Agro Dealer Private-Sector-Training-Needs-Assessment

USAID Agricultural Extension Support Activity
Training Need Assessment Report

Private Agricultural Extension Agents
2016
Prepared by:
Participatory Management Initiative for Development (PMID)
Page 1 of 85
Training Need Assessment Report

Private Agricultural Extension Agents
2016
Published by:
Published in:
December 2016
Prepared by:

PMID 1/11 Iqbal Road (2nd Building, Ground Floor),
Participatory Block A, Mohammadpur, Dhaka 1207.
Management Tel: 880 2 9132562, 88-02-9132318, 01711 731216
Initiative for Email: info@pmidbd.com, pmidbd@yahoo.com
Development Website: www.pmidbd.com
USAID Disclaimer: The report is made possible through support provided by the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID). The contents and opinions expressed herein are those of the author (s) and do
not necessarily reflect of the views of the US Agency for International Development or the United States
Government.
Page 2 of 85
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................................................. 7
ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................................... 8
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................................................. 10
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 11
CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 13
1.1 Background and Introduction ......................................................................................13
1.2 Objectives of the Assessment .....................................................................................13
1.3 Rationale of the Assessment ......................................................................................13
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY OF THE ASSESSMENT ................................................................................... 15
2.1 Assessment tool development .........................................................................................15
2.2 Sampling .........................................................................................................................15
2.3 SSI Conduction................................................................................................................15
2.4. Data analysis and reporting ............................................................................................16
CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................. 17
3.1. INPUT RETAILER ..........................................................................................................17
3.1.1. Service Providers vs. Service Receivers..................................................................................... 17
3.1.2. Services and Practice ................................................................................................................ 17
3.1.3. Basic Knowledge of Input Retailers........................................................................................... 18
3.1.4. Networking and Linkages .......................................................................................................... 20
3.1.5. Capacity building support ......................................................................................................... 20
3.1.6. Service Satisfaction Level .......................................................................................................... 20
3.1.8. Needs for further capacity building supports ........................................................................... 21
3.2. TILLEAGE SERVICE PROVIDERS ................................................................................22
3.2.3. Basic Knowledge of TiSP............................................................................................................ 23
3.2.5. Capacity Building Support ......................................................................................................... 24
3.2.6. Service satisfaction level ........................................................................................................... 24
3.2.7. Constrains to provide power tiller services .............................................................................. 24
3.3. IRRIGATION SERVICE PROVIDERS ............................................................................26
Page 3 of 85
3.3.3. Basic Knowledge of Irrigation Service Providers....................................................................... 26
3.3.6. Constraints to provide irrigation services ................................................................................. 27
3.4. NURSERER ...................................................................................................................29
3.4.3. Basic Technical KnowledgeLevel of Nurserer ........................................................................... 30
3.4.7. Constrains to provide services .................................................................................................. 31
3.5. PATILWALA ...................................................................................................................33
3.5.3. Technical knowledge level of Patilwala .................................................................................... 34
3.5.7. Constrains to Provide Patilwala Services .................................................................................. 35
3.5.8. Needs for Further Capacity building Supports .......................................................................... 35
3.6. LIVESTOCK HEALTH WORKER....................................................................................36
3.6.2. Service and Practice .................................................................................................................. 37
3.6.3. Basic knowledge of LHW ........................................................................................................... 37
3.6.7. Constrains to Provide Livestock Services .................................................................................. 39
3.7. Artificial Insemination Service Providers .........................................................................40
Page 4 of 85
3.7.1. Service Providers vs. Service Receivers:.................................................................................... 40
3.7.5. AISP received Trainings ............................................................................................................. 42
3.7.6. Constraints to Provide AI Services ............................................................................................ 42
3.8. SPRAY SERVICE PROVIDER .......................................................................................43
3.8.3. Basic Knowledge of Sprayers .................................................................................................... 44
3.8.6. Needs for Further Capacity Building Supports.......................................................................... 45
CHAPTER 4: TRAINING NEEDS ..................................................................................................................... 47
4.1. Input Retailers training needs .........................................................................................47
4.2. Tillage Service Providers (TiSP) training needs ..............................................................48
4.3. Irrigation service providers training needs.......................................................................48
4.4. Nurserer training needs ..................................................................................................49
4.5. Patilwala service providers training needs ......................................................................50
4.6. Livestock Health Workers (LHWs) training needs ...........................................................50
4.7. Artificial insemination service providers training needs ...................................................51
4.8. Spray service providers’ training needs ..........................................................................51
CHAPTER 5: SUPPORT FOR QUALITY SERVICE PROVISION ......................................................................... 53
5.1. Support to overcome the constraints ..............................................................................53
5.1.1 Support for agriculture sector service providers ....................................................................... 53
5.1.2. Support for fisheries sector service providers .......................................................................... 53
5.1.3. Support for livestock sector service providers.......................................................................... 53
5.1.4. Support for input retail service providers ................................................................................. 54
5.2. Support for better service provision ................................................................................54
5.2.1. Support for farmers’better service provision ........................................................................... 54
5.2.2. Support for women farmers better service provision .............................................................. 54
CHAPTER 6: RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION............................................................................... 55
6.1. Recommendations..........................................................................................................55
Page 5 of 85
6.2. Conclusion:.....................................................................................................................55
ANNEX 1: CAPACITY BUILDING AREA OF PRIVATE EXTENSION AGENTS .................................................... 56
ANNEX 2: TNA SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE-ENGLISH .................................................................................... 57
Annex-2.1: Need Assessment Questionnaire: INPUT RETAILER..........................................57
Annex-2.2: Need Assessment Questionnaire: Sprayer ..........................................................62
Annex-2.3: Need Assessment Questionnaire: Power Tiller service provider ..........................64
Annex-2.4: Need Assessment Questionnaire: Irrigation service provider ...............................67
Annex-2.5: Need Assessment Questionnaire: Livestock Service Provider .............................69
Annex-2.6: Need Assessment Questionnaire: AI Service Provider ........................................71
Annex-2.7. Need Assessment Questionnaire: Nurserer .........................................................74
Annex-2.8: Needs Assessment Questionnaire: Patilwala ......................................................77
ANNEX 3: AT A GLANCE KNOWLEDGE LEVEL OF PRIVATE EXTENSION AGENTS......................................... 80
Page 6 of 85
LIST OF TABLES
Table-1: Status of Sampling by LSPs 16
Table–2: Status of Knowledge of IRSPs for giving advisory suggestions in different 19
technical aspects.
Table-3: At a glance knowledge level of Retailers 19
Table-4: Status of capacity building training of IRSPs. 21
Table –5: Status of constrains faced by IRSP 22
Table –6: Summary of suggestions of TiSP by crops. 24
Table –7: Status of constrains faced by TISP 26
Table-8: Status of knowledge of ISPs for Advisory Suggestions. 28
Table-9: Status of capacity building training of ISP. 28
Table-10: Status of constraints faced by ISP 29
Table -11: Status of Basic Technical Knowledge Level of Nurserer 31
Table-12: Status of capacity building training of Nurserer 32
Table-13: Status of constrains that have faced by Nurserer during providing the 33
services.
Table-14: Status of services and practice of Patilwala. 35

Table-15: Status of Basic Knowledge Level of Patilwala. 35
Table-16: Status of capacity building training of Patilwala. 37
Table-17: Status of constrains faced by Patilwala during providing the services. 37
Table-18: Status of suggestions of LHWs provided to the farmers. 39
Table-19: Status of constraints faced by LHWs 41
Table-20: Status of relevant suggestions provided by the AISP to the farmers. 43
Table-21: Status of constrains that have faced by AISP during providing the services. 44
Table-22: Basic knowledge level of Sprayers. 46
Table-23: Status of capacity building training of Sprayers. 47
Page 7 of 85
ACRONYMS
ABT : Agribusiness Team
AESA : Agricultural Extension Support Activity
Ag Extension Project : USAID Agricultural Extension Support Activity
AI : Artificial Insemination
AICC : Agricultural Information and Communication Center
AISP : Artificial Insemination Service Provider
AP : Actual Performance
CODEC : Community Development Centre
DAE : Department of Agricultural Extension
DAM : Dhaka Ahsania Mission
DLS : Department of Livestock Services
DO : Dissolved Oxygen
DoF : Department of Fisheries
FPG : Farmers’ Producers Group
ICT : Information Communication Technology
IEC : Information, Education and Communication
IR : Input Retailer
ISP : Irrigation Service Providers
KSA : Knowledge, Skills and Attitude
LHW : Livestock Health Worker
LSP : Local Service Provider
MS : Microsoft
NSP : Nursery Service Provider
Page 8 of 85
PG : Performance Gap
PL : Post Larvae
PMID :
POPI : People’s Oriented Program Implementation
RF : Restraining Force
RP : Required Performance
SAAO : Sub Assistant Agriculture Officer
SSI : Semi-Structured Interview
SSP : Spray Service Provider
TiSP : Tillage Service Provider

TNA : Training Needs Assessment
UP : Union Parishad
USAID : United States Agency for International Development
VFA : Veterinary Field Assistant
Page 9 of 85
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It was a praiseworthy and pragmatic initiative taken by Dhaka Ahsania Mission, CARE Bangladesh and
mPower for the training needs assessments aiming for capacity building of private local agricultural
extension agents, enabling them for harvesting food, nutrition and increasing their income. In fact,
without the support of project team, it would have been difficult for PMID to conduct this training needs
assessment through identifying and building individual capacity needs.
Our heartfelt thanks to the people involved in respondents’ selection and data collection from the field
and private extension agents who participated in the interviews and provided practical information for
completion of data collection for the training needs assessments. We extend thanks to the experts of
Dhaka Ahsania Mission, CARE Bangladesh and mPower for providing their valuable feedback in finalizing
this Training Need Assessment report. We are specially thankful to Bidyuth K. Mahalder, Chief of Party;
Md. Anowarul Haq, Director, ERPP, CARE Bangladesh; Tania Sharmin, National Technical Coordinator;
Md. Azizullah Al Mahmud, Agri Business Marketing Specialist; Biswajit Mondal, Technical Manager; Md.
Hassanuzzaman, Technical Manager; Md. Misbahuzzaman, Technical Manager; Md. Sadique Hasan,
Technical Manager; Istiaque Jahan Shoef, M&E Data Specialist; Ahmad Sadequl Amin, Coordinator-
Agriculture and Value Chain and Saif M M Islam, Private Sector Engagement Coordinator, CARE
Bangladesh for their active support and cooperation in completing the assignment. We also take this
opportunity to express our gratitude to Abu Jafar Ansary, consultant for his valuable contribution in
completing the report.
It would be highly appreciable if the study findings and recommendations are duly considered and
applied for improving the exiting situation and achieving the project objectives.
Rafiqul Islam Khan

Managing Partner
Page 10 of 85
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The USAID Agricultural Extension Support Activity (AESA) project is being implemented since October 2012
in 26 upazilas of 12 districts in the central and south-west of Bangladesh by consortium of Dhaka Ahsania
Mission (DAM), CARE Bangladesh and mPower. The primary objective of the project is to increase
farmers’ access to improved extension services leading increased household incomes, nutritional status
and food security for 110,000 participating farmers who were mobilized into 3,854 Farmers’ Producer
Groups (FPG) under 6 value chains including Jute, Chili, Mungbean, Dairy, Beef Fattening and Fish.
The farmers have limited access to quality agricultural inputs and services, also public extension services are
not sufficient to meet the needs of the farmers. The project has found that alongside of public service, the
private extension service providers are playing a vital role to serve the farmers day-to-day solutions.
Considering these facts, the project hired a consultant for identifying needs, capacity building areas and
strategies, through conducting TNA for private extension agents e.g. input retailer, and LSPs-LHW, AI, Spray,
Tillage, Irrigation, AICC, Patilwala, Nurserer.
The SSIs have been conducted by the enumerators for data collection from private extension agents covering
10 upazila from 9 districts. Through random sampling a total number of 416 private extension agents have
been interviewed and data were collected from them which have been analyzed and finalized with the
assessments of training needs.
Input Retailers (97.70 percent) needs training on cultivation method of jute and chili, 95.98 percent
needs training on livestock rearing and finally, 95.40 percent needs training on cultivation method on
mungbean and on fish/shrimp/prawn farming.
In spite of not having required knowledge, sprayers provided relevant advisory services to the farmers.
Findings revealed that all the interviewed sprayers need training on “identification of disease and right
pesticides/insecticides” and “environmental impact of the spray”. Also, 23 respondents had knowledge
gap and required to receive training on “harvesting technology” followed by 21 on “germination
techniques”, 09 on “seeds ratio”, 09 on “pesticide application:, 06 on “disease and pest diagnosis” and
02 on “fertilizers dose”.
The Tillage Service Providers (TiSP) provided advisory suggestions to the farmers while, due to lack of
knowledge, 76.06 percent TiSPs needed training on “fertilizers dose”, followed by 70.42 percent on
“seeds rate”, 39.44 percent on “germination technique”, and 38.03 percent on “disease and pest
diagnosis”, 32.39 percent on pesticide application and 12.68 percent on “harvesting technology”. Also,
94.37 percent (67 out of 71) TiSPs needed training on the cultivation method of mungbean followed by
chili 91.55 percent and jute 87.32 percent.
The Irrigation Service Providers-ISPs (82 percent) required training on “harvesting technology”, followed
by 63 percent on “germination techniques”, 40 percent on “seeds ratio”, and 32 percent on “disease
and pest diagnosis”, 21 percent on both “pesticide application” and on “irrigation frequency at different
stages of crops”. In order to provide advisory suggestions, training on cultivation method of jute, chili
and mungbean is very much needed because 98.25 percent (56 out of 57) ISPs didn’t know about the
cultivation method of chili followed by mungbean 92.98 percent and jute 91.23 percent.
Page 11 of 85
Nurserers (94.12 percent) required training on “appropriate feed requirement” and “major disease and
management”. For oxygen deficiency measurement, 88.24 percent Nurserers needs training followed by
82.35 percent on “fertilizers and lime dose”, “nursery management”, “quality of fingerlings” and
“management of toxic gas”, 70.59 percent on “feed preparation”, 64.71 percent on “stocking density”.
All the (100 percent) Patilwala required training on “oxygen deficiency measurement and management”
followed by 90 percent required training on “disease and remedies”, “fingerling stocking rate and
species combination”, “fingerling treatment”. For “toxic gas management”, “appropriate feed
requirement and feed preparation” and “quality fingerlings identifications” 80 percent needs training
followed by 50 percent on “fingerlings transportation”, and on “fertilizer & lime dose for pond
preparation”.
Livestock Health Workers-LHWs (100 percent) needs training on “artificial insemination” followed by
86.67 percent on “feed management”, 82.22 percent on “vaccination”, 71.11 percent on “breed
selection”, 57.78 percent on “de-worming ”, 46.67 percent on “rules and regulation in using animal
drugs”, 40.00 percent on “primary treatment and disease management”, 20.00 percent on “livestock
rearing”, and 2.22 percent on “medicine.
.
Artificial Insemination Service Providers-AISPs (72.73 percent) needs training for “vaccination”, “primary
treatment and disease management”, and also “feed management”, 63.64 percent on “breed
selection”, 54.55 percent on “medicine”, 27.27 percent on “livestock rearing”, 18.18 percent on
“artificial insemination”, and 9.09 percent on de-worming.
In order to ensure quality service provision and overcome the service provision constraints, the
agriculture service providers require support as strengthening their linkages with the relevant nearby
wholesalers and retailers to get the quality machine, tools and equipment, fuel and lubricants suppliers.
Also, organize training on repair and maintenance of their machines by the dealers, company or
workshops and assist them for storage of fuel and lubricants to use during the peak season. For fish
fingerlings, the service providers can establish purchasing relationships with the established fish
hatcheries, available government fish hatcheries. Also, they can place advance orders to the hatcheries
after collecting the quantity from the farmers to ensure the quality of fingerlings. Also, considering the
collective and bulk transportation, the quality transportation can be cost effective.
The livestock service providers can strengthen working relationship with the local level government
livestock service agents and they will get more technical updated information and support services for
quality seeds and equipment for artificial insemination and disease treatment. The strong demand and
supply relation can be facilitated as per farmers’ requirements, so that the Retailers will take advance
initiative to collect technology, information and quality inputs for the farmers. Also, they can be trained
on latest technology to provide solutions at farmers door step. With regards to critical cases they can
facilitate for referrals to the desired service agents.
The capacity building strategy considered to organize ToT to the lead private extension agents followed
by cascade training. The lead agents also implement demonstration and extension of learned activity
out of the training. Also, strengthening the networking and linkages can facilitate the sustainable
capacity building process where the information technology and intensive monitoring and follow-up
supplement the whole process.
Page 12 of 85
Chapter 1: Background and Introduction
1.1 Background and Introduction

The USAID Agricultural Extension Support Activity (AESA) has been implementing since October 2012 with
the primary objective of increasing farmers’ access to improved agricultural extension services leading in
increased household income, nutritional status and food security for 110,000 participating farmers.
These farmers are mobilized into 3,854 Farmers’ Producer Groups (FPG) under 6 value chains including
Jute, Chili, Mungbean, Dairy, Beef Fattening and Fish. The Ag Extension Project is being implemented by
a consortium of Dhaka Ahsania Mission (DAM), CARE Bangladesh and mPower. The Dhaka Ahsania
Mission has been implementing the project with the technical assistance of CARE Bangladesh and
mPower. The project facilitates linkages of farmers to markets for inputs and sale of value-chain
products through enhancing better access and opportunities.
This project has been implementing in 231 union of 26 upazilas under 12 districts in the central and south-
west of Bangladesh. In general, the farmers in the southern belt are very much vulnerable in terms of climate
change effect and different natural calamities. The farmers have limited access to quality agricultural inputs
and services in a timely manner especially in some remote and hard to reach areas. Even, in some cases,
public extension services are not sufficient to respond the needs of the farmers though the government
departments still have some limitations. The project has found that alongside with the public service, the
private extension service providers are playing a vital role to serve the farmers for their day-to-day solutions
in terms of agricultural inputs, technical information and services.
Considering these facts, the project intends to hire a consultant for identifying needs and capacity building
areas and strategies to intervene through conducting TNA for 9-types of private extension agents-Input
retailer, Livestock health worker AI worker, Spray service provider, Tillage service provider, Irrigation service
provider, AICC agent, Patilwala(mobile fingerling provider) andFish nursery owner.
1.2 Objectives of the Assessment

