P. 1
Annual Report ME G2 15 Mar 2012

Annual Report ME G2 15 Mar 2012

|Views: 32|Likes:
Published by khmahbub

More info:

Published by: khmahbub on May 13, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/13/2012

pdf

text

original

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

CPWF Project Annual Report
Project Leader: Liz Humphreys Project Number: G2 Project Title: G2 Productive, profitable, and resilient

agriculture and aquaculture systems
Reporting Period: Report Serial Number: Starting Date: Completion Date: Apr. 1, 2011 to Mar. 31, 2012 G2_CPWF_PPR-2_12_03_15
Apr. 1, 2011 Mar. 31, 2014

Date: 15/03/2012

1 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

Contents
Guidance ...................................................................................................................................................3 Section 1: Research ..................................................................................................................................4 1.1. What were your team’s main activities over the last twelve months? ....................................4 1.2. Adjustments to your research questions ..................................................................................4 1.3. Describe how (research) ‘best bets’ are evolving based on interaction with potential users and on accumulated learning by your project. ....................................................................................5 1.4. Surprise and success .................................................................................................................5 Section 2: Outputs and programmatic contributions...............................................................................7 2.1. Present your project’s milestone plan ......................................................................................7 2.2. Contributions to and from the BDC and its projects, joint work ..............................................7 2.3. Partnerships ..............................................................................................................................8 2.4. Gender and diversity integration ..............................................................................................8 2.5. Contribution to and from Topic Working Groups (TWG) .........................................................9 2.6. Research publications and communication outputs ..............................................................10 2.7. Capacity building of people engaged in the project ...............................................................12 2.8. Outreach to actors or actor groups identified in the OLMs or others ....................................13 Section 3: Outcomes...............................................................................................................................14 3.1. Working towards developmental goals ..................................................................................14 3.2. Your project’s theory of change..............................................................................................14 3.3. Challenges when working towards developmental goals ......................................................14 Section 4: Financial Management ..........................................................................................................15 4.1. Summary financial report .......................................................................................................15 4.2. Project leader’s commentary on the summary financial report ............................................16 Section 5: Implications for future action ................................................................................................17 5.1. Response to previous change requests ..................................................................................17 5.2. Emerging opportunities and risks ...........................................................................................18 5.3. Assistance needed ..................................................................................................................18 5.4. Feedback for improving this reporting format .......................................................................18 5.5. Additional comments ..............................................................................................................19 Annexes ...................................................................................................................................................20 Annex 1: Updated Project Workbook.....................................................................................................20 Annex 2: Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) ............................................................................................20

2 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

Guidance
This report format is designed to enable you to capture and share how your project teams have progressed vis-à-vis what it set out to do and what you have learned in the last twelve months so that other projects and BDCs can benefit from your experience. This should include what challenges and opportunities your project has come up against, and strategies and innovations that you have developed in response and what worked, and what didn’t. Only by trying things out, learning from success and failure, and adapting accordingly, can we achieve impact with our research and get better at doing research for development. Only by sharing what we learn and then pulling out generalizable principles can we get better as a Program. In asking a number of questions about what you have learned you may well find you have answered a question already. If so, just say so. Please do fill in all relevant rows and boxes, even if it is to refer elsewhere. Add rows if necessary, e.g. if you have more than three communication highlights. The annexes are an important part of this report and need to be filled too. The format gives you an idea of the information we need. Be creative with it. Add photos. Tell a story. Let us know what is emerging from the project. Please send the report and annexes to the Basin Leader latest by the given deadline. Please refer to http://monitoring.cpwf.info/ for further guidance.

3 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

Section 1: Research
1.1. What were your team’s main activities over the last twelve months?

