provision of vegetable seeds
6.2.4 Promotion of improved storage facilities
6.2.5 Support the establishment of Veg sellers coop
6.3 Household Asset Building
6.3.1 Farm Oxen Provision
6.3.2 Local goat provision
6.3.3 Heifer Provision
6.3.4 Poultry Provision
6.3.5 Promotion of bee keeping
6.4 Community Training, Awareness /EXP sharing
6.4.1 On crop production & Protection (in 5 PAS)
6.4.2 Livestock Management & Forage Development
6.4.3 Soil Conservation and Environmental
Protection
6.4.4 Hygiene & Sanitation and Environmental
Health
6.4.5 Training of Traditional Birth Attendants
6.4.6 Paravet Training
6.4.7 Animators Training
6.4.8 Promotion of female participation in education
6.4.9 Experience sharing visit
6.5 Experts Training & Experience sharing
6.5.1 Project need identification & Planning
6.5.2 Project Monitoring and Evaluation
6.5.3 TOT Training
6.6 Support the DP & M Capacity at Woreda level
6.6.1 Support Nutritional Surveillance Assessments
6.6.2 Training on EW Data Collection & Analysis
6.6.3 Support Pre/post Harvest Crop Assessment
6.6.4 Support Woreda Level Relief Operations
GORO GUTU WOREDA OF EAST HARARGHE ZONE" Year 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
6.1 Safety Net
School Rehabilitation (6 sections)
VIP Construction
Spring Development
FORD Construction (12mx8m)
Roof catchments
Income
6.2.2 Prodn. & Provision of Fruit/Forage Seedlings
6.2.5 Provision of Different Forage Seeds
6.3.5 Promotion of bee keeping
6.4.1 On crop production & Protection
Protection
6.4.4 Hygiene & Sanitation and Environmental
Health
6.5.3 TOT Training
ANNEX VIII: ACTION PLAN FOR THE PROJECT "RIENFORCING RURAL LIVELIHOOD THROUGH
AN INTEGRATED FOOD SECURITY APPROACH IN FEDIS WOREDA OF E/ HARARGHE ZONE" Year 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
6.1 Safety Net
- Site identification for establishment
- Surveying and lay outing
- Nursery material provision
- Labor organization
- Seed collection
- Nursery establishment and management
- Hill side terracing
- Provision of materials like gabion for check dam
construction
- Check dam construction
- Micro basin construction
- Pond maintenance
- Gully re-vegetation
- Seedling plantation
- Surveying and designing for road construction
- Labor organization for road construction & maint
- Road Construction
-Road maintenance
- Assessment to determine school rehabilitation need
and materials
- Preparation of bill of quantity, procurement and
provision of construction materials
- Labor organization for school rehabilitation
- School rehabilitation
- VIP Construction site identification
- Procurement and provision of material
- VIP Construction
6.2 Promotion of Agricultural Production & Income
- Identification of farmers need
- Market assessment for potential seed supply
- Screening of beneficiaries
- Purchase and provision of seed

- Need identification
- Targeting of beneficiaries
- Purchase and provision of seeds

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
- Site identification
- Preparation of bill of quantities
- Procurement & provision of construction material
- Store construction
- Identification of cooperative members
- Organize cooperative management structure
- Training for coop. mgt and members
- Empowering the cooperative association
- Support the cooperative to be get as legal entity
- Beneficiary targeting
-Market assessment
-Establish purchasing Committee
- Training provision
- Establishing oxen delivery mechanism
- Purchase and provision of Oxen
- Market assessment
- Establish purchasing committee
- Establishing delivery mechanism
- Purchase and provision of Goat
- Market assessment
- Purchase and provision of heifer
- Market assessment
- Purchase and provision of chickens
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
-Preparation for the training
-Execution
-Execution
6.4.3 Soil Conservation and Environmental Protection
-Execution
6.4.4 Hygiene & Sanitation & Environmental Health
-Execution
-Execution
-Execution
-Execution
-Awareness creation and attitudinal change
- Provision of learning materials for female students
- Support provision of basic literacy for females
- Selection of appropriate visitors
- Identification of potential place for the visit
- Organizing experience sharing visit
-Requirement of consultant
-Organizing training
6.5.3 TOT Training
-Identification of trainees & trainer
- Organizing training
-Purchase & provision of nutritional surveillance equ.
-Training for experts on nutrition
-Nutritional surveillance assessment
ANNEX VIII: ACTION PLAN FOR THE PROJECT "RIENFORCING RURAL LIVELIHOOD THROUGH AN
INTEGRATED FOOD SECURITY APPROACH IN GORO GUTU WOREDA OF E/ HARARGHE ZONE" Year 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
6.1 Safety Net
- Site identification for establishment
- Surveying and lay outing
- Nursery material provision
- Seed collection
- Nursery establishment and management
- Hill side terracing
- Provision of materials like gabion for check
dam construction
- Check dam construction
- Micro basin construction
- Pond maintenance
- Gully re-vegetation
- Seedling plantation
- Surveying and designing for road construction
- Labor organization for road construction &
maintenance
- Road Construction
-Road maintenance
- Assessment to determine school rehabilitation
need and materials
- Preparation of bill of quantity, procurement
and provision of construction materials
- Labor organization for school rehabilitation
- School rehabilitation
- VIP Construction site identification
- Procurement and provision of material
- VIP Construction
Income
- Identification of farmers need
- Market assessment for potential seed supply
- Screening of beneficiaries
- Purchase and provision of seed