 To assess the correctness or accuracy of the information and services delivered by the private
service providers around 5-key improved practices of 6 value chains that have been promoting
by the USAID Agricultural Extension Support Activity;
 To assess the challenges and constraints faced by private extension service providers in
providing services; and
 To identify specific capacity building area of private service providers’ in order to better support
to farmers’ on the production technology of Jute, Chili, Mungbean, Beef, Dairy and Fish value
chain.
1.3 Rationale of the Assessment

The farmers of the project areas living in the hard to reach areas where the provision of extension
services were observed very fragile and thus there is a need to assess the capacity of locally available
private extension service providers as the government services are not always capable to meet the
growing needs. Huge demand of technical services for various level farmers but due to less number
manpower under government departments like as Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE) has
block-wise SAAOs which is iadequate to meet the farmer’s needs. Similarly, Department of Fisheries
(DoF) has limitedield staff and Department of Livestock Services (DLS) has also limited manpower and it
Page 13 of 85
was observed that existing manpower isnot enough to provide desired support services to the farmers.
As a result, farmers are asking technical information to different private extension service providers
during procuring services from them.
In the light of thisnecessity, project has taken this initiative to identify the needs of private extension
service providers for their capacity development. Also, to strengthen the locally available private
extension service provisionis necessary to serve the day-to-day farmers demandsin terms ofnputs,
advisory services, etc. Under this consideration, this assessment will identify the capacity development
needs and define capacity development strategy to support and accelerate the quality private service
provision with the initiative from the project. At the end, capacity building of these private extension
agents will contribute to the increased farmers’ productivity.
Page 14 of 85
Chapter 2: Methodology of the Assessment
2.1 Assessment tool development
The training need assessment was quantitative in nature, as such semi-structured Interview (SSI)
questionnaire was developed by the CARE Agribusiness Team. The questionnaireused for the
assessmentfor each type of service providers were given to respondents who had provided consent to
participate in the assessment as per sampling. The questionnaires were adopted based on findings from
the field test. All the outsourced enumerators were oriented on questionnaires before data collection.
The questionnaires are attached in Annex 1 with this report.
2.2 Sampling
The Ag Extension Project is being implemented in 26 upazilas of 12 districts in the central and south-west
of Bangladesh. Considering geographical context (hard to reach, climate vulnerability, less number of service
providers andvalue chain coverage), 10 Upazila1 have been identified from 9 districts2 for data collection.
To identify the types of private extension agents’, a landscape analysis/mapping has been conducted by
the project. Through this analysis/mapping a total of 9 type of private extension service agents were
identified within the 6 value chains. The project conducted a census to identify the number all these 9
types of private extension agents and total of more than 5000candiadates wereidentified in the entire
working areas Based on the project strategy, , a total number of 1138 private extension agents’ have
been short listedcovering the project working area. This TNA was conducted for short listed 1138 private
extension agents’ as per below (Table-1) sample size for each LSP. Finally, 416 private extension agents
have been identified by random sampling for data collection. Among them, 174 IRSPs, 31 SSPs, 57 ISPs,
71 TiSPs, 45 LHW, 11 AISPs, 17 NSPs, and 10 Patilwala have been selected to conduct the interviews and
data collection.
Table 1: Status of Sampling by LSPs
Private Extension Service Provider Total

Retailer Sprayer LSP- LSP- LSP- LSP-AI Nursery Patil- AICC
s (SSPs) Tillage (AISPs) owner
(IRSPs) Irrigation Livestock wala
(TiSPs) (NSPs)
(ISPs) (LHW)
Total 524 100 168 167 85 26 38 28 2 1138
number
Sample 174 31 57 71 45 11 17 10 0 416
size #
Sample 33.20 31.00 34.00 42.50 53.00 42.30 44.70 35.70 0 36.5
size %
2.3 SSI Conduction

The SSIs have been conducted among the selected 416 extension agents. Mostly, the interviews have
been conducted at their door step to put forward a visual observation of their activities related to the
1
Goalonado (Rajbari), Kaligonj (Satkhira), Chougacha (Jessore), Kalia (Narail), Amtoli (Barguna), Barisal
sadar (Barisal), Charfashion (Faridpur), Faridpur sadar (Faridpur), Hizla (Barisal) and Dacop (Khulna)
2
Barisal, Satkhira, Khulna, Narail, Rajbari, Faridpur, Bhola, Barguna and Jessore
Page 15 of 85
tools and equipments which they have claimed to get support for further improvements. As per plan
and selected samples, the SSIs conducted with 100 percent of the sampled population.
2.4. Data analysis and reporting

The TNA findings have been analyzed by using MS Excel and this report was prepared.
Page 16 of 85
Chapter 3: Findings of the Assessment
The training needs of capacity building assessment wereconducted among the locally available private
extension service providers covering the areas of agriculture support services, fisheries and livestock.
Extension service provider-wise findings of the assessment have been presentedin this chapter. The
findings mainly focused on the existing available services which are provided by the extension service
providers, the quality of their services, further capacity development needs and their suggestions with
regards to further improvement.
3.1. INPUT RETAILER

3.1.1. Service Providers vs. Service Receivers
Total 174 (all male) Input Retailers were interviewed
Particulars Numbers
in Barguna, Satkhira, Rajbari, Khulna, Barisal, Total Retailer (all male) 174
Faridpur, Jessore, Bhola and Narail districts. The Total no. of farmers 90,510
respondents provided inputs services to 90,510 received Service
farmers. Average 520 farmers seek service from each Average Farmers/Retailer 520
Retailer, while one Retailer provided inputs to Highest Farmers/ Retailer 4,000
maximum 4,000 farmers and minimum 520 farmers Lowest farmers/ Retailer 30
(please see inbox). Among the farmers, 7.69 percent Average Female farmers/ 7.69
were women farmers who received inputs services. It Retailer
has been also identified that no women
farmers/customers were under 10% Retailers.
3.1.2. Services and Practice

Sector Area of advisory suggestions # of IR %
Crops Fertilizer dose 153 87.93
Seed rate 118 67.82
Germination techniques 74 42.53
Disease/pest diagnosis 140 80.46
Pesticide application 159 91.38
Harvesting technology 43 24.71
Average 115 66
Fish/ shrimp farming Fertilizer & lime dose 66 37.93
Feed amount 52 29.89
Fingerling/PL stocking density 52 29.89
Feeding preparation 33 18.97
Disease diagnosis and remedies 63 36.21
Average 53 31
Livestock Feeding methods (quantity & proportion) 35 20.11
De-worming 23 13.22
Disease diagnosis and remedies 20 11.49
Vaccination 15 8.62
Average 23 13
Page 17 of 85
It has been discussed and data revealed that alongside of inputs selling, the Retailers have provided
relevant advisory services on crop production technology, fish/shrimp farming and livestock rearing.
Average, 56 percent farmers received the advisory support services from 98.28 percent (171 Retailers
out of total 174) Retailers. Out of which 7.69 percent women farmers observed received advisory
services from the Retailer during procuring the inputs for their crop fields, fish culture and livestock
rearing. Among the Retailers, on an average 66 percent provided advisory suggestions on crop
cultivation and provided advisory suggestion on fish culture and livestock on an average 31 percent and
13 percent respectively (please see inbox). Key reason for advisory services is that 100 percent Retailer
believed that these advisory services added benefit to their business.
3.1.3. Basic Knowledge of Input Retailers

In order to assess the knowledge level of Input Retailer in regards to provide the advisory support
services, 6 technical aspects of cultivation of jute, chili, mung bean and fish/shrimp farming; and 5
technical aspects of livestock have been discussed with the respondents. Six technical aspects under
crops (jute, chili and mung bean) are seed rate, seed germination testing method, irrigation time,
fertilizer doses, major insects and diseases; six technical aspects under fish/shrimp culture are fertilizers
and lime doses, stocking density, feed requirement, toxic gas management, water quality/oxygen
deficiency and diseases management; five technical aspects under livestock were breed selection, de-
worming, feed management, vaccination and disease management.
Data revealed that most of the Retailers didn’t have significant knowledge to provide accurate advisory
suggestions to the clients/farmers. About 51 percent of them were not able to provide any sorts of
advisory suggestions as requested by the farmers like jute, followed by 62%, 64%, 65% and 80% not able
to provide any sorts advisory suggestions as requested by the farmers respectively for chili, mung bean,
fish/shrimp culture and livestock. Similarly, 25%, 28%, 20%, 23% and 3% provided wrong suggestions
respectively in the sectors of jute, chili, mung bean, fish/shrimp farming and livestock to the farmers.
Only 2%, 2%, 4%, 5% and 4% able to provide correct suggestion respectively in the sectors of jute, chili,
mung bean, fish/shrimp farming and livestock. The assessments data revealed that 22%, 8%,12%, 18%
and 12% given partially correct suggestions in the sectors respectively jute, chili, mung bean, fish/shrimp
farming and livestock (Table-2).
Table –2: Status of Knowledge of IRSPs for giving advisory suggestions in different technical aspects.
Sector No Suggestion Correct Partially correct Not Correct
Jute 89(51%) 4(2%) 38(22%) 43(25%)
Chili 108(62%) 4(2%) 13(8%) 50(28%)
Mungbean 111(64%) 8(4%) 20(12%) 35(20%)
Fish/shrimp farming 113(65%) 8(5%) 31(18%) 23(13%)
Livestock 140(80%) 7(4%) 22(12%) 6(3%)
Page 18 of 85
Technical aspects specific knowledge level of Retailers are shown in Table 3.
Table-3: At a glance knowledge level of Input Retailers

Crop/ Farmers’ asking NO Correct Partially Not correct
sector
Jute Seed rate (kg/acre) Suggestion
89(51.15%) 6(3.45%) correct
40(22.99%) 39(22.41%)
(Tosha) Seed germination testing method 85(48.85%) 1(0.57%) 31(17.82%) 57(32.76%)
Irrigation time & method 88(50.77%) 1(0.57%) 43(24.71%) 42(24.14)
Fertilizer name & dose (kg/acre) 85(48.85%) 0 25(14.37%) 64(36.78%)
Major insect & management 84(48.28%) 10(5.75%) 53(30.46%) 27(15.52%)
Major disease & management 104(59.77%) 5(2.87%) 38(21.84%) 27(15.52%)
Overall 89(51%) 4(2%) 38(22%) 43(25%)
Chili Seed rate (kg/acre) 109(62.64%) 10(5.75%) 8(4.60%) 47(27.01%)
Seed germination testing method 126(72.41%) 5(2.87%) 15(8.62%) 28(16.06%)
Fertilizer name & dose (kg/acre) 97(55.75%) 0 9(5.17%) 68(39.08%)
Major disease & management 100(57.47%) 2(1.15%) 14(8.05%) 58(33.33%)
Weeding & irrigation 99(56.90%) 3(1.72%) 24(13.79%) 48(27.59%)
Overall 108(62%) 4(2%) 13(8%) 50(28%)
Mungbean Seed rate (kg/acre) 107(61.49%) 3(1.72%) 13(7.47%) 51(29.31%)
Seed germination testing method 133(76.44%) 3(1.72%) 6(3.45%) 32(18.39%)
Fertilizer name & dose (kg/acre) 114(65.52%) 6(3.45%) 10(5.75%) 44(25.29%)
Major disease & management 106(60.92%) 4(2.30) 23(13.22%) 41(23.56%)
Overall 111(64%) 8(4%) 20(12%) 35(20%)
Fish/ Fertilizer & lime dose (kg/decimal) 107(61.49%) 9(5.17%) 15(8.62%) 43(24.71%)
shrimp Stocking density (number/decimal) 110(63%) 5(3%) 21(12%) 38(22%)
farming Feed requirement (amount/day- 133(76%) 12(7%) 6(3%) 23(13%)
body weight
Toxic gas base) 116(67%) 13(7%) 34(20%) 11(6%)
Oxygen deficiency 105(60%) 5(3%) 53(30%) 11(6%)
Major disease & management 104(60%) 6(3%) 55(32%) 9(5%)
Overall 113(65%) 8(5%) 31(18%) 23(13%)
Livestock Breed selection 148(85%) 2(1%) 19(11%) 5(3%)
De-worming 145(83%) 9(5%) 14(8%) 6(3%)
Feed management 144(83%) 4(2%) 20(11%) 6(3%)
Vaccination 158(91%) 0 12(7%) 4(2%)
Disease management 150(86%) 5(3%) 15(9%) 4(2%)
Overall 140(80%) 7(4%) 22(12%) 6(3%)
Page 19 of 85
3.1.4. Networking and Linkages
Most of the Retailers maintained networking and linkages
Sources of No. of
with their relevant company, government departments, %
information Respondents
dealers and relevant projects. Key objective of the
Company 140 80
networking and linkages is to gather information related
Dealers 40 23
to their advisory services and business. Most of the
respondents (140) received information from company, Govt. dept. 121 70
government dept. (121), dealers (40) and from DAM/Agril Other 80 46
Extension project (80) (please see inbox).
3.1.5. Capacity building support

Input Retailers also received capacity building training for their trade and relevant advisory services from
different sources like government departments and private company. A total number of 11 respondents
didn’t receive any trainings, while, 163 respondents (94 percent) participated in various types of
capacity building training. Among them, 111 respondents received training on production techniques of
jute, chili, and mung bean, 58 respondents on feed management for livestock and fish, 111 respondents
on pest & diseases for field crops or livestock or fish or all; 29 respondents on communication and
business, 18 respondents on gender and 46 respondents on others issues like soil management, mango
production technology, human nutrition, fertilizer management, IPM, vermi compost, etc. (Table-4).
Table-4: Status of capacity building training of IR.

Training No. of Respondents %
Production Techniques: Jute/Chili/Mungbean/ Beef
111 63.79
fattening/Cow rearing/Fish farming
Feed management: Beef fattening/Cow rearing/Fish farming 58 33.33
Pest & Disease management: Field crops/Livestock/Fish 111 63.79
Communication and business 29 16.67
Gender 18 16.67
Others (soil management, mango production technology,
46 26.44
human nutrition, fertilizer management, IPM, vermi compost)
3.1.6. Service Satisfaction Level

Through retail sale of inputs to the farmers Satisfaction level Respondents %
the IR earned income and also supported in Very good (above 80%) 51 29.31
producing the crops, fish and livestock. About Good (60%-79%) 101 58.05
ranking of their satisfaction, 29.31 percent (51 Moderate (30%-59%) 20 11.49
out of 174) expressed that they felt very
Poor (up to 29%) 2 1.15
good, 58.05 percent (101 out of 174)
expressed good, 11.49 percent (20 out of 174) felt moderate and only 1.15 percent (2 IRSPs) felt poor
(please see inbox).
3.1.7. Constrains to provide irrigation services

IR also reported that with regards to ensure quality service provision, they faced various constraints like
getting seeds on time for farmers and less performance of pesticide/fungicide due to quality of products
and less access to new technology as shown in the following table (Table-5)
Page 20 of 85
Table –5: Status of constrains faced by IR
Area Constraints Cause
Quality input  Sometimes not getting seed on time  Imported seed
sourcing
Providing  Unable to provide up-dated  Lack of understanding on new
advisory information technology
services  Traditional practice  Not accepting new technology
 Sometimes farmers getting  Bad quality pesticide/medicine
disappointed due to less effective of  Lack of skill/education to run
pesticide/ medicine new technology/IT
 Less access to new technology/IT
3.1.8. Needs for further capacity building supports

3.1.8.1. Capacity building supports for IR
The Input retailers sell inputs for crops, fish and livestock for which they need to have proper knowledge
on all technical aspects of noted areas. Input retailers should have some concrete knowledge on specific
technical issues of crops, fish and livestock. The study data revealed that the IRs have low knowledge on
production technologies of Jute, Chili and Mungbean with the specific focus areas like seed rate
including germination test, fertilizer dose and pest/disease management. IR have low knowledge on
overall fish and shrimp farming and assessment data revealed that around 60% respondents unable to
provide correct information on fertilizer and lime dose for water quality management, stocking density
and feed management.
According to the survey findings IRs also had poor knowledge on livestock management especially in the
areas of breed selection, vaccination and disease management. On an average 25%, 28%, 20% and 13%
IRs were not able to provide correct answer in the sectors respectively Jute, Chili, Mungbean and
Fish/Shrimp culture. This will indicated a huge knowledge gaps considering their business nature and it
can be create big negative impact of farmer’s production. Therefore, there is a strong need to provide
capacity building support to the IR on the noted aspects to ensure efficient and effective services to the
farmers (Table-2 &3).
Moreover, the assessment data revealed that around 22% IRs are using ICT for proving service to the
farmers. This is a very interesting finding and there is a big area of capacity building of IR on ICT. Around
92% respondents have expressed to use ICT for providing service to the farmers.
IR were found selling chemical fertilizer, pesticide, fungicide plus others chemical for crops, fish and
livestock. From the study, it has been observed that around 19% respondents (33 out of 174) do not
know the rules and regulation of using chemicals thus training on use of such chemicals would be quite
beneficial for them.
3.1.8.2. Access to better services for women farmers

Input Retailers suggested following measures for better services:
 Invitation in training for enhance participation of women
 Good advice on quality seed production
 Arrange vegetable seed for women
 Awareness through courtyard meeting
 Ensure women participation in agriculture through family
Page 21 of 85
 Arrange working capital
 Distribute seed for women to establish home garden
 Provide some extra prevalence for women
 Use of IEC tools for building awareness of women on agriculture/irrigation, etc.
 Involve local leader/UP representatives for increase women participation
 Improve communication with women farmers
 Motivate them to increase women decision making power through income
3.1.8.3. Input Retailers’ uggestions for better services