The main activities of G2 are summarized as dot points here. Much greater detail on the research activities and initial key findings and plans is provide in Annex 3.    Development and finalization of contracts with all partners Recruitment of staff Field trips ○ Jan 2011 – site familiarization field trip to Barguna District, Barisal ○ May 2011 – (with G3 & G4) to Barisal, Khulna and Satkhira (site familiarization – discussions with groups of farmers, key informants, CSISA hub managers; biophysical observations; site selection for G2 on-farm crop-related activities) ○ Oct 2011 – (with G1, G5) to Barisal, Khulna and Satkhira (G2 review of crop trials on all 3 polders, visited some CSISA field sites, meetings with CSISA hub managers at Barisal and Khulan) Literature reviews ○ Review of homestead production systems near completion ○ Review of brackish water aquatic production systems near completion Surveys (survey design and field work completed, analysis and report writing in progress) ○ Surveys of famer practices for brackish water aquaculture in polder 3 ○ Survey of homestead production systems of 1,500 households on polders 43/2/F, 30 and 3 (brackish water areas only) Conducting biophysical research ○ Development of detailed workplans for rice variety, cropping system and aquaculture research and demonstrations ○ Successful implementation of rice variety trials for 2011 aman crops on all 3 polders, and for 2011/12 boro on polders 43/2/F and 30 in Bangladesh, and in North and South 24 Parganas in India ○ Successful implementation of on-farm sites for aman-boro-aus and aman-rabi-aus cropping system demonstrations/trials on polders 43/2/F and 30 ○ Establishment of sites for year-round brackish water aquaculture and for rice-aquaculture systems in saline parts of polder 3 IFWF3 – 6 participants from G2

 

1.2.

Adjustments to your research questions

No changes at this stage; in 2011 we put a lot of effort into understanding the situation in the study area, and developing relevant research questions, and we are at an early stage in our research. However, we would like to change the wording of Objective 1 from “1. Validate new germplasm suitable for various agricultural cropping systems and establish seed distribution networks in target zones” to “ 1. Validate new germplasm suitable for various agricultural cropping systems and initiate seed production and distribution in the study areas”. It is beyond the scope of this project to establish a new formal seed distribution network, and there is an existing seed distribution network led by BRRIs Genetic Resources Seed Division, with significant activity under the STRASA project. Our role is to

4 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT
initiate seed increase and the dissemination of seed of preferred varieties in the polder study areas (see Annex 3).

1.3.

Describe how (research) ‘best bets’ are evolving based on interaction with potential users and on accumulated learning by your project.

Our research is based around “best bets” for rice varieties, aquaculture species, cropping system (includes rice-aquaculture) intensification, and improved brackish water aquaculture. These best bets were chosen based on much accumulated learning over a couple of decades from previous non-CPWF projects, and more recently CPWF projects. This is in relation to technological, environmental and socio-economic factors, in particular: (1) rice germplasm, (2) aquaculture species, (3) crop (rice, rabi, aquaculture) technologies, (4) our knowledge of environmental factors, especially surface and groundwater resources (temporal and spatial salinity dynamics, temporal and spatial magnitude) and their management (or lack of), and (5) our knowledge of the farmers in this region (socio-economic, farming practices).

1.4.

Surprise and success

No earth shattering surprises. Good surprises:   The many things that IWM are bringing to the GBDC, and the way that they are going about it The lunches at Lake Castle View Hotel

Not so good surprises: Environmental  The high rainfall and poor water infrastructure and management in the study areas create difficulties for of implementation rice variety and cropping systems trials because of flooding – water too deep to transplant at the optimum seedling age, seedling nurseries damaged (polder 43/2/F) or destroyed (polder 30) reducing the number of planting dates on polder 30. We found that our site on polder 30 is lower in the landscape than the surroundings which made it impossible to implement our drainage treatments as planned. There was also untimely rain which masked the effect of our drainage treatments for the establishment of rabi crops (and whose establishment was generally delayed by the wet conditions).  Rats demolished the earliest maturing varieties in the first planting on both polders 30 and 43/2/F – so we had to install large plastic sheeting fences around our entire experimental sites at considerable expense, and we will need to repair and replace them throughout the life of the project (not really a surprise I guess, just one extra big job which weren’t geared up for logistically or financially until the problem started). Bureaucratic  Some unexpected additional imposts upon us through being part of the CPWF GBDC – most of these things should have been foreshadowed and incorporated at the project proposal development stage so that they could have been built into the project milestone plan and related work plans, and budgeted for up front (e.g. additional m/e and gender strategy requirements) rather than learning about these requirements 6 months after the project has

5 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT
  started. The long delay in getting the first funds from CPWF (November) which restricted some activities and delayed startup of some activities The long time it took to finalise some of the LoAs, specifically IRRI-WFC, WFC-BFRI, WFC-CIBA, WFC-consultant which delayed start up of some activities