- Need identification
- Targeting of beneficiaries
- Purchase and provision of seeds

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12
0
- Site identification
- Preparation of bill of quantities
- Procurement & provision of construction
material
- Store construction
- Identification of cooperative members
- Organize cooperative management structure
- Training for coop. mgt and members
- Empowering the cooperative association
- Support the cooperative to be get as legal entity
-Market assessment
-Establish purchasing Committee
- Establishing oxen delivery mechanism
- Purchase and provision of Oxen
- Market assessment
- Purchase and provision of Goat
- Market assessment
- Purchase and provision of heifer
- Market assessment
- Purchase and provision of chickens

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
6.4 Community Training, Awareness /EXP
sharing
-Execution
6.4.2 Livestock Management & Forage
Development
-Execution
Protection
-Execution
6.4.4 Hygiene & Sanitation & Environmental
Health
-Execution
-Execution
-Execution
-Execution
6.4.8 Promotion of female participation in
education
-Awareness creation and attitudinal change
- Provision of learning materials for female
students
- Support provision of basic literacy for
females
- Selection of appropriate visitors
- Identification of potential place for the visit
- Organizing experience sharing visit
List of Activity by Component Semester 1 Semester 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
6.5.3 TOT Training
-Identification of trainees & trainer
- Organizing training
6.6 Support the DP & M Capacity at Woreda
level
-Purchase & provision of nutritional
surveillance equipment.
-Training for experts on nutrition
-Nutritional surveillance assessment

CISP Harar M & E Framework For RRLH Through IFSA Fedis & GG

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

CISP Harar M & E Framework For RRLH Through IFSA Fedis & GG

Caricato da

Copyright:

CISP – Harar

Monitoring & Evaluation Framework (Draft)

RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES

Prepared for Consultation by:

I. BACK GROUND AND INTRODUCTORY NOTE OF THE PROJECT

II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

I. M&E FRAMEWORK OF THE PROJECT "RIENFORCING THE LIVELIHOODS OF RURAL

ANNEX I: M&E Framework For "RLIFSA"

ANNEX V: Physical Activities Progress Quarterly Monitoring Format

I. BACK GROUND AND INTRODUCTORY NOTE OF THE PROJECT

Budget Line: 210202

Project Duration: 24 Months

Region: Regional National State of Oromia

Mode of Funding: Co financed by the EC and CISP International

765,387.59 EURO 688,848.83 EURO 90 %

II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

2.1. OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT

2.1.2. Specific objectives

In line with the above, the project is also aims at:

2.2. PROJECT ACTIVITIES

2.2.1 SAFETY NETS:

No. Fedis Woreda Goro Gutu

2.2.1.2. Social infrastructure development

No. Fedis Woreda Goro Gutu

2.2.2. PROMOTION OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND INCOME

2.2.2.1 Provision of improved seed varieties:

It is roughly estimated that about 70 % of the seed to be delivered to be pre-screened landraces

These measures are expected to be:

2.2.2.2. Production and Provision of fruit and forage seedlings:

2.2.2.3. Provision of Vegetable Seeds:

2.2.2.4. Promotion of improved storage facilities:

2.2.2.5. Support the establishment of Vegetable sellers’ cooperatives:

2.2.3 HOUSEHOLD ASSET BUILDING

No Woreda Type of No. to be No. of Budget required Target Group

No Woreda Type of No. to be No. of Budget required Target

No Type of Training Woreda Round No. of Benef. Target Groups

No List of Actions Unit No. of Unit Target Groups

2.2.6 BUILDING PARTNER’S CAPACITY ON TWO LEVELS: HUMAN & PHYSICAL

Table: Human Capacity Building

No. Type of Training Unit Volume Target No of Trainees

Table: Physical Capacity Building:

No Type of Equipment/ Materials Unit Number per woreda Remark

2.2.7. SUPPORT FOR PARTNERS ASSOCIATIONS

Physical Capacity building.

Human Capacity Building

2.2.8 STUDIES & ASSESSMENTS

2.3. EXPECTED OUTCOME/ IMPACT OF THE PROJECT ON TARGET GROUPS

2.3.1. Concert result of the Project

The Project’s expected concert results may be divided in four categories:

1) Impact on direct target HHs,

i) Project Impact on HHs:

ii) Project Impact at Community Level:

Specifically the Project expects to provide the community with:

 Improved maternal and child health services.

iii) Project Impact at Institutional Level

iv) Publications and other outputs

2.3.2. MULTIPLIER EFFECTS

2.3.3. LONG TERM IMPACT

The Project is designed so as to ensure maximum sustainability beyond the implementation

i) The Financial Aspect

ii) At Institutional Level

iii) Policy level

2.4. BENEFICIARIES AND PARTNERSHIP ANALYSIS

2.4.1. Beneficiaries Analysis

2.4.2 Partnership Analysis

 Structure/ Status/ Characteristics,

TEAM: Facilitator _ Recorder