Respondents suggested that in order to ensure the better services to the farmers they want to organize:
 Advisory services
 More training for farmers
 Ensure good quality machine for better service for farmers
 Share knowledge on good quality suppliers of irrigation and others agriculture inputs
 Advocacy on reduce load-shading to ensure timely electricity
 Establish linkage with GO-NGOs
 Show documentary
 Quality inputs services
 Negotiate with good company and arrange dealership for retailers
 Assist to get source of quality products
 Mobilize to all company for clearly writing doze in the level
 Ensure reasonable price for retailers and farmers will get benefit from them
 Stop distribution of expired products
 Protect illegal marketing from India/smuggling
 Enhance quality supervision/monitoring from govt.
 Improve quality of products
3.2. TILLEAGE SERVICE PROVIDERS

The Tillage Service Providers (TiSP) have
Particulars Numbers
provided services to a total number of
Power Tiller Service Providers 71 (Male-71)
8016 farmers. A total number of 71
Total no. of farmers received Power 8,016
(Male-71) TiSPs have been interviewed in
Tiller Service
Barguna, Rajbari, Barisal, Faridpur,
Jessore, Bhola and Naraildistricts. Average Highest Irrigation/Farmers 400
113 farmers received the service from Lowest Irrigation/farmers 20
each TiSP, while, one TiSP provided Average 113
irrigation to maximum 400 farmers and Women farmers 09%
minimum 20 farmers by one TiSP (please No women farmers under TISP 9.71
see inbox). Among the farmers, 09 percent are women farmers and they have received power tiller
services. Similarly, 9.71 percent TISPdidn’t provide any services to women farmers.
Page 22 of 85
The survey data revealed that 98.59 Advisory suggestions # of TISPs %
percent (70 out of 71) TISP provided Fertilizer dose 62 87.32
advisory services to the farmers. The
Seed rate 44 61.97
farmers (39.28 percent) also sought
advisory services from TISPs. Among the Germination techniques 17 23.94
TISPs, 87.32 percent provided advisory Disease/pest diagnosis 48 67.61
services on fertilizer dose, 61.97 percent Pesticide application 43 60.56
on seeds rate, 23.94 percent on Harvesting technology 21 29.58
germination techniques, 67.61 percent on
disease/pest diagnosis, 60.56 percent on pesticide application and 29.58 percent provided advisory
services on harvesting technology (please see inbox).
3.2.3. Basic Knowledge of TiSP

A total number of 68 TiSPs (95.77 percent) expressed that advisory services help them in their business.
With regard to provide the advisory services, the TiSPs knowledge level is very important. For this,
relevant technical aspects of cultivation of Jute, Chili, and Mungbean have been set and discussed with
the TiSPs during the assessment. The assessment data revealed that majority of the TiSPs didn’t have
substantial knowledge3 to provide advisory suggestions as requested by the farmers and they were not
able to give any answer when the farmers sought suggestions. Due to lack of knowledge, 28 percent
TiSPs didn’t give any suggestions on jute cultivation, 44 percent on chili cultivation and 46 percent on
cultivation of mungbean. Data revealed that only 18 percent were able to give proper suggestions on
jute cultivation, 08 percent on chili cultivation and 06 percent on mungbean cultivation. Similarly, 18
percent provided partial suggestion on jute cultivation, 22 percent on chili and 16 percent on mungbean
cultivation. Most of the TiSPs provided wrong suggestions- 30 percent on jute cultivation, 26 percent on
chili cultivation and 31 percent on mungbean cultivation (table –6).
Table –6: Summary of suggestions of TiSP by crops.

Crop No answer Correct Partially correct Not correct
Jute 40(28%) 9(12%) 13(18%) 21(30%)
Chili 32(44%) 6(8%) 16(22%) 19(26%)
Mungbean 33(46%) 4(6%) 11(16%) 22(31%)

Most of the TiSPs maintained networking and Sources of information TiSPs %
linkages with their relevant agencies for access to Company 15 21.13
necessary information, knowledge and benefits to
Dealer 21 29.58
ensure better service provision. For the information,
the assessments data revealed that 15 TiSPs (21.13 Govt. departments 47 66.20
percent) collect information from company, 21 TiSPs Other sources: NGO, USAID
39 54.93
(29.58 percent) from dealers, 47 TiSPs (66.20 projects, Advanced Farmers
percent) from government departments, and 39 TISPs (54.93 percent) from NGOs, projects, and
advanced farmers (please see inbox).
3
Reference for cross checking of technical information: Climate Field School Module
http://www.dae.gov.bd
Page 23 of 85
3.2.5. Capacity Building Support
Through networking and linkages, the TiSPs Training # of TiSP %
obtained capacity building support. A total Production Techniques: 35 49.30
numbers of 42 (59.15 percent) TiSPs received
Jute/Chili/Mugbean
capacity building training with the support from
Maintenance of tiller 7 9.86
government, private company & NGOs. Among
the training, 49.30 percent (35) TiSPs received Communication and business 3 4.23
training on production techniques of jute, chili Gender 7 9.86
and mung bean. For maintenance of power tiller, 9.86 percent (07) TiSPs received training, for
communication and business, 4.23 percent (03), and 9.86 percent (07) TiSPs received training on gender
(please see inbox).
3.2.6. Service satisfaction level

By providing power tiller services to the Satisfaction level Respondents %
farmers at their crop fields the TiSPs earn their Very good (above 80%) 10 14.08
income and also support in generating the Good (60%-79%) 33 46.48
crops production. Their satisfaction level has Moderate (30%-59%) 27 38.03
been ranked as shown in the box. Among the Poor (up to 29%) 1 1.41
respondents 46.48 percent (33 TiSPs) claimed
that they feel good, 14.08 percent (10 TiSPs) expressed very good, 38.03 percent (27 TiSP) felt
moderate, and 1.41 percent (01 TiSP) expressed poor satisfaction (please see inbox).
3.2.7. Constrains to provide power tiller services

The TiSPs faced various constrains with regard to provide services to the farmers. The major constraints
they faced are: scarcity of quality equipment and lubricants at their local area due to long distance and
they get bad quality products. Due to scarcity of quality fuel and mobil they have added water with the
fuel that caused losing durability of equipment. Also, due to lack of working capital, they remain unable
to keep sufficient reserve to use at time when it requires. They lacked technical skills, knowledge and
access to updated information which has been shown in the table (Table-7) below:
Table –7: Status of constrains faced by TISP

Sourcing quality tillage  Unavailability of quality  Long distance
equipment equipment within local  Bad quality equipment
area
 Facing problem during
peak season
Sourcing quality  Sudden problem  Bad quality oil/mobil
fuel/mobil, etc.  Adding water in oil  Losing durability of equipment
Making available timely  Unable to reserve/stock  Lack of working capital
Providing advisory  Less access to update  Unable to provide information to
services information clients
 Lack of knowledge  Lack of training
Page 24 of 85
3.2.8.1. Capacity building supports for TiSPs
The assessment data revealed that the TiSPs have insufficientknowledge on overall cultivation method
of jute, chili and mung bean (table-3 above). Only, 12 percent (09 out of 71) TiSPs properly knew about
jute cultivation followed by 08 percent on chili cultivation and 04 percent on mung bean cultivation. On
the contrary, majority of them (mung bean 46 percent, chili 44 percent and jute 28 percent) not
providing any suggestions in response to the farmers and majority (mung bean 31 percent, chili 26
percent and jute 30 percent) of them were providing wrong suggestions to the farmers. As such, there is
a constant need to provide capacity building support to the TiSPs on the cultivation of jute, chili and
mung bean to ensure efficient and effective services for the farmers.
3.2.8.2. TiSPs suggestions for better services to farmers

Respondents suggested following initiatives for better services to the farmers:
Advisory services
 More training for farmers
 Ensure good quality equipment for better service for farmers
 Sharing knowledge on good quality suppliers of tillage and others agriculture inputs
 Establish linkage with GO-NGOs
 Video documentary show
 Arrange spares with discount or subsidy from government
Tillage services
 Arrange spares with discount or subsidy from government
 Information about quality supplier/company
 User- friendly Introduction of local equipment considering farmers’ capacity and need
 Arrange credit from government bank
 Ensure good price of farmers production
3.2.8.3. TiSPs suggestions for access to better service for women farmers
Most of the TiSPs reported that they can increase better services for the women farmers. They also
expressed that by taking a number of measures, it is possible to increase better services for women
farmers. Common suggestions expressed by the TiSPs are as follows:
 Advice on women participation is very important for family income
 Awareness through courtyard meeting for women participation in agriculture
 Arrange working capital for women farmers
 Arrange training for women
 Provide some extra prevalence for women
 Use of IEC tools for building awareness of women on agriculture
 Improve communication with women farmers
 Discount for women headed farmers
 Aware women on crop cultivation
Page 25 of 85
3.3. IRRIGATION SERVICE PROVIDERS
A total number of 57 (Male-57) Irrigation
Particulars Numbers
Service Providers (ISP) have been interviewed in
Barguna, Rajbari, Barisal, Faridpur, Jessore, Respondents/Irrigation Service 57
Bhola, and Narail districts. The respondents Providers (Male-57)
provided irrigation services to a total number of Total no. of farmers received 4,377
4,377 farmers. Average 77 farmers seek services Irrigation Service
from each irrigation service provider, while one Highest Irrigation/Farmers 1,000
irrigation service provider provided irrigation to Lowest Irrigation/farmers 07
maximum 1,000 farmers and minimum 7
farmers (please see inbox). Out of the farmers, 07.16 percent are female who received irrigation
services.

Through discussion and collected data, it has Advisory suggestions # of ISPs %
been revealed that the service providers have
Irrigation 57 100%
provided relevant advisory services on
Irrigation frequency at 45 79%
irrigation, irrigation frequency at the different
stages of crops, doses of fertilizers, seeds ratio, different stages of crops
germination techniques, disease/pest diagnosis, Doses of fertilizers 42 74%
pesticide application, harvesting technology. Seed ratio 34 60%
Average, 41 percent farmers received the Germination techniques 21 37%
advisory support services from 98.25 percent Disease/pest diagnosis 39 68%
(56 service providers out of total 57) irrigation Pesticide application 45 61%
service providers out of which 7.16 percent Harvesting technology 10 17%
female farmers received advisory services from
the irrigation service providers during procuring the irrigation for their crop fields. Among the irrigation
service providers, all of them (100 percent) provided advisory suggestions on irrigation, 79 percent (45)
on irrigation frequency at different stages of crops, 74 percent (42) on doses of fertilizers, 60 percent
(34) on seeds ratio, 37 percent (21) on germination techniques, 68 percent (39) on disease/pest
diagnosis, 61 percent (45) on pesticide application and 17 percent (10) on harvesting technology (please
see inbox). 100 percent irrigation service providers reported that these advisory services added benefit
to their business.
3.3.3. Basic Knowledge of Irrigation Service Providers

Technical services provided to the tillers included six technical aspects of cultivation of jute, chili and
mung bean. Data revealed that majority of the irrigation service providers didn’t have substantial
knowledge4 to provide correct advisory suggestions. About 50 percent of them were not able to provide
any sorts of advisory suggestions on jute cultivation (48 percent), chili (75 percent) and mungbean (58
percent).However, few of them were able to provide correct suggestions like 08 percent provided
correct suggestion on jute production, 01 percent on chili cultivation and 07 percent on mungbean
4
Page 26 of 85
cultivation. On the contrary, majority of the ISPs provided wrong suggestions-26 percent on jute and
mungbean and 13 percent on chili cultivation (Table-8).
Table –8: Status of knowledge of ISPs for Advisory Suggestions.
Crop No answer Correct Partially correct Not correct

Jute 27(48%) 5(8%) 11(19%) 15(26%)
Chili 43(75%) 1(1%) 6(11%) 8(13%)
Mungbean 33(58%) 4(7%) 5(9%) 15(26%)

Most of the irrigation service providers maintained
Sources of No. of
networking and linkages with relevant companies, %
government departments and dealers. Key
Company 17 29.82
objective of the networking and linkages is to
Govt. departments 36 63.16
gather information related to their advisory services
and irrigation business. Majority of the respondents Dealers 19 33.33
(36 ISP out of 57) received information from Other/ projects 21 36.84
government departments; different ongoing project (21 ISP), dealers (19 ISP) and company (17 ISP
sprayers) (please see inbox). ISP also received capacity building training on relevant trade and advisory
services from different sources like government and private company. A total of 47 respondents (82
percent) received capacity building training. Among them, 27 respondents received training on
production techniques of jute, chili, and mung bean, 09 respondents on maintenance of irrigation pump,
01 respondent on communication and 10 respondents on vegetables cultivation, cow fattening, rice,
sugarcane, sub-dealer, etc. (table-9).
Table –9: Status of capacity building training of ISP.

Training No. of ISP %
Production Techniques: Jute/Chili/ Mung bean 27 47.37
Maintenance of irrigation pump 9 15.78
Vegetables cultivation, cow fattening, rice, sugarcane, sub-dealer, etc. 10 17.5

By providing irrigation services to the farmers Satisfaction level Respondents %
at their crop fields, ISP earned their income Very good (above 80%) 2 3.51
and also supported in generating the crops Good (60%-79%) 31 54.39
production. In a relevant question, Moderate (30%-59%) 24 42.11
satisfaction level ranking of spraying services
are- 54.39 percent (31 ISP) claimed good satisfaction, 3.51 percent (02 ISP) expressed very good, and
42.11 percent (24 ISP) reported moderate satisfaction (please see inbox).
3.3.6. Constraints to provide irrigation services

The ISP also faced various constraints. The major constrains they have faced on sourcing good quality
irrigation pumps and equipment, fuel, lack of availability and lack of knowledge for advisory services
which are shown in the following table (Table-10).
Page 27 of 85
Table –10: Status of constraints faced by ISP
Sourcing  Bad quality machine  Less durable of machineries
quality pump  Not getting good quality  Companies are not selling quality
equipment machineries machines/no monitoring from
 Lack of knowledge on sourcing government
quality equipment  Lack of training and quality equipment
 Scarcity of good mechanics in time of urgent need in distant areas.
 Lack of skill to identify quality  Lack of technical knowledge on
machine maintenance
 Unavailability of quality equipment  Source of quality machine in local areas
in local market  Lack of capital to buy quality machine
 High price of quality product
Sourcing  Damage of machine  Add water in oil
quality  Adultèred oil/fuel  Supplier unable to reserve bulk
fuel/oil etc.  Scarcity of quality oil/fuel quantity
 Scarcity of mobil/oil during peak  Irrigation hampered due to scarcity of
season quality fuel
Making  No system for storage  Lack of capital for storage
available  Lack of timely delivery  Remote area i.e. far from
timely  Long distance of supplier suppliers/depot
Providing  Lack of knowledge  Lack of training
advisory  Less knowledge on production  Information system not in place for
services technology getting latest technologies
 Flow of new technology not in
place
 Supervision from government less
in place
 Limitation of advice in all aspects

3.3.7.1. Capacity building supports for ISP
Data revealed that the Irrigation Service Providers had poor knowledge on irrigation time and method
(table-5 above). Only, 38.60 percent (22 ISP out of 57) knew about irrigation time and method for Jute,
8.77 percent (05 ISP) about chili and 19.30 percent (11 ISP) about mung bean. According to the existing
knowledge level on advisory services, it has been observed that about 50 percent ISP (table-5)were not
able to provide any suggestions on Irrigation, Seed ratio (kg/acre), Seed germination testing method,
Irrigation time & method, Fertilizer name & dose (kg/acre), Major insect & management, and Major
disease & management. Therefore, there is a strong need to provide capacity building support to the ISP
on the above mentioned aspects to ensure efficient and effective services to the farmers.
3.3.7.2. ISP Suggestions for Better Services to the Farmers

Suggestions provided by the respondents are as follows:
Advisory services
 More training for farmers
Page 28 of 85
 Ensure good quality machine for better irrigation services
 Dessimination of knowledge on good quality suppliers of irrigation and others agriculture inputs
 Reducing load-shading to ensure timely electricity and irrigation to the crop fields
 Establish linkage with GO-NGOs
 Showing documentary film
Irrigation services
 Sourcing of quality machine
 Open a shop by NGO for ensuring quality inputs
 Subsidized support for purchasing irrigation pumps
3.3.7.3. ISP Suggestions for Access to Better Service for Women Farmers
Most of the ISP opined that they could increase better services for the women farmers. They also
reported that by taking couple of measures it is possible to increase better services for women farmers
which are as follows:
 Good advice on quality seed production
 Awareness through courtyard meeting
 Arrange working capital
 Arrange training for women
 Distribute seed for women to establish home garden
 Provide some extra care for women farmers
 Use of IEC tools for building awareness of women on agriculture/irrigation, etc.
 Improve communication with women farmers
 Discount for women farmers for irrigation
 Aware women farmers on crop cultivation and irrigation management and motivate them in
different ways
3.4. NURSERER
A total number of 17 (all male) Nursererhave Particulars Numbers
been interviewed from Barguna, Rajbari,
Respondents/NSP 17
Barisal, Narail, Satkhira and Khulna districts.
Data revealed that a total number of 6,150 Total no. of farmers received Service 6,150
farmers received services from the 17 Highest Farmers/NSP 1,000
Nurserer. Average 362 farmers took the Lowest Farmers/NSP 150
service from each Nurserer, while, one Nurserer provided service to maximum 1,000 farmers and
minimum 150 farmers (please see inbox). Both the male and female farmers received the service from
the Nurserer.
Page 29 of 85
Alongside of main business, they provided Services Respondents %
relevant advisory services on fertilizer, lime Fertilizer & lime dose 17 100
dose, nursery management, PL
Nursery management 9 53
identification, PL stocking rate, feeds and
diseases management. Assessment data Quality Fingerling/PL identification 14 82
revealed that average 71 percent farmers Fingerling/PL stocking rate 15 88
received the advisory services from 100 Appropriate feed requirement 6 35
percent (17) Nurserer. Out of which, 9 Feed preparation 5 29
percent female farmers received advisory Disease and remedies 2 12
services from the Nurserer during
procuring the fingerling/PL for their fish/shrimp/prawn farming. For the advisory services, 17 Nurserers
provided advisory services on dose of lime and fertilizers, 9 on nursery management, 14 on quality
fingerling/PL identification, 15 on fingerling/PL stocking rate, 6 on appropriate feed requirements, 5 on
feed preparation and 2 on disease and remedies techniques (please see inbox). All respondents
reported that those advisory services added benefit to their business.
3.4.3. Basic Technical KnowledgeLevel of Nurserer