Our proudest achievements are: 1. the commitment of our BRRI and BRAC partners who worked hard to successfully implement the 2011 aman variety and cropping system trials, under difficult conditions and time pressures, borrowing from other resources because of the 7 month delay in receipt of the first payment from CPWF 2. the contributions of G2 to the overall GBDC (see 2.2)

6 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

Section 2: Outputs and programmatic contributions
2.1. Present your project’s milestone plan

Please see our report against milestones in the project work book (attached). In summary, we are almost running to plan in most aspects. We are running a couple of months behind time in relation to literature reviews and surveys for brackish water aquaculture and homestead farming systems. Start up has been slower in India due to delays in signoff of the LoA between WFC and CIBA, and we need to work more closely with our CSSRI and CIBA partners. We have begun to address this by: (1) visits from the PL and project co-ordinator to W. Bengal in Feb., followed by a visit from the WFC team leader, (2) inviting key staff from CIBA and CSSRI to join the field trips in Bangladesh, in addition to the review and planning and reflection workshops (nothing beats interaction during long journeys in vehicles and in the field!). That we are almost running to plan is remarkable given the late (November) arrival of funds, especially in the case of our BRRI and BRAC partners.

2.2.

Contributions to and from the BDC and its projects, joint work

Contribution to other BDC projects

Significance of your contribution to other BDC projects’ objectives (i.e., outputs, outcomes) 1. Selection of study sites The focal study regions (polders) of the BDC, covering a range of salinity and thus land use, were proposed by G2 based on a range of criteria also proposed by G2, and were adopted by the BDC. 2. Familiarisation with the coastal As of 31 March 2012 we have conducted 3 field visits to the region – physiography, land use, coastal region of BGD, each time joined by one or more non-G2 agro-ecological issues people (all the Gs plus CPWF mgt) 3. Cross project interaction The field visits have provided a tremendous opportunity for crossproject interaction and shared learning (as well as intra-project interaction between the partners from different disciplines, organisations and countries) 4. Assistance to G5 G2 has provided much assistance to G5 in response to requests for advice (almost on a daily basis), and we have offered many suggestions in relation to a range of matters Contribution from other BDC projects Significance of their contribution to your project’s objectives (i.e., outputs, outcomes) 1. Maps from G1 and G4 Polder maps and Google earth maps provided by G1 and G4 are very helpful for us to understand our sites in relation to the bigger picture; also, the mapping of aman, boro and aus rice areas in Bangladesh is useful Work carried out jointly Significance of the work carried out jointly to projects’ and BDC objectives (i.e., outputs, outcomes) 1. Co-ordination between G1, This will provide a better data set (locations, type, quality and G2 and G4 in monitoring of frequency of data) and thus better understanding of the water water depth and salinity, and depth and salinity dynamics of the study polders, which is soil salinity, at the study essential for identifying potential improved water management polders – this was an options

7 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT
initiative of G1/G2 Contribution to the BDC as a whole 1. See 1-4 in contribution to other GBDC projects Significance of your contribution to the BDC as a whole Of course, these activities have contributed to the BDC as a whole – through faster initial familiarization, and through better understanding of the water management and cropping system issues and opportunities.

2.3.

Partnerships

We have selected very suitable partners to meet our research and outcome objectives to enable us to address the primary food security issues of the coastal Ganges region i.e. increased production, stability of production and profitability rice-based cropping systems and brackish water aquaculture. This will only be possible through improved germplasm, and improved water and agronomic/aquacultural management. Our partnerships enable us to address productivity of rice-aquaculture systems in a holistic way, initially achieved through the partnership between IRRI and WFC and the partners that each brings. Our partners are mostly “traditional” research partners (NARES - BRRI, BFRI, CSSRI, CIBA), but we are also partnering with one NGO (BRAC) with significant experience in the introduction of rabi crops in the coastal zone, which is lacking in the rest of our team. We have also developed a new partnership with the CSISA Bangladesh expansion project. This involves co-sponsorship of 3 PhD scholars who will be undertaking research on cropping system intensification at Patuakhali (near polder 43/2/F) and Batiaghata (polder 30). This is a good synergy – without this partnership we could have only sponsored one student in the G2, and CSISA does not have the capability to support process research.

2.4.