In order to assess the knowledge level5, seven technical aspects of nursery have been set and discussed
with the respondents during the survey. Survey data revealed that 17.65 percent Nurserer fully and
58.82 percent Nurserer partially knew the nursery management where 23.53 percent didn’t know how
to manage the nursery properly. For Fertilizer & lime dose for pond preparation, 11.76 percent didn’t
know and answer questions of the farmers, 17.65 percent provided suggestions correctly, and 41.18
percent provided partial correction suggestions and 29.41 percent given wrong suggestions. In regards
to stocking density, 35.29 percent provided correct suggestions, 41.18 percent provided partially correct
suggestions, and 23.53 percent provided wrong suggestions. For feed requirements, 76.47 percent
provided wrong suggestions, followed by 11.76 percent provided partially correct suggestions, 5.88
percent provided correct suggestions and no suggestions each. Again, survey data revealed that 17.65
percent Nurserer provided fully correct suggestions and 76.47 percent Nurserer provided partially
correct suggestions on toxic gas management where around only 5.88 percent provided wrong
suggestions to the farmers.Similarly, for oxygen deficiency, and major disease and management 11.76
percent provided wrong suggestions, 70.59 percent provided partially correct suggestions and 11.76
percent and 5.88 percent provided correct suggestions to the farmers respectively (Table-11).
Table -11: Status of Basic Technical Knowledge Level of Nurserer

Farmers’ asking No answer Correct Partially correct Not correct
Nursery Management 0 3 (17.65%) 10 (58.82%) 4(23.53%)
Fertilizer & lime dose for Pond 2 (11.76%) 3 (17.65%) 7 (41.18%) 5 (29.41%)
preparation (kg/decimal)
Stocking density (number/decimal) 0 6 (35.29%) 7 (41.18%) 4 (23.53%)
Feed requirement 1 (5.88%) 1 (5.88%) 2 (11.76%) 13 (76.47%)
Toxic gas 0 3 (17.65%) 13 (76.47%) 1 (5.88%)
Oxygen deficiency 1 (5.88%) 2 (11.76%) 12 (70.59%) 2 (11.76%)
Major diseases & management 2 (11.76%) 1 (5.88%) 12 (70.59%) 2 (11.76%)
5
Reference for cross checking of technical information: Department of Fisheries
http://fisheries.portal.gov.bd/sites/default/files/files/fisheries.portal.gov.bd/publications
Page 30 of 85
Most of the Nurserer maintained networking and
Sources of No. of
linkages with their relevant Hatchery, company, %
government departments and dealers. Key objective
of the networking and linkages is to gather Company 3 17.64
information related to their advisory services and Dealers 1 5.88
nursery business. Majority of the respondents (10 Govt. dept. 9 52.94
Nurserer out of 17) received information from Hatchery & Others 10 58.82
different NGOs (DAM, World Fish Centre and
CODEC), secondly from governments (09 Nurserer), thirdly from company (03 Nurserer) and lastly from
dealers (01 Nurserer) (please see inbox).

Alongside day to day relevant information, the Nurserer also received capacity building training for their
trade and relevant advisory services from different sources like government and private company.
Assessment data revealed that a total number of 16 respondents (95 percent) received capacity building
training- 7 respondents received training on nursery management, 15 respondents on production
techniques on fish/shrimp; 13 respondents on feed management, 11 respondents on disease
management of fish/shrimp, 3 respondents on commination and business and 4 respondents on gender
(table-12).
Table –12: Status of capacity building training of Nurserer

Training No. of Respondents % Remarks
Nursery Management 7 41.17
Production Techniques 15 88.24
Feed management 13 76.47
Disease management 11 64.70
Gender 4 23.52

The Nurserer earned their income through Satisfaction level Respondents %
nursery business and also contributedin Very good (above 80%) 2 11.76
generating the production of fish and Good (60%-79%) 12 70.58
shrimp/prawn. When asked about their Moderate (30%-59%) 3 17.64
satisfaction by providing services for supply of
fingerling/PL, they expressed their views. Among the respondents, 70.58 percent (12 Nurserer) claimed
that they feel good, 11.76 percent (02 Nurserer) expressed very good, and 17.64 percent (03 Nurserer)
felt moderate (please see inbox).
3.4.7. Constrains to provide services

The Nurserer also claimed that in regards to ensure quality service provision, they have faced various
constrains. The major constrains they have faced on high mortality rate of fingerling and PL due to
distance of hatchery to the farmers ponds, lack of transportations, scarcity of oxygen and traditional
methods and lastly poor quality of fingerlings and PLs. The following table (Table-13) described
constrains and causes that the Nurserer faced during providing their services.
Page 31 of 85
Table – 13: Constrains that have faced by Nurserer during providing the services.
Quality Fry/PL  Source area is so far  Collection of quality fry/PL
sourcing  No limitation  Cause of suitable weather
 Failure of Oxygen  Timely storage of PL/fingerling
 Fry/PL die  Communication gap between fisheries office
 Poor quality fry/PL  Excess number of PL in packet
 Huge supply against demand but less follow up
Fingerling/PL  Mortality rate high  Less DO (Dissolved Oxyzen)
transportation  Use traditional method  High mortality of fry due to temperature
 Scarcity of quality fry/PL, high salinity
 Distant transportation and viral diseases
Making timely  Long distance  Bad weather
Advisory  Unable to provide all  Lack of up-dated information and training
services information

3.4.8.1. Capacity building supports for Nurserer
Data revealed that the Nurserer have very low knowledge on one important technical aspects i.e. feed
requirement (table-10, above). This is one of the key technical areas for fish culture. If they don’t have
knowledge about this, the Nurserer does not bring any positive result of the production out of this
effort. Considering this broader aspect and key objective of capacity building, there is a strong need to
provide training to the Nurserer on “feed requirement for fish culture”. Only 17.65 percent (03 out 17)
Nurserers have proper knowledge on “nursery management” and “fertilizer and lime dose for pond
preparation” for fish farming. Thus, Nurserer needs capacity building training on both aspects.
Nurserer had also moderately low knowledge on nursery management and stocking density and in both
cases 24% respondents unable to provide correct information on both areas i.e. nursery management
and stocking density. On the hand, 18% Nurserers are using ICT (Information Communication
Technology) for proving service to the farmers. This is a very interesting findingof building capacity of
Nurserer on ICT and 94% respondents have expressed to use ICT for providing service to the farmers.
3.4.8.2. Access to Better Services for Women Farmers

Most of the Nurserersreported that they could increase better services for the women by taking some
measuresas follows:
 Invitation in training for enhance participation of women
 Awareness through courtyard meeting
 Ensure women participation in fish culture
 Arrange working capital
 Use of IEC tools for building awareness of women on fish culture
3.4.8.3. Nurserer suggestions for better services

The respondents suggested that in order to ensure the better services to the farmers they want to
organize:
 More training for farmers
Page 32 of 85
 Establish linkage with GO-NGOs
 Show documentary
 Ensure good quality fingerling and PL
 Virus free PL
 Use good quality PL, fertilizer and pesticides
 Ensure free from bad quality medicine and ensure punishment
3.5. PATILWALA
(Patilwala means one who carries fingerlings/fish fries in a lange/medium sized aluminium container for
moving from one place to another)
A total number of 10 (all male) Patilwala have been Particulars Numbers
interviewedin Barguna, Satkhira, Barisal, and Narail
Respondents/Patilwala 10
districts. 2,480 farmers have received services from
the total 10 Patilwala. Average 248 farmers took Total no. of farmers received Service 2480
service from each Patilwala. A Patilwala provided Average Farmers/Patilwala 248
service to maximum 750 farmers and minimum 30 Highest Farmers/Patilwala 750
farmers (please see inbox). Both the male and Lowest Farmers/Patilwala 30
female farmers have received the service from the
Nurserer.

Besides main business they also provided relevant advisory services on fertilizer & lime dose, fingerling
transportation, quality fingerling identification, fingerling treatment, fingerling stocking rate and species
combination, appropriate feed requirement, feed preparation and disease and remedies. Average 61
percent farmers received the advisory services from 100 percent (10) Patilwala, of which 15 percent
female farmers received advisory services from the Patilwala during procuring the fingerling for their
fish/shrimp/prawn cultivation. All Patilwala (10) have provided advisory suggestions for 61 percent
farmers. Among them, 8 Patilwala providing advisory services on fertilizer and lime dose, 5 on fingerling
transportation, 8 on quality fingerling identification 5 on Fingerling treatment, 7 on Fingerling stocking
rate and Species combination, 6 on Appropriate feed requirement, 7 on feed preparation and 8 on
disease and remedies. 100 percent respondents reported that these advisory services added benefit to
their business (Table-14).
Table-14: Status of services and practice of Patilwala.

Services No. of Respondents %
Fertilizer & lime dose 8 80
Fingerling transportation 5 50
Quality Fingerling identification 8 80
Fingerling treatment 5 50
Fingerling stocking rate and Species combination 7 70
Appropriate feed requirement 6 60
Feed preparation 7 70
Disease and remedies 8 80
Page 33 of 85
3.5.3. Technical knowledge level of Patilwala
In order to assess the knowledge level6, 8 technical aspects of fish/shrimp culture have been set and
discussed with the respondents. Data revealed that overall knowledge of Patilwala on fish/shrimp
culture are adequate i.e. 60% Patilwala provided proper suggestions to their clients/farmers. A total of 4
out of 10 (40%) were unable to answer fertilizer and lime dose for pond preparation where 5 out of 10
(50%) able to answer same information in right way.In regards to explain stocking density of fingerling,
the knowledge level observed very low i.e. 6 out of 10 (60%) Patilwala are not capable to advise
correctly to their farmers (Table-15).
Table – 15: Status of Basic Knowledge Level of Patilwala.
No Partially Not
Farmers’ asking Correct correct
Suggestion correct
Fingerling transportation 2(20%) 5(50%) 1(10%) 2(20%)
Fingerling treatment methods 4(40%) 1(10%) 3(30%) 2(20%)
Fertilizer & lime dose for pond preparation 1(10%) 5(50%) 0 4(40%)
(kg/decimal)
Stocking density (number/decimal) 0 1(10%) 3(30%) 6(60%)
Feed requirement (amount/day-body weight base) 0 2(20%) 2(20%) 6(60%)
Toxic gas 0 2(20%) 7(70%) 1(10%)
Oxygen deficiency 0 0 9(90%) 1(10%)
Major disease & management 0 1(10%) 8(80%) 1(10%)

Most of the Patilwala maintained networking and
Sources of No. of
linkages with their relevant company, government %
departments and dealers. Key objective of the
Hatchery owner 2 20
networking and linkages is to gather information
Nurserer 3 30
related to their advisory services and business. Most of
the respondents (07 Patilwala out of 10) received Department of 7
70
information from department of fisheries, from Fisheries
Nurserer (03 Patilwala), from hatchery owner (02 NGOs 2 20
Patilwala) and from NGOs (02 Patilwala) (please see inbox).

Patilwala also received capacity building training on their trade and relevant advisory services from
government and private company.9 respondents (90 percent) received capacity building training.
Among them, 09 respondents received training on fish culture technique, 7 respondents on fish feed
management; 7 respondents on fishdisease management, 1 respondent on communication and
business, and 5 respondents on gender (table-16).
6 Reference for cross checking of technical information: Department of Fisheries

http://fisheries.portal.gov.bd/sites/default/files/files/fisheries.portal.gov.bd/publications
Page 34 of 85
Table – 16: Status of capacity building training of Patilwala.
Training No. of Respondents % Remarks
Fry/Fingerling transportation and treatment 0 0
Fish Production Techniques 9 90
FishFeed management 7 70
Fish Disease management 7 70
Communication and business 1 10
Gender 5 50

Patilwala continued their income through Satisfaction level Respondents %
their business and also support in generating Very good (above 80%) 1 10
the production of fish and shrimp/prawn. Good (60%-79%) 8 80
Data revealed that among the respondents 10 Moderate (30%-59%) 1 10
percent (01 Patilwala) claimed to feel very
good satisfaction, 80 percent (08 Patilwala) expressed good, and 10 percent (01 Patilwala) felt moderate
(please see inbox).
3.5.7. Constrains to Provide Patilwala Services

Patilwala also claimed that they have faced various constrains- high mortality rate of fingerling and
distance of hatchery from farmers ponds. Also, they have faced scarcity of quality fingerling, high rate of
mortality due to long transportation of fingerling using traditional method, and scarcity of relevant
knowledge to provide technical suggestions. The following table (Table-17) described constrains and
causes that the Patilwala faced during providing their services.
Table – 17: Status of constrains faced by Patilwala during providing the services.
Areas Constraints Causes
Quality Fry  Adulteration in fingerling  Bad practices of hatchery owner
sourcing  Scarcity of quality fingerling
Fingerling  Mortality rate high  Less DO (Dissolve Oxyzen)
transportation  Use traditional method  High mortality of fry due to temperature
 Scarcity of Quality fry/Long distance
Transportation and diseases
Available timely  Long distance  Bad weather
Advisory  Unable to provide all  Lack of up-dated information and training
services information
3.5.8. Needs for Further Capacity building Supports

3.5.8.1. Capacity building Supports for Patilwala
The study data revealed that the 10 percent Patilwala have very low knowledge on important technical
aspects i.e. fingerlings treatment method, stocking density, and major disease management (table-12,
above). These are the key technical area for fish culture. If they don’t have knowledge about these, the
Patilwala does not bring any positive result of the production out of this effort. Considering this broader
aspect and key objective of capacity building, there is a strong need to provide training to the Patilwala
on these states areas.
Page 35 of 85
On the hand, data showed that around 30 percent Patilwala are using ICT for proving service to the
farmers. This is a very interesting finding and there is a big area of capacity building of Patilwala on ICT
and around 90 percent respondents have expressed to use ICT for providing service to the farmers.
3.5.8.2. Access to Better Services for Women Farmers

Most of the Patilwala reported that they could increase better services for the women taking some
measures as following:
o Aware on fish culture
o Training and good suggestions
o Courtyard meeting
o Group formation, training and awareness
3.5.8.3. Patilwala’s suggestions for access to better services for farmers

In a question of provision of providing better services to the farmers, the respondents suggested that in
order to ensure the better services to the farmers they want to organize:
 Training
 Technical support
 Reading material (Booklet, leaflet, etc.)
 Facilitate to set-up hatchery at local level
 Ensure van and patil for the Patilwala
 Facilitate to establish linkage with good hatchery for getting quality fingerling on regular
basis
 Quality control to protect disease during production in hatchery
 Enhance supervision and monitoring of government department to ensure quality.
3.6. LIVESTOCK HEALTH WORKER

The Livestock Health Worker (LHW)have been
Particulars Numbers
interviewed in Rajbari, Faridpur, Jessore, Khulna and
Narail districts and 45 (all male) LHW have been Livestock Service Providers 45(Male-45)
interviewed to assess about the existing service Total no. of farmers 31,850
providing capacity and further required supports. Highest farmers 6,000
The LHWs provided services to a total number of Lowest farmers 70
31,850 farmers. Average 708 farmers took the Average 708
service from each LHW, while, one LHW provided
services to highest 6,000 farmers and lowest was 70 farmers by one LHW (please see inbox). Among the
farmers, 16 percent farmers are women and they have received livestock services. All the LHW (100
percent) have women service recipient.
Page 36 of 85
3.6.2. Service and Practice
The LHW provided general services to the farmers. Services LSPs %
The services included primary treatment,
Primary treatment 42 93.33
vaccination, medicine, advice on livestock rearing
and artificial insemination. The assessment data Medicine 44 97.78
revealed that 93.33 percent (42) LHWs provided Advice on Livestock rearing 36 80.00
primary treatment, 95.66 percent LHWs provided Vaccination 27 60.00
medicine, 80 percent LHWs provided advice on Artificial insemination 20 44.44
livestock rearing, 60 percent LHWs provided
vaccination followed by 44.44 percent artificial insemination to the livestock of farmer (please see
inbox). Also, 48 percent farmers seeking medicine support from the LHWs.
3.6.3. Basic knowledge of LHW

All the LHWs expressed that providing primary treatment services and medicines add benefits to their
business. They have also provided suggestions to the farmers in regards to livestock rearing. If the
farmers benefited following the suggestions of LHWs on various aspects of their livestock rearing, the
farmers will purchase more services from the LHWs. The table (table – 16) shows that 60 percent LHWs
provided correct suggestions7 to the farmers on primary treatment and disease management. Rest of
the 40 percent provided partially correct suggestions on the same aspects. For vaccination, 12 percent
LHWs not provided any suggestions, 8 percent provided correct suggestions, and 22 percent partially
correct and 3 percent provided wrong suggestions. All of the LHWs provided suggestions on de-worming
out of which 42.42 percent provided correct suggestions, 42.42 percent provided partially correct
suggestions and 15.56 percent provided wrong suggestion to the farmers. For feed management, 11.11
percent not provided any suggestions, 13.33 percent provided correct suggestions, 68.80 percent
provided partially correct suggestions and 6.67 percent provided wrong suggestions to the farmers. For
breed selection, 8.89 percent not provided any suggestions, 28.89 percent provided proper suggestions,
40.00 percent provided partial suggestions and 20.22 percent provided wrong suggestions to the
farmers. For artificial insemination, none of the LHWs able to provide proper suggestions, 53.33 percent
not provided any suggestions, 42.42 percent provided partial suggestions and 4.44 percent provided
wrong suggestion. Similarly, 12 LHWs (26.67 percent) used ICT application to provide services to the
farmers.
Table – 18: Status of suggestions of LHWs provided to the farmers.
Primary treatment (disease

0 27 (60.00%) 18 (40.00%) 0
management)
Vaccination 12 (26.67%) 8 (17.78%) 22 (48.89%) 3 (6.67%)
De-worming 0 19 (42.42%) 19 (42.42%) 7 (15.56%)
Feed management 5 (11.11%) 6 (13.33%) 31 (68.80%) 3 (6.67%)
Breed selection 4 (8.89%) 13 (28.89%) 18 (40.00%) 10 (22.22%)
Artificial Insemination 24 (53.33%) 0 19 (42.42%) 2 (4.44%)
7 Reference for cross checking of technical information: Department of Livestock

http://old.dls.gov.bd/e_Livestock/manual_Livestock.pdf
Page 37 of 85
3.6.4.1. Information
The LHWs maintained networking and linkages Sources of information LSPs %
with their relevant agencies for information, Company 4 8.89
technical knowledge and business information. Dealer 8 17.78
For better services, 8.89 percent LHWs got DLS 43 95.56
information from company, 17.78 percent from AI firms 28 62.22
dealer, 95.56 percent from DLS, 62.22 percent
NGOs 16 35.56
from AI firms, 35.56 percent from NGOs and 8.89
Extension projects 4 8.89
percent received information from extension
projects (please see inbox).
3.6.4.2. Linkages
Data revealed that all (100 percent) the LHWs Agencies LSPs %
maintained linkages with their relevant DLS 40 88.89
organizations for their knowledge development Animal health company 18 40.00
and growth of their business. Most of the LHWs NGOs 16 35.56
(88.89 percent) maintained linkages with DLS Input retailers and dealers 8 17.78
followed by 40.00 percent with animal health
AI firms 7 15.56
company, 35.56 percent with NGOs, 17.78
Others 1 2.22
percent with input retailers and dealers, 15.56
percent with AI firms and 2.22 percent with others (please see inbox).