Gender and diversity integration

Gender and diversity should start with the project team. Our very large team is predominantly male, but with 2 women in leadership positions – the PL and one of the PIs at BRRI. The male dominance reflects the current situation in research institutions in field-based research in cropping systems and aquaculture in Bangladesh and India. I don’t think we can do anything about this. During our initial familiarization/planning visits we ensured the presence of women, and also held separate discussions with groups of men and women. The aquaculture and homestead surveys explicitly address the role of women, men and youth in homestead production systems and rice-aquaculture “ghers”. Once these surveys have been analysed, in a disaggregated way, project G2 will be in a better position to design further research strategies that are sensitive to the gender and diversity differences within the systems where G2 operates. Homestead research activities will be designed and implemented with women, and this is an important opportunity to develop interventions that directly benefit women. Brackishwater aquaculture appears to be almost entirely done by men, but the surveys are seeking a more in depth understanding of gender roles and influences for future research. In the future we will also seek to involve women in participatory varietal evaluation – to date we have not done this well. In the coastal zones of Bangladesh women do not traditionally go to the field, but they are involved in decision making about crop production and do most of the post-harvest activities. In West Bengal women are involved in a range of crop production activities including transplanting, weeding, harvesting and post-harvest activities. We are planning to include women in the field days to show our cropping systems and varietal trials. In Bangladesh we will invite 10 pairs (husband and wife)

8 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT
during crop cuttings of rice (aus, aman and boro seasons) and non-rice (rabi season) crops each year, starting from the rabi/boro season 2011-2012 (harvest in April 2012). Our aim is to provide knowledge to both husband and wife on crop intensification and diversification opportunities for higher productivity and income. In discussing and planning agricultural activities with their husbands, we believe that the women will encourage their husbands to adopt higher production and income related agricultural practices, more so for food insecure families.

2.5.

Contribution to and from Topic Working Groups (TWG)

Contribution to TWGs (specify)

Significance of contribution to project and BDC objectives (i.e., outputs, outcomes) 1. Reslience working group Some G2 team members joined discussions with the resilience working group workshops in South Africa. Various suggestions were made to enhance interaction with the Ganges projects, including G2, and further advice is awaited from the resilience working group team. Contribution from any TWG (specify) Significance of contribution to project and BDC objectives (i.e., outputs, outcomes) 1. none

9 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

2.6.

Research publications and communication outputs

List (in the table below) all your outputs produced in the last twelve months for the target groups already defined in the project OLMs (or if for others please state so and explain). . Please provide a copy of the output or the web link for easy access, including links to pre-prints of journal articles. Output types are: a. Books and Book Chapters1 b. Journal articles (include articles that have been submitted 2 c. Research Reports (working paper, consultant’s report, discussion paper, project reports, etc) d. Student theses e. Conference and Seminar Papers f. Posters g. Policy briefs, briefing papers h. Reference materials (booklets and training manuals for extension agents,etc.) i. Articles for media or news (radio, newspapers, newsletters, etc. j. Social media outputs, including web sites, blogs, wikis k. Videos l. Data and information outputs, including datasets and databases m. PowerPoint presentations ( except the internal project presentations) n. Other (specify) Output Reference (Author, year, title/ output name, etc.) Target audience (as in How disseminated / Any feedback on its Type (see OLM) promoted / used use, or how above) monitored/ evaluated e. & m. Gregorio, 2012, Rice varieties with higher yield and stress tolerant traits for CPWF Paper & presentation at cropping system intensification of the coastal Ganges community/researchers IFWF3, Nov. 2011 e. & m. Ritu, 2012, Aus-aman cropping system: a new approach for increasing cropping CPWF Paper & presentation at system intensity in southwest coastal Bangladesh community/researchers IFWF3 e. & m. Barman (for Alam), 2012, Integrated aqua-agricultural production systems in the CPWF Paper & presentation at brackish water zones of Bangladesh community/researchers IFWF3 e. & m. Mondal, 2012, Improving drainage is crucial for cropping system intensification in CPWF Paper & presentation at
1 2

Please indicate if these are peer-reviewed or not. Please indicate if these are peer-reviewed or not.

10 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT
e. & m. the poldered coastal zones of Bangladesh Mondal, 2012, Productive, profitable, and resilient agriculture and aquaculture systems community/researchers IFWF3 ~150 Bangladeshi Presentation at stakeholders – see stakeholders meeting section 2.6 organized by G5 on 22 January 2012 in Khulna, and 14 February 2012 in Barisal.

11 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT 2.7. Capacity building of people engaged in the project
The reality is that the capacity of most people in the very large G2 team has increased through activities such as increased familiarization with the project region and issues, the effort put into articulating key research questions and the development of systematic and detailed work plans, and considerable cross-disciplinary interaction. In addition we have conducted or planned the following activities FAMILY NAME, Given Name 12 collaborating farmers at Sandeshkhali and Gosaba in W. Bengal (names available) 8 enumerators for homestead survey in Bangladesh (names available) Md Hafijur Rahman Nibir Kumar Saha Md Farhad Gender Nationality Level (e.g., MSc, PhD), affiliated University/ type of training M Indian Research / thesis subject Output and/or OP*

Training in improved rice cultivation practices (seed treatment, 2.1 testing seed quality, nutrient management, nursery management, field layout)

M

Bangladeshi

Training and orientation for conduct of homestead survey

2.3

M M M

Bangladeshi PhD scholarship offered – yet to enrol Bangladeshi PhD scholarship offered – yet to enrol Bangladeshi PhD scholarship offered – yet to enrol

Crop intensification (rice-rice-rabi) in moderately saline area of 2.2 coastal Bangladesh (Batiaghata, Khulna) Cropping system intensification (rice-rice-rice) in a fresh water 2.2 area of coastal Bangladesh (Patuakhali) Cropping system intensification (rice-rice-rabi) in a fresh water 2.2 area of coastal Bangladesh (Patuakhali)

12 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT 2.8. Outreach to actors or actor groups identified in the OLMs or others
Please list any outreach activities carried out in the last twelve months for target group identified in the OLMs or others updating any previous lists. Type of outreach activities (e.g. informal/ Actors/ Actor groups (taken from OLM or formal meeting, stakeholder consultation, any other newly identified target group). seminar, training, forum) How many participants (gender/ diversity distribution)? Formal stakeholder meeting organized by ~150 participants from Government G5 – power point presentation from G2 (DAE, DOF, BWDB, LGED, BRRI, BARI, (Mondal) Khulna University), Non-Government (BRAC, BDS, Uttaran, Shusilan, TMSS), International (IRRI, CIMMYT, WFC, Winrock International), private sector (golda hatchery, fish processing plant, chamber of commerce), journalist, local government representatives Participatory variety selection 25 farmers (all male) Dates, venue (location, Any feedback or how monitored/evaluated? Any country) evidence that your outreach activities led to some positive change? 22 January 2012 in Khulna and 14 February 2012 in Barisal, Bangladesh

Participatory variety selection

20 farmers (all male)

Training in improved rice cultivation 8 farmers (all male) practices (seed treatment, testing seed quality, nutrient management, nursery management, field preparation/layout for varietal comparisons) 8 farmers (1 female)

25 Oct 2011, Bazar Khali, polder 43/2/F, Bangladesh 18 Nov 2011, Sehara, polder 3, Bangladesh Daudpur village, Sandeshkhali II (W. Bengal, India) Rangabelia village, Gosaba (W. Bengal, India)

Farmers are conducting well-managed varietal evaluation

13 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

Section 3: Outcomes
3.1. Working towards developmental goals
Not a lot to report at this stage. Our biggest progress to date is in the completion of evaluation of aman varieties in farmers’ fields on all 3 study polders, and seed increase of the most promising varieties for dissemination to farmers in 2012 (see Annex 3).

3.2. Your project’s theory of change
No change

3.3. Challenges when working towards developmental goals
The main barriers are: 1. the fact that it takes considerable time for full project startup (LoAs, fund transfers, recruitment of staff & students, development of good work plans) but we had to start formally on 1 April 2011 because of CPWF constraints – what CPWF can do is give a no cost extension to increase our potential to achieve our goals 2. finding suitable field sites – our work is about demonstrating the benefits of improved water management, but it is very difficult to do this in an environment where water is very poorly managed at the local regional level; we need to invest heavily in earthworks and pumps to protect our sites, but even then we face problems and have to decide whether to walk away from our investment and find another site – nothing CPWF can do to assist here, except to understand why we cannot always achieve what we set out to achieve 3. the need for lots of farmers to change at the same time for successful adoption of technology, for example 3.1 growing shorter duration rice varieties is a key to cropping system intensification; however, if isolated farmers do this, their earlier maturing crops will be destroyed by rats – large areas need to be planted to earlier maturing varieties to minimize the rat damage on individual crops 3.2 it is impossible for an individual farmer to adopt improved water management without improved management at the local community/water shed scale CPWF is assisting as to address this through the Innovation Grant in which we will implement improved water management and crop varieties and management (Aman, Rabi) in a small watershed (50 farmers in total)

14 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

Section 4: Financial Management
Please note that the summary report below requires sign off by the Lead Institution’s chief financial officer. Financial reporting requirements are described in detail in Standard Clause 8.06. This summary report is required in addition to a six-monthly statement of project receipts and expenditures.