Through networking and linkages, the LHWs Training # of LSPs %
also received capacity building training related Livestock management: Beef 40 88.89
to their services and business. majority of the fattening/Cow rearing
LHWs (88.89 percent) received training on Feed management 32 71.11
Livestock management: Beef fattening/Cow Disease management 32 71.11
rearing, followed by 71.11 percent on feed Artificial Insemination 18 40.00
management, 71.11 percent disease
management, 40.00 percent artificial
Gender 14 31.11
insemination, 35.56 percent on communication
Others (please specify) 2 4.44
and business, 31.11 percent on gender and 4.44
percent on others (please see inbox).
3.6.6. Service satisfaction level

The LHWs contributed on the growth and Satisfaction level Respondents %
expansion of livestock rearing by providing Very good (above 80%) 10 22.22
their services and they have also continued Good (60%-79%) 26 57.78
their livelihoods out of selling the services. Moderate (30%-59%) 9 20.00
Data revealed that the satisfaction level of
LHWswith regard to service provision is that 57.78 percent (26 LHWs) claimed that they and in good
satisfaction, 22.22 percent (10 LHWs) expressed very good, and 20.00 percent (9 LHWs) expressed
moderate satisfaction (please see inbox).
Page 38 of 85
3.6.7. Constrains to Provide Livestock Services
With regards to providing livestock services to the farmers, the LHWs faced various constraints which
might hamper their quality and timely delivery of services. They have faced scarcity of equipment for
training, technical information, and lack of technical know-how to understand new diseases all of which
shown in table below (table-19).Also, they also got less assistance in regards to right information in
desired time, and irregular support from DLS. Due to long distance and poor road condition, they were
unable to provide or collect timely support from sources and for the farmers.
Table – 19: Status of constraints faced by LHWs

Updated technical  Problems of equipment for  Unavailability of equipment and
information training training
 Scarcity of technical information  Scarcity of equipment
 Problem of info-technology  Lack of skill to handle new
 Unable to understand new technology
disease  Lack of technical know-how
Support from DLS  Less assistance  Due to shortage of govt.
 Not available at office manpower
 Not getting right information in  Lack of accountability of govt.
right time employee
 Extension worker are not  Lack of supervision from authority
regular
Providing services in  Timely support  Distance and road communication
time

3.6.8.1. Capacity building supports for LHWs
Data revealed that the LHWs have moderate knowledge on livestock’s primary treatment and disease
management, vaccination, de-worming , feed management, breed selection and artificial insemination
(table-15, above). Among them, 60.00 percent LSPs correctly knew about primary treatment and disease
management followed by 42.42 percent correctly knew de-worming, 28.89 percent on breed selection,
17.78 percent vaccination and 13.33 percent feed management. On the contrary, most of them (53.33
percent) not providing any suggestions in response to the farmers on artificial insemination. Also,
majority (46.67 percent) of the LHWs mentioned that they didn’t know about the rules and regulations
(environmental aspects, health hazards, etc.) in using animal drugs. It is evident that there is a constant
need to provide capacity building support to the LHWs on the above aspects so that they can able to
provide correct suggestions to ensure efficient and effective services for the farmers. Also, the livestock
production along with the growth of LHWs business will be increased.
3.6.8.2. LHWs Suggestions for better services for farmers

Respondents suggested following areas in order to ensure the better services to the farmers:
Advisory services
 Provide training
 Ensure reading materials
 Training on IT
 Advise on how to overcome poverty
 Importance of use of quality inputs/medicine
Page 39 of 85
Quality input
 Improve the quality of semen
 Improve quality of work
3.6.8.3. LHWs Suggestions for Access to Better Service for Women Farmers
With regards to ensure the provision of better services for women farmers, the LHWs want to take the
following initiatives:
 Explain how they will be benefited
 Aware on superstition
 Training and good suggestions
 Aware on animal husbandry is a profitable activity
 Courtyard meeting
 Through extension workers
 Group formation, training and awareness
 Involve in practical training/sessions
3.7. Artificial Insemination Service Providers

3.7.1. Service Providers vs. Service Receivers:
A total number of 11 (Female-2 and Male-9) Particulars Numbers
artificial insemination service providers (AISP)
Artificial Insemination Service 11 (Male-9,
were interviewed in Rajbari, Faridpur, Jessore,
Providers (AISP) Female-2)
and Khulna districts. A total number of 7,160
Total no. of farmers received AIS 7,160
farmers purchased the AI services from the
Highest Sprayer/Farmers 1,200
total 11 AISP. Average 651 farmers took
Lowest Sprayer/farmers 200
service from each AISP, while, one AISP
Average 651
provided service to maximum 1,200 farmers
and minimum 200 farmers (please see inbox). Both the male and female farmers received the AI service
from the AISP. A total of 27 percent female farmers received the AIS from the AISP.

3.7.2.1. Artificial Insemination Service
With regards to common services and General Services # of AISPs %
practices in addition to AIS, farmers sought AI 11 100.00
relevant advisory services. The inbox shows Vaccination 4 36.36
that all the AISPs (100 percent) provided Primary treatment 10 90.91
artificial insemination services to the farmers. Advice on Livestock rearing 8 72.73
For vaccination 36.36 percent provided Medicine 5 45.45
services, 90.91 percent about primary
treatment, 72.73 percent on livestock rearing and 45.45 percent on medicine (please see inbox).
3.7.2.2. Relevant General Suggestions:

In addition to AIS, they provided relevant general suggestions to the farmers. The survey data revealed
(Table-20) that 09 AISP (82 percent) provided proper suggestions on artificial insemination, 02 AISP (18
percent) provided partial suggestion. For primary disease treatment, 03 AISP (27.27 percent) provided
proper suggestions, 07 AISP (63.64 percent) provided partial suggestions and 01 AISP (8.33 percent) do
not provided any suggestion. With regards to vaccination, 03 AISP (27.27 percent) provided proper
Page 40 of 85
suggestions, 04 AISP (36.36 percent) provided partially correct suggestions and 03 AISP (25 percent) do
not provided any suggestions on the same aspects. For de-worming, 10 AISP (90.91 percent) provided
correct suggestions and 01 AISP (8.33 percent) do not provided any suggestions on the same aspects. In
regards to feed management, 03 AISP (27.27 percent) provided correct suggestions, 04 AISP (36.36
percent) provided partially correct suggestions and 02 AISP (16.67 percent) not provided any
suggestions on the same aspects. For breed selection, 04 AISP (36.36 percent) provided correct
suggestions, 06 AISP (54.55 percent) provided partially correct suggestions and 01 AISP (8.33 percent)
not provided any suggestions on the same aspects.
Table – 20: Status of relevant suggestions provided by the AISP to the farmers.
AI (Artificial Insemination) 0 (0%) 9 (82%) 2 (18%) 0 (0%)
Primary treatment (disease mgt.) 1 (8.33%) 3 (27.27%) 7 (63.64%) 0 (0%)
Vaccination 3 (25%) 3 (27.27%) 4 (36.36%) 1 (9.09%)
De-worming 1 (8.33%) 10 (90.91%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Feed management 2 (16.67%) 3 (27.27%) 4 (36.36%) 2 (18%)
Breed selection 1 (8.33%) 4 (36.36%) 6 (54.55%) 0 (0%)
3.7.2.3. Treatment Service

AISP also provided treatment services to the farmers’ cattle. The survey data revealed that 91 percent
(10 AISP) respondents provided treatment services to the cattle of farmers. Also, 62 percent farmers
sought treatment support. There is a scope for extension of support services on cattle treatment. Also,
all the AISP (11 AISP, 100 percent) reported that the treatment services added more benefits to their
business.

3.7.3.1. Information
Most of the AISP maintained networking and linkages with Sources of
their relevant agencies for access of necessary information, Respondents %
information
knowledge and benefits to ensure better service provision. DLS 11 100.00
Data revealed that all (11 AISP) the respondents collected AI firms 6 54.55
and got information of DLS, 06 AISP (54.55 percent) from AI Dealers 1 09.09
farms, and 06 AISP (54.55 percent) got information from Company 6 54.55
company, 03 AISP (27.27 percent) from NGOs, 01 AISP
NGOs 3 27.27
(09.09 percent) from Dealers and 01 AISP (09.09 percent)
Others 1 09.09
from other sources (please see inbox).
3.7.3.2. Linkages
With regards to maintaining the linkages related to their
Sources of information AISP %
business and services, it was observed that most of the
DLS 10 90.91
AISP (10 out of 11, 90.91 percent) maintained linkages
AI firms 6 54.55
with DLS. More than fifty percent (54.55 percent, 06 AISP)
Animal Health Company 6 54.55
maintained linkages with AI firms and animal health
company while 03 AISP with NGOs. In case of dealers and NGOs 3 27.27
retailers, none of them maintained any linkages, that Input retailers/ Dealers 0 0
might be a weakness for quick availability of their service materials and knowledge and information
about latest progress of AIS (please see inbox).
Page 41 of 85
With regard to service and satisfaction, all the AISP Satisfaction level Respondents %
expressed that by providing AISP services to the Very good (above 80%) 2 18.18
farmers they are contributing to the growth and Good (60%-79%) 6 54.55
production of farmers cattle. AISP ranked the levels Moderate (30%-59%) 3 27.27
of satisfaction- 54.55 percent (06 AISP) felt good,
18.18 percent (02 AISP) very good, and 27.27 percent (03 AISP) felt moderate (please see inbox).
3.7.5. AISP received Trainings

The survey data revealed that AISP received training Title of training AISP
relevant to their profession from some relevant Artificial Insemination 11
agencies. The respondents informed that they Livestock management: Beef 5
received training from government, AI firms, private fattening/Cow rearing
company and NGOs. Among the respondents, all of Feed management 2
them (11 AISP, 100 percent) received training on Disease management 6
artificial insemination, 05 AISP received training on Communication and business 0
livestock management: beef fattening/cow rearing,
Gender 1
02 AISP on feed management, 06 AISP on disease
Others (please specify) 0
management, and 01 AISP on gender (please see
inbox).
3.7.6. Constraints to Provide AI Services

The AISP faced various constraints-the scarcity of updated technical information due to which they faced
constraint to collecting quality seed and lack of relevant technical skills. AISP claimed about less
importance of DLS and they didn’t get the service in time due to bad road communication. The
constraints faced by AISP are as following (Table-21).
Table – 21: Status of constrains that have faced by AISP during providing the services.
Updated technical  Quality of semen  AI equipmentsnot good quality
information  Unavailability of up-dated information  Lack of training
Support from DLS  Less support by DLS staff  Shortage of manpower
 Less communication
Providing services  Not getting semen timely from  Remoteness, large area
in time sources coverage, proper diagnosis

3.7.7.1. Capacity building supports for AISPs
Data revealed that the AISPs had poor knowledge on providing suggestions on primary treatment and
disease management, vaccination, de-worming, feed management and breed selection. Only 27.27
percent given correct suggestions on primary treatment and disease management, 63.64 percent
provided partial correct suggestions and 8.33 percent didn’t provide any suggestions (Table-17). For
artificial insemination, majority (82 percent) of them provided correct suggestions followed by 18
percent partially correct suggestions and none of them given any wrong suggestions. Therefore, there is
a strong need to provide capacity building support to the AISPson the noted aspects (vaccination, de-
worming, feed management and breed selection) to ensure efficient and effective services to the
farmers.
Page 42 of 85
3.7.7.2. AISP Suggestions for better services to the farmers
Respondents suggested that in order to ensure the better services to the farmers they want to organize:
 Communication with govt. office on regular basis

 Training on regular basis
 Enhance farmers knowledge
 Ensure demonstration
 Training on new technology
 Suggestions on use of good medicine
 Use advance farmers for motivation
 Announcing using mike about disease infestation and AI-poster-leaflet
Also in order to maintain the quality they want to:

 Ensure Nitrogen gas on regular basis
 Ensure quality inputs
3.7.7.3. AISP Suggestions for access to better service for women farmers
Most of the AISP expressed that they could increase better services for the women farmers by taking
couple of measures which are mentioned as follows:
 Provide training and good suggestions to women farmers

 Aware the women farmers on livestock rearing
 Courtyard meeting with women farmers on AI and related management
 Through extension workers to support the women farmers
 Group formation, training and awareness the women farmers on livestock rearing
 Involve in practical training/sessions on livestock rearing
 Provide some advantage for women like more time and support services at their door step
3.8. SPRAY SERVICE PROVIDER

A total number of 31 (Female-2 and Male-29) Particulars Numbers
Spray provider have been interviewed from 6
Spray service provider 31 (Male-29, Female-2)
districts (Barguna, Rajbari, Barisal, Faridpur,
Narail and Chandpur). As per data collected Total no. of farmers received 11,125
from the respondents, it was revealed that Spray Service
the farmers term spray of insecticide, Highest Farmers/ Spray 2,000
pesticide, or fungicide, altogether as provider
insecticide sprayers. A total number of Lowest farmers/spray 15
11,125 farmers have purchased the spray provider
services from 31 spray provider. Thus,
average 358 farmers have taken service from each spray provider while, one provider provided services
to maximum 2,000 farmers and minimum 15 farmers (please see inbox). Both the male and female
farmers have received the spray service from the providers.
Page 43 of 85
Alongside of spray, they have provided Services # of SSPs %
relevant advisory services on germination, Fertilizer dose 29 93.55
seed sowing ratio, dose of fertilizers, pest
Seed ratio 22 70.97
management, techniques for application of
insecticide and harvesting technology. Germination techniques 10 32.26
Average 66.36 percent farmers received the Disease/pest diagnosis 25 80.65
advisory services from 90 percent (28) spray Pesticide application 30 96.77
service providers out of which 11.16 percent Harvesting technology 08 25.81
female farmers received advisory services
from the sprayers during procuring the spray for their crop fields. Similarly, 11 percent farmers received
advisory services from the female sprayers. Among them, 29 sprayers provided advisory services on
dose of fertilizers, 22 on seeds ratio, 10 on germination techniques, 25 on disease/pest diagnosis, 30 on
pesticide application and 08 on harvesting technology (please see inbox).100 percent participants
opined that these advisory services added benefit to their business.
3.8.3. Basic Knowledge of Sprayers

In order to assess the knowledge level8, six technical aspects of spraying have been set and discussed
with the respondents during the survey. Survey data revealed that 93.55 percent sprayers knew about
doses and mixing ratio of different pesticides and insecticides. All the 31 participants (100 percent) have
knowledge about timing of spray. A total of 24 out of 31 (77.42 percent) have knowledge about health
hazards associated with spraying and how to minimize them. A total of 30 sprayers (96.77 percent) have
knowledge of protection/measures to be taken during the time of spraying. With regard to identification
of diseases and right pesticides/insecticides, the knowledge level observed less in 21 out of 31 (67.74
percent) sprayers. Similarly, only 17 sprayers out of 31 (54.84 percent) have knowledge about adverse
effects on environment (table – 22).
Table – 22: Basic knowledge level of Sprayers.