4.1.

Summary financial report

Please fill in the table below to report on your project cash flow to date and adjust the timeline according to your project dates, e.g. delete 2010 if your project started.
Time
3

2010

2011

2011

2012

2012

2013

2013

Completion Report and Final Audit for project closure

(thousands of $US) 1 Value of tranche payment received this report period Value of tranche payments received to date Value of expenditures for report period Cumulative value of expenditures to date Balance held against cumulative tranche payments Value of committed funds

Progress Report US$

Progress Report 1 US$

Progress Report 2 US$

Progress Report1 US$

Progress Report 2 US$

Progress Report 1 US$

Progress Report 2 US$

US$

2 3 4 5

6

Instructions to fill the table by row: ● Insert the value of funds CPWF provided against your charge code/ project code during the period of your report. ● Insert the value of funds received to date by summing all amounts in line 1. ● Insert the value of all funds that have been transferred out of your charge code/project code during the report period. Your financial management system, or accountant, should be able to provide you with this figure. (See separate note on commitments) ● Insert the value of funds spent to date by adding this reporting period to the previous accumulative total. ● Insert the value of unspent funds that you are holding in your charge code/project code ● Of the balance you are holding in your charge code/project code, state what how much has been committed and provide an explanation below. This is also important, because we may hold back funds from your next tranche payment if it looks as though you are holding substantial unallocated funds.

I certify that the summary financial report is correct

Chief financial officer: Date:

3

Adjust the dates to fit with our contract period

15 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT Project leader’s commentary on the summary financial report
Expected date of expenditure

4.2.

Please explain any significant commitments currently being held: Commitment is held against payment to which partners or Amount, providers? USD

If you are over-spent / under-spent please explain why or any aspect of the financial progress of your project that has or will affect progress:

If you had moved budgets across line items please explain why:

Any other comments about financial aspects of your project, and any advice you would like to receive:

16 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

Section 5: Implications for future action
5.1. Response to previous change requests
Describe and provide evidence of what you did to address the issues Responded by email on 19 Dec 2011 as follows:
Yes, it would be nice to have BARI as a formal partner. However, as I have explained previously  we do not have the resources to include an additional partner, even BARI  we are seeking the advice and germplasm of BARI in relation to Rabi crops Yes, the local BARI personnel will be invited to relevant field days and training workshops along with others – most unlikely that there will be any by Feb 2012. For your further information, Liz visited BARI at Satkhira in February 2011, and several of us visited BARI at Barisal in May. BARI Barisal was unable or not interested in collaboration in the cropping system research, and we were not optimistic that it would be possible to do good work at BARI Satkhira. We are not undertaking any onstation cropping system research at Satkhira – we found the BRRI station most unsuitable (uncontrolled flooding) – we plan to transfer this work to a suitable farmer’s field on polder 30. Also for your further information, another (IFAD) project led by Liz is collaborating with BARI, with dry seeded rice and cropping system experiments at BARI RARS Jessore.

What were the requests made in the MT evaluation of your Project Inception Report? 1. Respond to BL’s request to establish collaboration with BARI

One of our partners, BRAC, has a lot of experience in growing rabi crops in the coastal zone, and a significant program in promoting them 2. Clarify role of BSMRAU WFC is hiring Dr Jahangir Alam as a consultant (expertise in brackish water aquaculture and riceaquaculture systems). Jahangir recently left BFRI to take a position at BSMRAU. There is no role of BSMRAU as such 3. Update project workbook (contact sheet) Done (attached) to include some project team members 4. Prepare financial report and invoice for Done nd the 2 payment – financial report was included in official submitted version from IRRI - Invoice was sent on ?? 5. Submit other documents that were not included in the inception report: CVs of CV of Saha was submitted 31 Jan 2012 All LoAs are now finalized and have been submitted

17 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT
other team members, signed LOA 6. Submit third-party IP audit IP audit was re-submitted to Bing

5.2.