Technical Aspects/Knowledge Attributes # of SSPs %
About dosages and mixing of different pesticides & insecticides. 29 93.55%
Timing of spray. 31 100.00%
Health hazards those are associated with spraying and how to minimize 24 77.42%
them.
Protection/measures to be taken in the time of spraying 30 96.77%
Disease identification so that right pesticides/ insecticides are used 21 67.74%
Adverse effects on environment 17 54.84%
Most of the spray providers maintained
Sources of
networking and linkages with their relevant # of SSPs %
information
company, government departments and dealers.
Key objective of the networking and linkages is Company 24 77.42
to gather information related to their advisory Govt. departments 22 70.97
services and spraying business. Majority of the Dealers 11 35.48
8
Page 44 of 85
respondents (24 providers out of 31) received information from company, government departments (22
provider) and dealers (11 providers) (please see inbox). Besides, day to day relevant information, the
sprayers also received capacity building training for their trade and relevant advisory services from
different sources like government and private company. A total of 26 respondents (83.87 percent)
received capacity building training. Among them, 19 respondents received training on Pest & Disease
management of field crops, 15 respondents received training on production techniques on jute, chili,
and mungbean, 06 respondents received training on communication and business, 05 respondents
received training on gender and 01 participants received training on home gardening (table-23).
Table – 23: Status of capacity building training of Sprayers.
Training No. of Respondents %
Pest & Disease management of Field crops 19 61.29
Production Techniques: Jute/Chili/Mungbean 15 48.39
Gender 05 16.13
Home Gardening 01 3.23

By providing spraying services to the farmers Satisfaction level Respondents %
in their crop field, the sprayers earn their Very good (above 80%) 6 22.58
income and also support in increasing the Good (60%-79%) 21 67.74
production. Satisfaction levels of service Moderate (30%-59%) 4 12.90
providers have been ranked as shown in the
box. Among the respondents 67.74 percent (21 sprayers) claimed that they feel good, 22.58 percent (06
sprayers) expressed very well, and 12.90 percent (04 sprayers) felt moderate (please see inbox).
3.8.6. Needs for Further Capacity Building Supports

3.8.6.1. Capacity building Supports for Spray service providers
The study data revealed that the Spray Service Providers have very low knowledge on two important
technical aspects (table-1 above). Of the Name of Training Respondents
two, one is the key for success of spray is: Identification of disease and right 31
identification of disease and right pesticides/insecticides
pesticides/insecticides. If they don’t have Environmental impact of the spray 31
knowledge about this, the spray doesn’t Spray technique 4
bring any positive result of the production. Cow rearing 1
On the other hand, if they are not aware Modern agriculture production 4
about the environmental impact of the techniques
spray, it will cause environmental Rice cultivation 1
degradation which in the long run may have Pesticide management 8
impact on the productivity of the crop field Fish culture 1
where they apply insecticides/pesticides by Business management 1
spray. Considering this broader aspects and Skill development and awareness 1
key objectives of capacity building, there is building
a strong need to provide training to the Health and nutrition 1
sprayers on “identification of disease and Fruits garden 1
right pesticides/insecticides” and “adverse
effect of spray of pesticides/insecticides on
environment” (mentioned in the inbox). Also, the spray providers have expressed that they need to
Page 45 of 85
obtain certain skills that can help them for further development of their profession and income. Out of
total 31 spray providers, 23 respondents (74.19 percent) requested for providing skill development
training for their capacity building on specific activities. A total of 04 respondents requested to receive
training on spray techniques, 04 on modern agriculture, and 08 on pesticide management. One
respondent each requested training on cow rearing, rice cultivation, fish culture, business management,
skill development and awareness building, health and nutrition, and fruits garden (please see inbox).
3.8.6.2. Spray service providers’suggestions for better services to farmers

When asked about the provision of providing better services to the farmers, the respondents suggested
to organize trainings on following contents:
 Training on new technologies
 Introduce less harmful pesticide
 Distribute free spray machine and leaflet-booklet
 Enhance farmers knowledge
 Ensure demonstration
 Right way to spray
 Use of good medicine
 Work with advanced farmers for motivation
 Plant disease, insects and modern technology
 Awareness building about disease infestation through miking, poster and leaflet distribution
 Ensure quality inputs
 Use good quality spray machine
 Use good quality seed, fertilizer and pesticides
3.8.6.3. Spray providers’suggestions for access to better service forwomen farmers

Most of the spray providers’ opined that they can increase better services for the women farmers
through taking a couple of measures as stated below:
 Group formation, training and awareness to the women farmers
 By providing training and good suggestions
 Awareness building among the women farmers on agriculture
 Courtyard meeting with women farmers for their better service provision
 Provision of better services for women farmers through extension workers
 Involve women farmers in practical training/sessions
 Give more time and detailed briefing to women farmers
Page 46 of 85
Chapter 4: Training Needs
With reference to the methodology, in all the cases the training needs have been assessed measuring
the performance gap as revealed through data analysis table. Data revealed the number of private
extension service providers giving no answer in response to farmers’ suggestions, correct answers to
farmers, partially correct and wrong answers. The required performance noted as most of the farmers
seeking advisory suggestions, while service providers level of knowledge, skills and attitude, level of
satisfaction for service provision have been measured. Also, private extension service providers
suggested for the restraining force for theory of change. After analyzing the assessments data and
following the calculation of forces, performances, gaps and KSA, this chapter presented the training
needs for private extension service providers in the following sub-sections. So far at galance knowledge
level of eight provate extension service providers is presented in annex 2.
4.1. Input Retailers training needs

With regard to assess the knowledge level of Retailers to provide the advisory support services, 6
technical aspects of cultivation of jute, chili and mung bean; fish/shrimp farming; and 5 Technical
aspects of livestock were discussed with the respondents.
Status of Retailers Training Needs
Mungbean 96
166
Fish/shrimp farming 96
167
Livestock 95
168
Jute 98
170
Chili 98
171
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
%of Retailer #of Retailer
Figure-1: Status of input retailers Training Needs.

Six technical aspects under crops (jute, chili and mung bean) were seed rate, seed germination testing
method, irrigation time, fertilizer doses, major insects and diseases; six technical aspects under
fish/shrimp culture were fertilizers & lime doses, stocking density, feed requirement, toxic gas
management, water quality/oxygen deficiency and diseases management; Five technical aspects under
livestock were breed selection, de-worming, feed management, vaccination and disease management.
The assessment data revealed that majority of the IRs didn’t have significant knowledge to provide
accurate advisory suggestions as requested by their clients/farmers. Thus, it has been observed that 98
percent IRSPs needs training on cultivation method of jute and chili, 96% on mungbean and fish/shrimp
and finaly, 95 percent on livestock rearing (Figure-1). The assessment data also reveled that IRSP
knowledge levels significantly vary in different technocal aspects within same production technology
(Please see the table-3).
Page 47 of 85
4.2. Tillage Service Providers (TiSP) training needs
Assessment data revealed that 76.06 percent TiSPs needed training on “fertilizers dose”, followed by
70.42 percent on “seeds rate”, 39.44 percent on “germination technique”, and 38.03 percent on
“disease and pest diagnosis” 32.39 percent on pesticide application and 12.68 percent on “harvesting
technology”. They also need further trainings on the respective aspects for their capacity building and
be able them to support the farmers (Figure-2).
Status of TiSPs Training Needs
Jute 62 87.32
Chili 65 91.55
Mungbean 67 94.37
Harvesting technology 9 12.68
Pesticide application 23 32.39 %
Disease/pest diagnosis 27 38.03 # of PTSPs
Germination techniques 28 39.44
Seed rate 50 70.42
Fertilizer dose 54 76.06
0 20 40 60 80 100
Figure –2: Status of TiSPs Training Needs.
They also provided suggestions on cultivation method of jute, chili and mungbean. Therefore, the basic
knowledge level TISPs for cultivation method of jute, chili and mungbean remained crucial to support
the farmers in the perfect manner. Considering the same point of view, 94.37 percent (67 out of 71)
TISPs didn’t know about the cultivation method of mungbean followed by chili 91.55 percent and jute
87.32 percent (Figure -2). So they needed furthertraining on cultivation method of jute, chili and
mungbean.
4.3. Irrigation service providers training needs

Data represented the actual gap of training needs for irrigation service providers. The assessment data
revealed that 82 percent ISPs required training on “harvesting technology”, followed by 63 percent on
“germination techniques”, 40 percent on “seeds ratio”, 32 percent on “disease and pest diagnosis”, 21
percent on both “pesticide application” and on “irrigation frequency at different stages of crops”
(Figure-3).
Page 48 of 85
Status of ISPs Training Needs
Jute 52 91.23
Mungbean 53 92.98
Chili 56 98.25
Irrigation frequency at different stages of… 12 21
Pesticide application 12 21 %
Doses of fertilizers 15 26
# of ISPs
Disease/pest diagnosis 18 32
Seed ratio 23 40
Germination techniques 36 63
Harvesting technology 47 82
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Figure-3: Status of ISPs training needs.
ISPs provided suggestions on cultivation method of jute, chili and mungbean. The basic knowledge level
ISPs for cultivation method of jute, chili and mungbean remained crucial to support the farmers in the
perfect manner. Considering the same point of view, 98.25 percent (56 out of 57) ISPs didn’t know
about the cultivation method of chili followed by mungbean 92.98 percent and jute 91.23 percent
(Figure-3). Training on cultivation method of jute, chili and mungbean is very much needed.
4.4. Nurserer training needs

Calculating the performance gap, knowledge level and TNA, the assessment data revealed that the
nursery service providers needed further training needs. The following graph shows (Figure-4) that
94.12 percent NSPs required training on “appropriate feed requirement” and “major disease and
management”. For oxygen deficiency measurement, 88.24 NSPs needs training followed by 82.35
percent on “fertilizers and lime dose”, “nursery management”, “quality of fingerlings” and
“management of toxic gas”, 70.59 percent on “feed preparation”, 64.71 percent on “stocking density”.
Status of Nerserer Training Needs

Stocking density (number/decimal) 11 64.71
Feed preparation 12 70.59
Toxic gas 14 82.35
Quality Fingerling/PL identification 14 82.35
%
Nursery management 14 82.35
# of NSPs
Fertilizer & lime dose 14 82.35
Oxygen deficiency 15 88.24
Appropriate feed requirement 16 94.12
Major diseases & management 16 94.12
0 20 40 60 80 100
Figure-4: Status of NSPs Training needs
Page 49 of 85
4.5. Patilwala service providers training needs
Based on calculation, the assessment data revealed that 100 percent Patilwala required training on
“oxygen deficiency measurement and management” followed by 90 percent required training on
“disease and remedies”, “fingerling stocking rate and species combination”, “fingerling treatment”. For
“toxic gas management”, “appropriate feed requirement and feed preparation” and “quality fingerlings
identifications” 80 percent needs training followed by 50 percent on “fingerlings transportation”, and
on “fertilizer & lime dose for pond preparation (kg/decimal)” (Figure-5).
Status of Patilwala Training Needs
Oxygen deficiency 10 100

Disease and remedies 9 90
Fingerling stocking rate and… 9 90
%
Fingerling treatment 9 90
Toxic gas 8 80 No. of Patilwala
Appropriate feed requirement and… 8 80
Quality Fingerling identification 8 80
Fingerling transportation 5 50
Fertilizer & lime dose for pond… 5 50
0 50 100 150
Figure –5: Status of Patilwala Training needs.
4.6. Livestock Health Workers (LHWs) training needs

In regards to the assessments of service and practice including basic knowledge of LHW, the assessment
data revealed that 100 percent LHWs needs training on “artificial insemination” followed by 86.67
percent on “feed management”, 82.22 percent on “vaccination”, 71.11 percent on “breed selection”,
57.78 percent on “de-worming ”, 46.67 percent on “rules and regulation in using animal drugs”, 40.00
percent on “primary treatment and disease management”, 20.00 percent on “livestock rearing”, and
2.22 percent on “medicine” as shown in the Figure 6.
Status of LHWs Training Needs
Medicine 12.22
Livestock rearing 9 20
Primary treatment (disease management) 18 40
Rules and regulations (environmental… 21 46.67
De-warming 26 57.78 %
Breed selection 32 71.11 LSPs
Vaccination 37 82.22
Artificial insemination 45 100
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Figure – 6: Status of LHWs Training Needs.
Page 50 of 85
4.7. Artificial insemination service providers training needs
The assessment data revealed that all the AISPs were not able to provide overall services and
suggestions to the farmers. Also, most of them provided partially correct suggestions and few of them
provided wrong suggestions. Therefore based on the findings, it that the gaps have been calculated
including furthertraining needs. For vaccination 72.73 percent AISPs needs training, similar percentage
needs training on “primary treatment and disease management”, and also “feed management”, 63.64
percent on “breed selection”, 54.55 percent on “medicine”, 27.27 percent on “livestock rearing”, 18.18
percent on “artificial insemination”, and 9.09 percent on de-worming (Figure-7).
Status of AISPs Training Needs
De-worming 1 9.09
AI 2 18.18
Livestock rearing 3 27.27
Medicine 6 54.55
%
Breed selection 7 63.64
# of AISPs
Primary treatment (disease management) 8 72.73
Vaccination 8 72.73
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Figure-7: Status of AISPs training needs
4.8. Spray service providers’ training needs

For the advisory services, the assessment data Training on # of SSP
revealed that the Sprayer were not able to provide Identification of disease and right 31
general suggestions side by side of spray service. They pesticides/insecticides
also need trainings on two key aspects associated to
Environmental impact of the spray 31
their service performance and production of crops and
Harvesting technology 23
sustainability- “identification of disease and right
pesticides/insecticides” and “environmental impact of Germination techniques 21
the spray”. Besides, 23 respondents had knowledge Seed ratio 9
gap and required to receive training on “harvesting Pesticide application 9
technology” followed by 21 on “germination Disease/pest diagnosis 6
techniques”, 09 on “seeds ratio”, 09 on “pesticide Fertilizer dose 2
application:, 06 on “disease and pest diagnosis” and 02
on “fertilizers dose” (please see inbox).
Page 51 of 85
Spray providers also mentioned to receive Training on # of SSP
training on various aspects for their capacity Spray technique 4
building and development on “spray
Cow rearing 1
techniques” (04 respondents), “cow rearing”
Modern agriculture 4
(01), “modern agriculture” (4), “rice
Rice cultivation 1
cultivation” (01), “business management”
Fish culture 1
(01), “skill development and awareness
Business management 1
building” (01), “health and nutrition” (01),
and “fruits garden” (01). These trainings will Skill development and awareness building 1
help them for social and socio-economic Health and nutrition 1
development (please see inbox). Fruits garden 1
Page 52 of 85
Chapter 5: Support for Quality Service Provision
This chapter described the further supports that have been needed to ensure better service provision.
Based on the faced constraints by the local private extension service providers and their suggestions to
improve the service for farmers and women farmers, the required further support have been set in this
chapter.
5.1. Support to overcome the constraints

In order to measure the magnitude of constraints and way to overcome the same, the local private
extension service providers have been categorized into three areas- service providers for agriculture, for
fisheries and for livestock, whereas the input retail service providers remained common for providing
services in all the categories.
5.1.1 Support for agriculture sector service providers

In agriculture sector, the service providers are sprayers, irrigation service providers, and power tiller
services providers. Alongside of training, the first common support needed is to assist them to get good
quality equipment to run their machine with quality fuel and lubricants. Facilitate the service providers
for networking with the relevant nearby wholesalers and retailers to get the quality machine, tools and
equipment, fuel and lubricants suppliers. Also, organize training on repair and maintenance of their
machines by the dealers, company or workshops. Assist the service providers by the communication and
information so that they can get the good quality machines. Facilitate them to generate savings and
capital formulation to purchase and storage of fuel and lubricants to use during the peak season. Linked
them with AIS by which they can collect updated technical information afterwards they can disseminate
these at the farmers level for generating wider benefits.
5.1.2. Support for fisheries sector service providers

It has been observed that both the Nurserer and Patilwala faced almost similar constraints. Thus, in
order to overcome such constraints the following steps can be taken.For fish fingerlings, the service
providers can establish purchasing relationships with the established fish hatcheries, available
government fish hatcheries. Also, they can place advance orders to the hatcheries after collecting the
quantity from the farmersto ensure the quality of fingerings. Also, considering the collective and bulk
shipments, the quality transportation can be arranged. In regards to ensure that the service providers
have to gain the sound knowledge on stocking ratio and density to facilitate the farmers. For the shrimp
and prawn PL the same strategy can be followed. There are some traditional method for transportation
of fingerlings i.e. keep them feed free or feed them oil cake so that don’t release fecal matter into the
water and keep the mortality less due to contamination. They service providers can also be provided
latest technical information related to fish/shrimp/prawn rearing through linkages so that they can
disseminate the same to the farmers.
5.1.3. Support for livestock sector service providers

In order to overcome the constraints, the livestock service providers have to be empowered and
strengthen working relationship with the local level government livestock service agents (union level
veterinary assistant) instead of labeling more lack of responsibility at the DLS level. If this channel and
support can be strengthened, they will get more technical updated information and support services for
quality seeds and equipment for artificial insemination and disease treatment.
Page 53 of 85
5.1.4. Support for input retail service providers
For input retail service providers, strong procurement relation can be facilitated as per farmers’
requirements, so that the IRSPs will take advance initiative to collect technology information and quality
inputs to provide to the farmers. Also, they can be trained on latest technology to provide solutions at
farmers door step according to their level and capacity. In regards to critical cases they can facilitate for
referrals to the desired service agents.
5.2. Support for better service provision

According to the design of assessment, the suggestions from service providers have been collected on
how to improve and ensure better quality services to the farmers. The opinion also collected separately
for women farmers which have been analyzed to deliver a common support provision for the farmers.
5.2.1. Support for farmers’better service provision

Among many suggestions, the majority priority wise common support can be facilitated to improve and
ensure better quality services to the farmers are:
 Enhance farmers knowledge through training, reading materials
 Aware through IEC, demonstration and documentary
 Subsidy on machine/inputs/spares from government
 Negotiate with good company and arrange dealership for retailers
 Training on new technology and IT
 Ensure reasonable price for retailers and farmers will get benefit from them
 Advocacy on reduce load-shading to ensure timely electricity
 Stop distribution of expired products and protect illegal marketing from India/smuggling
 Enhance quality supervision/monitoring from govt.
 Improve the quality of semen and inputs (PL, fertilizers, pesticide/fungicide, etc.)
 Suggestions on use of good inputs, tools and machines
5.2.2. Support for women farmers better service provision

The most common priority wise suggestions to improve and ensure better quality services to the women
farmers areas follows:
 Awareness through courtyard meeting and motivation through extension workers
 Provide some extra prevalence/discount and working capital for women
 Use of IEC tools for building awareness of women on agriculture/fisheries/livestock, etc.
 Practical training and good suggestions for women
 Aware on agriculture/fisheries/livestock for their economic empowerment
 Ensure women participation in agriculture through family member
Page 54 of 85
Chapter 6: Recommendations and Conclusion
6.1. Recommendations
The overall recommendation for capacity building of private extension agents is to impart them relevant
training on their specific trade. The training can be provided on the general support service and
suggestions providing areas as an example: for spray service providers develop the skills on spraying first
and there after develop their capacity on cultivation method of jute, chili and mungbean. The specific
recommendations areas follows:
 Design the training calendar following the cultivation/rearing seasons;