Emerging opportunities and risks
Implications for future action We are in the process of establishing this activity Output/OP G2.2 &2.5

Emerging opportunities 1. The CPWF call for proposals for the innovation grant was an emerging opportunity for conducting improved community water management in a small watershed 2. Recently identified the opportunity for CSSRI and CIBA to collaborate in the rice+aquaculture work being led by CIBA (CSSRI to assist in the identification of suitable improved rice varieties and to provide seed and management advice) Emerging risks 1. Loss of funding

Rice variety trials with 2-3 of the G2.2 best bets will be included in the kharif rice+aquaculture work of CSISA Implications for future action Awaiting further advice from CPWF Output/OP All

5.3.

Assistance needed

Please list assistance the project might require, e.g., help with cross-basin learning, methodological assistance, capacity building needs, assistance with M&E, communications, and generally issues that are affecting the project deliver its outputs and outcomes. Assistance needed with By whom (e.g. TWGs and/or the CPWF Research Team, Coordination Project and/ or CPWF KM team) Why is it important?

None identified

5.4.

Feedback for improving this reporting format

Please tell us what you liked and what you think needs to be changed or improved in this reporting format. It’s difficult to give positive feedback because preparing reports is always a time-consuming chore trying to meet the demands of the “donor” or “program”, regardless of what is requested of projects; however, no major complaints on this one – just a few small things listed below:  It is not clear what you really want from us in term of research activities in section 1.1. For me (Liz, the PL) this was a good thing, I could prepare what I wanted/needed to prepare in order to synthesise the progress of G2 in a way that was useful to me, and hopefully to the G2 team, and to the overall GBDC. To me this is the most important part of the report, but is greatly under-played in the overall report format. So my initial reaction when I saw the report template was quite negative – it seemed to me that CPWF’s emphasis was on all the “peripheral” stuff. Perhaps a statement in the footnotes to section 1.1 stating the importance of this section (and that you don’t just want a list of activities – you also want to know what we learnt, where we are going with it……).

18 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT
 I did not bother to attempt to specifically state “why these [activities] were relevant to your work and achieving your objectives” in section 1.1. If it’s not self-evident from the “activities” report, I give up. The template needs some minor editing – it had the wrong font in many of the tables – a small thing, but doing project reports is always stressful until the job is almost done, so removing little annoyances like this (and my concerns above) would be helpful. There seems to be a problem with printing – the problem starts at page 14 – I haven’t tried to solve it I hope that there will be no more major changes to the template – it works, just needs tiny tweaking.

 

5.5.

Additional comments

Please provide any additional comments not covered so far but that you wish to communicate to the Basin Leader and CPWF Management Team Positive There is good will across the various Gs and some small but good collaboration. We are very pleased that members of all the Gs have participated in our field trips at various times - this provides excellent opportunity for interdisciplinary discussion and understanding of development problems and opportunities. Negative We are very concerned and disappointed at the lack of progress in establishment of a Ganges BDC steering/advisory committee – this should have been up and running in time for a joint meeting with the PLs immediately following the Inception Workshop. This issue has been raised and ignored many times. A well-chosen steering/advisory committee with genuine opportunity to understand what we are trying to achieve and finding, and with opportunity to provide considered feedback and suggestions, is an extremely important strategy for both improving the relevance of our research and for influencing policy

19 | Page

PPR

Annual PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT

Annexes
Annex 1: Updated Project Workbook
Please submit your Project Workbook with updated outcomes logic model, indicator and milestone plan, Gantt chart and budget inserted as new pages with the date of the reporting period in the tab title. The justification for changes should be in the body of this report. Outcomes logic model – no change, therefore it has not been updated Milestone plan, Gantt chart and budget – there is no point in updating the these things until the funding situation for CPWF is “finalized” (at least for 2012). We are almost running to plan in relation to milestones and activities (just some small delays in some things). We do not have the latest budget figures from IRRI finance yet.

Annex 2: Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
Please send any updates to your project’s 3rd Party Intellectual Property Audit using this template https://sites.google.com/a/cpwf.info/handbook/files1/CPWF_Annex5_ThirdPartyIPAuditForm.doc?attredirects=0. If there are no updates, please state this in this section. No updates

Annex 3: Detailed G2 activity report

20 | Page

PPR

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->