 Involve government and non-government including private local actors during facilitation of
training;
 Motivate the private extension agents each events (trainings, meetings, workshops) about their
enhanced responsible services and improve their values and attitude to avoid adulterated services
and inputs to the farmers;
 At the last session of training develop expected support from actors for keeping updated technical
information and support through strengthening the purposeful networking and linkages;
 Develop and facilitate the training as simple as possible considering the level and understanding
capacity of private extension agents and farmers;
 Alongside of training, support the private extension agents so that they can conduct advocacy for
securing the locally available: free, subsidized, or low cost quality services and inputs for the
farmers;
 Besides training, organize workshops and meetings with the local relevant public and private service
providers, associations, traders to strengthen the capacity of private extension agents for
networking and linkages; and
 For better inclusiveness, where possible revisit with private extension agents how much they aware
about disaster, climate change and others vulnerable groups like persons with disabilities, elderly
people, etc. and include in capacity building plan as cross cutting aspects.
6.2. Conclusion:
Capacity building is an ongoing process and is not a one-step event. Therefore, to facilitate the capacity
building of private extension agents is an effective effort. This assessment not only focused on the
training needs assessmentbut also considered the holistic aspects of capacity building process. The
process, where the knowledge level, their empowerment, networking and linkages have been
considered to develop a comprehensive capacity building strategy for private extension agents including
assessment of their training needs. Out of the assessments, it has been realized that if the private
extension agents do not successfully perform the farmers intended purpose and not provide quality
products, the advisory services will not bring any value for them at the end. Also, the farmers will be
affected financially in the long run and lose trust on service providers.The findings have been presented
based on analyzed data and training needs and further capacity building support needs have been
calculated following the methodology and presented in the report with prioritization to start with the
highly recommended one at the first step. This report fully entailed the representation of collected data
through semi structured questionnaire survey and expressions of needs are based on the methodology
of calculation instead of individuals’ intension.
Page 55 of 85
Annex 1: Capacity building area of private extension agents
Capacity building of private service providers on improved production technology is the precondition to
ensure better services to the farmers. Following are of the provider wise intervention areas:
Private Extension Proposed area of interventions
Agents
1. Training
Crop: Seed & germination, fertilizer application, disease & insect management.
Livestock: Feed management, de-worming, disease management
Aquaculture: Feed management, fertilizer management, disease management
2. Extension Materials:
- Providing printing materials though private companies & AESA project (poster,
1. Input Retailers leaflet, flip chart)
3. Linkage:
- Private Companies and Govt. departments
- Facilitate Business Linkage Meeting with FPGs
- Sharing the list with contact number of private extension agents to the FPGs
4. Providing ICT apps and videos to selected input retailers who have
smartphones
1. Training
Crop: Land preparation, seed rate & germination, fertilizer application, weeding &
2. Spray service
irrigation management, disease & insect management, harvesting
provider
Livestock: Breed selection & de-worming, Primary Treatment (FMD, Anthrax, BQ,
3. Tillage service
HS), vaccination, disease management, Artificial Insemination
provider
Aquaculture: Nursery & Stocking management, fertilizer application, feed
4. Irrigation
management, disease management.
5. Livestock
2. Extension Materials:
health worker
- Providing printing materials though private companies & AESA project (poster,
6. AI worker
leaflet, flip chart)
7. Fish nurserer
3. Linkage:
8. Patilwala
- Private Companies and Govt. departments
9. AICC agent
- Facilitate Business Linkage Meeting with FPGs
- Sharing the list with contact number of private extension agents to the FPGs
Gender and Facilitation skill development
All actors
Page 56 of 85
Annex 2: TNA Survey Questionnaire-English
Annex-2.1: Need Assessment Questionnaire: INPUT RETAILER
Name: ……………………………….. Mobile: ………..………………. Shop name: ………………...

Address: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………
1. How many customers do you serve?

 …………….…..
2. What percentages of women receive service from you?
 …………….…..%
3. Do you provide advisory services to your customers?
 Yes  No
4. What percentage of your customers seeks advisory services?
 …………….…..%
5. What are the services generally farmers seek from you?
Crops  Fertilizer dose  Seed rate  Germination techniques
 Disease/pest  Pesticide application  Harvesting technology

diagnosis
Fish/shrimp  Fertilizer & lime dose  Feed amount  Fingerling/PL stocking

farming density
 Feeding preparation  Disease diagnosis  Others

and remedies
Livestock  Feeding methods (quantity & proportion)  De-worming
 Disease diagnosis and remedies  Vaccination
6. Generally what do you suggest farmers’ in regard to below area?

Crop/sector Farmers’ asking Your suggestion
Jute (Tosha) Seed rate 1. Line sowing: ……………………………………………..…

(kg/acre) 2. Broadcasting: ………………………………………………
Seed germination
testing method
Irrigation time &
method
Fertilizer name & Urea: …………… TSP: …………… MoP: ………………
dose (kg/acre) Gypsum: …………………… Zinc: ……………………
Major insect & 1. Insect name: ………………………………………..…..
Page 57 of 85
management Management: ……………………………….……………....

2. Insect name: …………………………………………..
Management: …………………………..……………..…..
Major disease & 1. Disease name: ……………………………………….. Management:

management ………………………………….………..
2. Disease name: …………………………………………..
Management: …………………………………………….....
Others
Chili Seed rate 1. Line sowing: ……………………………………………..…

(kg/acre) 2. Broadcasting: ……………………………………………
Seed germination
testing method
Fertilizer name & Urea: …………… TSP: ………….. MoP: …………… Gypsum: ………
dose (kg/acre) Boron: ……… Compost: ……………
Major insect & 1. Insect name: ……………………………………………..

management Management: ………………………………………………..
2. Insect name: …………………………………………..
Management: ……………………………………………..
Major disease & 1. Disease name: ………………………………………….. Management:

management ………………………………………………..
2. Disease name: …………………………………………..
Management: ………………………………………………..
Weeding & 1. Weeding: ……………………………………………..….. 2. Irrigation:

irrigation ………………………………………………….
Others
Mungbean Seed rate 1. Line sowing: ……………………………………………..…

Seed germination
testing method
Fertilizer name & Urea: …………… TSP: ………… MoP: ……………………
dose (kg/acre) Boron: ……………………

management Management: ………………………………………………..
2. Insect name: ……………………………………………….
Management: ………………………………………………..
Page 58 of 85
management ………………………………………..………..
2. Disease name: …………………………………………..
Management: ………………………………………………..

irrigation ……………………………………………….
Others
Fish/shrimp Fertilizer & lime Urea: …………… TSP: ………….. Lime: …………… Compost: …………….
farming dose (kg/decimal)
Stocking density 1. Carp polyculture: …………… 2. Carp-Golda: …………
(number/decimal) 3. Bagda: ……………………………….
Feed requirement 1. Fish: ……………………………………………………..

(amount/day- 2. Shrimp: …………………………………………………..
body weight base)
Toxic gas Remedy: ……………………………………………………..
Oxygen deficiency Remedy: ……………………………………………………..
Major disease & Fish:

management 1. Disease: …………….…… Mgt.: ……………………….
2. Disease: ……….…….…… Mgt.: ………………….….
Shrimp:
1. Disease: …….…….…… Mgt.: …………………….….
2. Disease: …………….…… Mgt.: ……………………….
Golda:
1. Disease: …….…….…… Mgt.: …………………….….
2. Disease: ……….…… Mgt.: ……………………….….
Others
Livestock Breed selection Criteria: ………………………………………………………..

…………………………………………………………………..
De-worming Timing: …………………………………………………………

Method: ……………………………………………………
Feed Fodder cultivation: …………………………………………………………………

management Concentrate feed preparation: ………………………………
………………………………………………………………….
Page 59 of 85
UMB/UMS preparation: …………………………………
…………………………………………………………………
Vaccination Vaccine name & schedule: ……………………………..

………………………………………………………………
Disease 1. Disease: ……….…… Mgt.: ……………………….….

management 2. Disease: ………….…….…… Mgt.: …………………….
3. Disease: ……………………… Mgt.: ……………………
4. Disease: ………….…… Mgt.: ………………………….
Others
7. Where do you get information from?

 Company  Dealer  Govt. departments Others (please specify)
8. Do you think advisory services add any benefits in your business?
 Yes  No
9. How would you describe your satisfaction level about providing advisory services to your
customers’?
 Poor (up to 29%)  Moderate (30%-59%)  Good (60%-79%)  Very good (above 80%)
10. Did you receive formal training from any govt./private company/NGO?
 Yes  No
If yes, what are these? (Put tick √)
 Production Techniques: Jute/Chili/Mungbean/Beef fattening/Cow rearing/Fish farming (put
tick √)
 Feed management: Beef fattening/Cow rearing/Fish farming (Put tick √)
 Pest & Disease management: Field crops/Livestock/Fish (Put tick √)
 Communication and business
 Gender
 Others (please specify)
11. Do you use any ICT application to provide services for the farmers?
 Yes  No
12. Do you want to use ICT to provide services your to farmer?
 Yes  No
13. What are the constraints you face in input business?
 Quality input sourcing
 Making available timely
 Providing advisory services
 Others
14. How can you ensure access to better services for women farmers?
Page 60 of 85
15. Do you know about rules and regulation using chemical (environmental issue, health hazard etc.)?
 Yes  No
16. What do you suggest in order to provide better services to your customer (like training material?
 Advisory services: .…………………………………………………………………………….
 Quality input : ……………………………………………………………………………………
Page 61 of 85
Annex-2.2: Need Assessment Questionnaire: Sprayer
Name: Shop Name:
Address: Mobile Number:
 …………….…..
 Yes  No
 …………….…..%
 …………….…..%
5. Do you have basic required knowledge to provide spraying service?
 About dosages and mixing of  Timing of spray.  Health hazards those are
different pesticides & associated with spraying and
insecticides. how to minimize them.
 Disease identification so that  protection/measures to  Adverse effects on

right pesticides/ insecticides are be taken in the time of environment
used. spraying
6. Do you provide any other advisory services to your customers rather than spraying?
 Yes  No
7. Do you want training in any other services where you feel confident and want to involve in future?
 Yes  No (If Yes, Please mention) …………………………………………………..
8. What are the advisory services you provide to the customers alongside the spraying service?
 Fertilizer dose  Seed rate  Germination techniques
 Disease/pest diagnosis  Pesticide application  Harvesting technology

 Yes  No
11. How would you describe your satisfaction level about spraying services to your customers’?
12. Did you receive formal training from any govt. or private company?
 Yes  No
If yes, what are these? (put tick √)
 Production Techniques: Jute/Chili/Mungbean (put tick √)
 Pest & Disease management of Field crops
 Gender
 Others (Specify)
Page 62 of 85
14. Do you know about rules and regulation using chemical (environmental issue, health hazard etc.)?
 Yes  No
15. What do you suggest order providing better services to your customer (like training material?
 Advisory services : _______________________________________________________
 Quality input : __________________________
Page 63 of 85
Annex-2.3: Need Assessment Questionnaire: Power Tiller service provider
Name:
 …………….…..
 …………….…..%

 Yes  No
 …………….…..%

Jute (Tosha) Land preparation 1. Number of plough ………………………..
2. Depth of plough……………………………
3. Time of plough………………………………
Seed rate 1. Line sowing: …………………………………………..…

Seed germination
testing method
Irrigation time &

method
Fertilizer name Urea: ………… TSP: ……………… MoP: ………………
&dose (kg/acre) Gypsum: …………………… Zinc: ……………………
Major insect & 1. Insect name: …………………………………………..…..

management Management: …………………………….……………....
2. Insect name: ……………………………………………..
Management: ……………………………………………..…..

management ……………………………………….………..
2. Disease name: …………………………………………..
Management: ……………………………………….....
Chili Land preparation 1. Number of plough ………………………..
Page 64 of 85
3. Time of plough………………………………
Seed rate 1. Line sowing: ……………………………………………..…

Seed germination
testing method
Tillage procedure 1. Number of plough………………………………………….
2. Depth of plough…………………………………………..
3. Time of plough …………………………………………….
Fertilizer name & Urea: …………… TSP: ………….. MoP: …………… Gypsum: ……………
dose (kg/acre) Boron: ……… Compost: …………

management Management: ……………………………………………..
2. Insect name: …………………………………………..
Management: ………………………………………………..

management ……………………………………………..
2. Disease name: ………………………………………..
Management: ………………………………………………..

irrigation ………………………………………………….
Mungbean Land preparation 1. Number of plough ………………………..
3.Time of plough………………………………
Seed rate 1. Line sowing: ……………………………………………..…

Seed germination
testing method
Fertilizer name & Urea: …………… TSP: ………… MoP: ……………………

2. Insect name: …………………………………………..
Management: ……………………………………………..
Page 65 of 85

management ………………………………………..………..
2. Disease name: …………………………………………..
Management: ………………………………………………..
Weeding 1. Weeding: ……………………………………………..….. 2. Irrigation:

&irrigation ………………………………………………….

 Yes  No
9. How would you describe your satisfaction level about providing tillage services to your
customers’?
10. Did you receive formal training from any govt., private company & NGO?
 Yes  No
 Production Techniques: Jute/Chili/Mung bean (put tick√)
 Maintenance of tiller
 Gender
11. What are the constraints you face in tillage service?
 Sourcing quality tillage equipment
Sourcing quality fuel/mobile etc.
13. What do you suggest in order providing better services to your customer?
 Advisory services: _______________________________________________________
 Tillage services: _________________________________________________________
Page 66 of 85
Annex-2.4: Need Assessment Questionnaire: Irrigation service provider
Name:
 …………….…..
 …………….…..%
 Yes  No
 …………….…..%
 Irrigation  Irrigation frequency at the different stages of crop

Jute (Tosha) Seed rate 1. Line sowing: ……………………………………………..…

Seed germination
testing method
Irrigation time &
method
Fertilizer name & Urea: ……………… TSP: ……… MoP: ……………………
dose (kg/acre) Gypsum: …………………… Zinc: ……………………
Major insect & 1. Insect name: …………………………………………..…..

management Management: ……………………………….……………....
2. Insect name: ……………………………………………..
Management: …………………………..……………..…..

management ……………………………………….………..
2. Disease name: …………………………………………..
Management: …………………………………………….....
Others
Chili Seed rate 1. Line sowing: …………………………………………..…

Page 67 of 85
Seed germination
testing method
Fertilizer name & Urea: …………… TSP: ………….. MoP: …………… Gypsum: ………
dose (kg/acre) Boron: ……… Compost: ………………

2. Insect name: ……………………………………………..
Management: ……………………………………………..

management ………………………………………………..
2. Disease name: …………………………………………..
Management: ………………………………………………..

irrigation ……………………………………………….
Others
Mungbean Seed rate 1. Line sowing: ……………………………………………..…

Seed germination
testing method
Fertilizer name & Urea: ………… TSP: …………… MoP: ……………………
Major insect & 1. Insect name: …………………………………………..

2. Insect name: …………………………………………..
Management: ……………………………………………..

management …………………………………..………..
2. Disease name: ………………………………………..
Management: ……………………………………………..

irrigation ……………………………………………….
Others

Page 68 of 85
 Yes  No
9. How would you describe your satisfaction level about providing irrigation services to your
customers’?
10. Did you receive formal training from any govt.,/ private company/ NGO?
 Yes  No
 Production Techniques: Jute/Chili/Mungbean (put tick√)
 Maintenance of irrigation pump
 Others (please Specify)
11. Do you know about crop cultivation season for Jute/Chili/Mung bean?
 Yes  No
12. What are the constraints you face in irrigation service?
 Sourcing quality pump equipment
Sourcing quality fuel/mobile etc.
 Others
14. What do you suggest in order providing better services to your customer?
 Advisory services : _______________________________________________________

 Irrigation services : _________________________________________________________
Annex-2.5: Need Assessment Questionnaire: Livestock Service Provider
Name: …………………………………………… Mobile: ………..……………… Shop name (if any): ……………………….……....
Address: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………
 …………….…..
2. What percentages of women farmers receive service from you?
 …………….…..%
 Primary treatment  Vaccination  Medicine
 Advice on Livestock rearing  AI
Page 69 of 85
Farmers’ asking Your suggestion
Primary treatment 1. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ………………….….

(disease 2. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………….….
management) 3. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ………………….….
4. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………….….
Vaccination Vaccine name & schedule: ………………………………………
De-worming Timing: ………………………………………………………………

Method: ………………………………………………………………
Feed Fodder cultivation: …………………………………………………

management Concentrate feed preparation: …………………………………….
UMB/UMS preparation: ………………………………………………
Breed selection Type of breeds: ……………………………………………………..

Criteria: ………………………………………………………………..
AI (Artificial Signs of heat: ……………………………………………………….

Insemination) Appropriate timing of heat: ………………………………………….
Causes of AI failure: ………………………………………………
Others
5. Do you provide medicines to your customers?

 Yes  No
6. What percentage of your customers seeks medicine support?
 …………….…..%
 DLS  Company  Dealer  AI Firms  NGO  Others (please specify)
8. Do you think selling of medicines add any benefits in your business?
 Yes  No
9. How would you describe your satisfaction level about providing services to your customers’?
 Poor (upto 29%)  Moderate (30%-59%)  Good (60%-79%)  Very good (above 80%)
10. Did you receive formal training from any Govt./Private company/NGO?
 Yes  No
 Livestock management: Beef fattening/Cow rearing (put tick √)
 Feed management
 Disease management
 Artificial Insemination
 Gender
Page 70 of 85
 Yes  No
12. Do you want to use ICT to provide services to your farmers?
 Yes  No
13. Do you have linkages with any organization (Public/Private/NGO/Others)?  Yes  No
If yes, what are those? (Put tick √)
DLS/NATP  Animal health Company NGO  Input retailer/dealer
14. What are the constraints you face in providing quality services?
 Updated technical
information
 Support from DLS
 Providing services in time
 Others
16. Do you think to know about rules and regulation in using animal
17. drugs (environmental issue, health hazard etc.)?
 Yes  No
18. What do you suggest in order to provide better services to your customers (like training
material)?
 Providing quality services: …………………………………………………………………………………………….
 Support from DLS : ……………………………………………………………………………………………….
Annex-2.6: Need Assessment Questionnaire: AI Service Provider
Name: …………………………………………… Mobile: ………..……………… Shop name (if any): ……………………….……....

Address: …………………………………………………………………………………………………

 …………….…..
2. What percentages of women farmers receive service from you?
 …………….…..%
 AI  Vaccination  Primary treatment
 Advice on Livestock rearing  Medicine
Page 71 of 85
Farmers’ asking Your suggestion
AI (Artificial Signs of heat: …………………………………………………………

Insemination) Appropriate timing of heat: …………………………………….
Causes of AI failure: ………………………………………………
Primary treatment 1. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….

(disease 2. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
management) 3. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
4. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
Vaccination Vaccine name & schedule: ………………………………………..
De-worming Timing: ……………………………………………………

Method: ………………………………………………………………
Feed management Fodder cultivation: …………………………………………………

Concentrate feed preparation: ……………………………………….
UMB/UMS preparation: …………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
Breed selection Type of breeds: ………………………………………………………………………

Criteria: …………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Others
5. Do you provide primary treatment to your customers?

 Yes  No
6. What percentage of your customers seeks primary treatment support?
 …………….…..%
 DLS  AI Firms  Dealer  Company  NGO  Others (please specify)
8. Do you have linkages with any organization (Public/Private/NGO/Others)?  Yes  No
If yes, what are those? (Put tick √)
 DLS  AI Firms  NGO  Input retailer/dealer  Animal Health Company
9. Do you think providing of treatment services add any benefits in your business?
 Yes  No
10. How would you describe your satisfaction level about providing services to your customers’?
 Poor (upto 29%)  Moderate (30%-59%)  Good (60%-79%)  Very good (above 80%)
11. Did you receive formal training from any Govt./AI Firms/Private company/NGO?
Page 72 of 85
 Yes  No
 Artificial Insemination
 Livestock management: Beef fattening/Cow rearing (put tick √)
 Feed management
 Gender
12. What are the constraints you face in providing quality services?
 Updated technical information
 Support from DLS
 Providing services in time
 Others
14. Do you think to know about rules and regulation in using animal drugs (environmental issue,
health hazard etc.)?
 Yes  No
15. What do you suggest in order to provide better services to your customers (like training material?
 Providing quality services: ……………….…………………………………………………………………………….
 Support from DLS : …………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Page 73 of 85
Annex-2.7. Need Assessment Questionnaire: Nurserer
Name: ………………………………………… Mobile: ………..…………………........ Nursery type:…………………………………..
Address: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………
 …………….…..%
 Yes  No
 …………….…..%
Fish/shrimp  Fertilizer & lime dose  Nursery management  Quality Fingerling/PL
farming identification
 Fingerling/PL stocking rate  Appropriate feed  Feed preparation

requirement
 Disease and remedies  Others (Specify)
6. Generally what do you suggest farmers’ in regard to below areas?

Fish/shrimp Nursery 1.Nursery area: ……………..% of the Pond/gher area

farming Management 2.Water depth: ………………………feet
3.Water treatment:………………….kg/decimal/feet
4. Rearing period: ……………………days
Fertilizer & lime Urea: …………… TSP: ………….. Lime: …………… Compost: …………….
dose for Pond
preparation
(kg/decimal)
Stocking density 1. Fish fingerling(4-5inch): ……………in pond
(number/decimal) 2. Golda PL : …………………......in the nursery
3. Bagda PL : ………………………in the nursery
Feed requirement 1. Fish fingerling for 1st month………………………………………………..

(amount/day-
2. Shrimp PL 1000 for 1st Week………………………………………….....
body weight base)
Toxic gas
Remedy: ………………………………………………………………………………..
Oxygen deficiency
Remedy: ………………………………………………………………………………..
Page 74 of 85
Major diseases & Fish:

management 1. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
2. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
Shrimp:
1. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
2. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
Golda:
1. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
2. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….

 Hatchery owner  Department of Fisheries  Others (please specify)
 Yes  No
customers’?
 Poor (up to  Moderate (30%-  Good (60%-79%)  Very good (above 80%)
29%) 59%)
10. Did you receive formal training from any govt./private company/NGO?
 Yes  No
 Nursery management
 Production Techniques
 Feed management
 Gender
 Others
 Yes  No
 Yes  No
13. What are the constraints you face in Fry/PL business?
 Quality Fry/PL sourcing
 Survivability
Page 75 of 85
 Others
15. What do you suggest in order providing better services to your customer (like training
materials)?
 Advisory services : ….……………………………………………………………………………………
 Quality Fry/PL : …………………………………………………………………………………………
Page 76 of 85
Annex-2.8: Needs Assessment Questionnaire: Patilwala
Name: …………………………………… Mobile: ………..………………….....................................
Address: …………………………………………………………………………………………………
 …………….…..%
 Yes  No
 …………….…..%
Fish/shrimp  Fertilizer & lime dose  Fingerling transportation  Quality Fingerling
farming identification
 Fingerling treatment  Fingerling stocking rate  Appropriate feed

and Species combination requirement
 Feed preparation  Disease and remedies  Others (Specify)
6. Generally what do you suggest farmers’ in regard to below areas?

Fish Fingerling ……………Carp Fingerling (2”-3”) in 10 liter water for 6-8

transportation hours distance transportation
Fingerling
treatment
methods
Fertilizer & lime

dose for pond Urea: …………… TSP: ………….. Lime: …………… Compost:
preparation …………….
(kg/decimal)
Stocking density Carp fingerling(4-5inch): ……………in Pond
(number/decimal)
Feed requirement ……………kg feed for 100kg Fish

(amount/day-
body weight base)
Toxic gas
Remedy: ………………………………………………………………..
Oxygen deficiency Remedy: ………………………………………………………………..
Major disease & Fish:
Page 77 of 85
management 1. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….

2. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
Golda:
1. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….
2. Disease: ………………….…….…… Mgt.: ……………………………….….

 Hatchery owner Nurserer  Department of Fisheries Others (please specify)
 Yes  No
customers’?
10 Did you receive formal training from any govt./private company/NGO?

 Yes  No
 Fry/Fingerling transportation and treatment
 Production Techniques
 Feed management
 Gender
 Others (if any Please specify)
 Yes  No
 Yes  No
13. What are the constraints you face in Fry/fingerling business?
 Quality Fry sourcing
 Fingerling transportation
 Others
Page 78 of 85
15. How do you recommend in order providing better services to your customer (like training
materials) ?
 Advisory services : …………………………………………………………………………………………………….
 Quality fingerling : ………………………..…………………………………………………………………….
Page 79 of 85
Annex 3: At a glance knowledge level of private extension agents
LSP Crop/ Farmers’ asking NO Suggestion Correct Partially Not correct
sector correct
Jute Seed rate (kg/acre) 89(51.15%) 6(3.45%) 40(22.99%) 39(22.41%)
(Tosha) Seed germination testing 85(48.85%) 1(0.57%) 31(17.82%) 57(32.76%)
method
Irrigation time & method 88(50.77%) 1(0.57%) 43(24.71%) 42(24.14)
Fertilizer name & dose 85(48.85%) 0 25(14.37%) 64(36.78%)
(kg/acre)
Major insect & 84(48.28%) 10(5.75%) 53(30.46%) 27(15.52%)
management
Major disease & 104(59.77%) 5(2.87%) 38(21.84%) 27(15.52%)
management
Overall 89(51%) 4(2%) 38(22%) 43(25%)
Chili Seed rate (kg/acre) 109(62.64%) 10(5.75%) 8(4.60%) 47(27.01%)
Seed germination testing 126(72.41%) 5(2.87%) 15(8.62%) 28(16.06%)
method
(kg/acre)
Major insect & 115(66.09%) 2(1.15%) 9(5.17%) 48(27.59%)
management
Major disease & 100(57.47%) 2(1.15%) 14(8.05%) 58(33.33%)
management
Retailer
Overall 108(62%) 4(2%) 13(8%) 50(28%)

Mungbe Seed rate (kg/acre) 107(61.49%) 3(1.72%) 13(7.47%) 51(29.31%)
an Seed germination testing 133(76.44%) 3(1.72%) 6(3.45%) 32(18.39%)
method
Fertilizer name & dose 114(65.52%) 6(3.45%) 10(5.75%) 44(25.29%)
(kg/acre)
Major insect & 107(61.49%) 5(2.87%) 28(16.09%) 34(19.54%)
management
Major disease & 106(60.92%) 4(2.30) 23(13.22%) 41(23.56%)
management
Overall 111(64%) 8(4%) 20(12%) 35(20%)
Fish/shri Fertilizer & lime dose 107(61.49%) 9(5.17%) 15(8.62%) 43(24.71%)
mp (kg/decimal)
farming Stocking density 110(63%) 5(3%) 21(12%) 38(22%)
(number/decimal)
Feed requirement 133(76%) 12(7%) 6(3%) 23(13%)
(amount/day-body
weight base)
Toxic gas 116(67%) 13(7%) 34(20%) 11(6%)
Oxygen deficiency 105(60%) 5(3%) 53(30%) 11(6%)
Major disease & 104(60%) 6(3%) 55(32%) 9(5%)
Page 80 of 85
sector correct
management
Overall 113(65%) 8(5%) 31(18%) 23(13%)
Livestoc Breed selection 148(85%) 2(1%) 19(11%) 5(3%)
k De-worming 145(83%) 9(5%) 14(8%) 6(3%)
Feed management 144(83%) 4(2%) 20(11%) 6(3%)
Vaccination 158(91%) 0 12(7%) 4(2%)
Disease management 150(86%) 5(3%) 15(9%) 4(2%)
Overall 140(80%) 7(4%) 22(12%) 6(3%)
Jute Land preparation 22 (31%) 27 (38%) 12 (11%) 10 (14%)
(Tosha) Seed rate (kg/acre) 23 (32%) 12 (17%) 25 (35%) 11 (15%)
Seed germination testing 35 (49%) 8 (11%) 14 (20%) 14 (20%)
method
Irrigation time & method 36 (51%) 3 (4%) 10 (14%) 22 (31%)
Fertilizer name &dose 29 (41%) 1 (2%) 3 (4%) 38 (54%)
(kg/acre)
Major insect & 27 (38%) 5 (7%) 12 (17%) 27 (38%)
management
Major disease & 27 (38%) 5 (7%) 12 (17%) 27 (38%)
management
Overall 40(28%) 9(12%) 13(18%) 21(30%)
Chili Land preparation 23 (32%) 12 (17%) 25 (35%) 11 (15%)
Seed rate (kg/acre) 36 (51%) 3 (4%) 10 (14%) 22 (31%)
Seed germination testing 36 (51%) 3 (4%) 10 (14%) 22 (31%)
method
Tillage procedure 36 (51%) 3 (4%) 10(14%) 22(30%)
Tillage
Fertilizer name & dose 38(54%) 0 (0%) 7 (10%) 28 (39%)

(kg/acre)
Major insect & 23 (32%) 12(17%) 25(35%) 11(15%)
management
Major disease & 23 (32%) 12 (17%) 25(35%) 11(15%)
management
Weeding & irrigation 37(52%) 0(0%) 13(18%) 21(30%)
Overall 32(44%) 6(8%) 16(22%) 19(26%)
Mungbe Land preparation 36 (51%) 3(4%) 10(14%) 22(31%)
an Seed rate (kg/acre) 30(42%) 6(8%) 6(8%) 29(41%)
Seed germination testing 36 (51%) 3(4%) 10(14%) 22(31%)
method
Fertilizer name & dose 41(58%) 2(3%) 4(6%) 24(34%)
(kg/acre)
Major insect & 23(32%) 12(17%) 25(35%) 11(15%)
management
Major disease & 27(38%) 5(7%) 12(17%) 27(38%)
management
Weeding &irrigation 37(52%) 0(0%) 13(18%) 21(30%)
Page 81 of 85
sector correct
Overall 33(46%) 4(6%) 11(16%) 22(31%)
Jute Irrigation 26(45.61%) 2 (3.51%) 11(19.30%) 18(31.58%)
(Tosha) Seed rate (kg/acre) 26(45.61%) 20(35.09%) 5(8.77%) 6(10.53%)
Seed germination testing 28(49.12%) 2(3.51%) 14(24.56%) 13(22.81%)
method
Irrigation time & method 28 (49.12%) 0 7 (12.28%) 22
(38.60%)
(kg/acre)
Major insect & 27 (47.37%) 2(3.51%) 22(38.60%) 6(10.53%)
management
Major disease & 29(50.88%) 7(12.28%) 11(19.30%) 10(17.54%)
management
Others
Overall 27(47.61%) 5(7.76%) 10(18.54%) 15(25.56%)
Irrigation Service Provider
Chili Seed rate (kg/acre) 43(75.44%) 4(7.02%) 0 10(17.54%)

Seed germination testing 45(78.95%) 0 6(10.53%) 6(10.53%)
method
Fertilizer name & dose 42 (73.68%) 0 2(3.51%) 13(22.81%)
(kg/acre)
Major insect & 43(75.44%) 0 8(14.04%) 6(10.53%)
management
Major disease & 42(73.68%) 0 10(17.54%) 5(8.77%)
management
Overall 43(75%) 1(1%) 6(11%) 8(13%)
Mungbe Seed rate (kg/acre) 33(57.89%) 1(1.75%) 1(1.75%) 22(38.60%)
an Seed germination testing 35(61.40%) 6(10.53%) 2(3.51%) 14(24.56%)
method
Fertilizer name & dose 34(59.65%) 1(1.75%) 1(1.75%) 21(36.84%)
(kg/acre)
Major insect & 31(54.39%) 0 16(28.07%) 10(17.54%)
management
Major disease & 33(57.89%) 8(14.04%) 6(10.53% 10(17.54%)
management
Overall 33(58%) 4(7%) 5(9%) 15(26%)
Fish/ Nursery Management 0 3 (17.65%) 10 (58.82%) 4(23.53%)
Shrimp Fertilizer & lime dose for 2 (11.76%) 3 (17.65%) 7 (41.18%) 5 (29.41%)
Pond preparation
Nerserer
(kg/decimal)
Stocking density 0 6 (35.29%) 7 (41.18%) 4 (23.53%)
(number/decimal)
Feed requirement 1 (5.88%) 1 (5.88%) 2 (11.76%) 13
(76.47%)
Page 82 of 85
sector correct
Toxic gas 0 3 (17.65%) 13 (76.47%) 1 (5.88%)
Oxygen deficiency 1 (5.88%) 2 (11.76%) 12 (70.59%) 2 (11.76%)
Major diseases & 2 (11.76%) 1 (5.88%) 12 (70.59%) 2 (11.76%)
management
Fish/ Fingerling transportation 2(20%) 5(50%) 1(10%) 2(20%)
Shrimp Fingerling treatment 4(40%) 1(10%) 3(30%) 2(20%)
methods
Fertilizer & lime dose for 1(10%) 5(50%) 0 4(40%)
pond preparation
(kg/decimal)
Patilwala
Stocking density 0 1(10%) 3(30%) 6(60%)

(number/decimal)
Feed requirement 0 2(20%) 2(20%) 6(60%)
(amount/day-body
weight base)
Toxic gas 0 2(20%) 7(70%) 1(10%)
Oxygen deficiency 0 0 9(90%) 1(10%)
Major disease & 0 1(10%) 8(80%) 1(10%)
management
Livestoc Primary treatment
0 27 (60.00%) 18 (40.00%) 0
k (disease management)
Vaccination 12 (26.67%) 8 (17.78%) 22 (48.89%) 3 (6.67%)
De-worming 0 19 (42.42%) 19 (42.42%) 7 (15.56%)
LHW
Feed management 5 (11.11%) 6 (13.33%) 31 (68.80%) 3 (6.67%)

10
Breed selection 4 (8.89%) 13 (28.89%) 18 (40.00%)
(22.22%)
Artificial Insemination 24 (53.33%) 0 19 (42.42%) 2 (4.44%)
Livestoc AI (Artificial Insemination) 0 (0%) 9 (82%) 2 (18%) 0 (0%)
k Primary treatment
1 (8.33%) 3 (27.27%) 7 (63.64%) 0 (0%)
(disease management)
Vaccination 3 (25%) 3 (27.27%) 4 (36.36%) 1 (9.09%)
AI
De-worming 1 (8.33%) 10 (90.91%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Feed management 2 (16.67%) 3 (27.27%) 4 (36.36%) 2 (18%)
Breed selection 1 (8.33%) 4 (36.36%) 6 (54.55%) 0 (0%)
Crops About dosages and 2(6.45%) 29 (93.55%) 0 0
mixing of different
pesticides & insecticides.
Timing of spray. 0 31 (100%) 0 0
Health hazards those are 7(23.52%) 24(77.42%) 0 0
Sprayer
associated with spraying

and how to minimize
them.
Protection/measures to 1(4.33%) 30(96.77%) 0 0
be taken in the time of
spraying
Page 83 of 85
sector correct
Disease identification so 10(33.26%) 21(67.74%) 0 0
that right pesticides/
insecticides are used
Adverse effects on 14(44.26%) 17(54.84%) 0 0
environment
Page 84 of 85
House 7, Road 2/1, Banani, Dhaka 1213
Tel.: +88-02-55040845
Email: info@aesabd.bd.org; info@aesabd.org
Web: www.aesabd.org
Page 85 of 85

Agro Dealer Private-Sector-Training-Needs-Assessment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agro Dealer Private-Sector-Training-Needs-Assessment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

USAID Agricultural Extension Support Activity

Training Need Assessment Report

Training Need Assessment Report

USAID Agricultural Extension Support Activity

Participatory Management Initiative for Development (PMID)

Table-14: Status of services and practice of Patilwala. 35

AESA : Agricultural Extension Support Activity

Ag Extension Project : USAID Agricultural Extension Support Activity

AICC : Agricultural Information and Communication Center

AISP : Artificial Insemination Service Provider

CODEC : Community Development Centre

DAE : Department of Agricultural Extension

DAM : Dhaka Ahsania Mission

DLS : Department of Livestock Services

DoF : Department of Fisheries

FPG : Farmers’ Producers Group

ICT : Information Communication Technology

IEC : Information, Education and Communication

ISP : Irrigation Service Providers

KSA : Knowledge, Skills and Attitude

LHW : Livestock Health Worker

LSP : Local Service Provider

NSP : Nursery Service Provider

POPI : People’s Oriented Program Implementation

SAAO : Sub Assistant Agriculture Officer

SSI : Semi-Structured Interview

SSP : Spray Service Provider

TiSP : Tillage Service Provider

USAID : United States Agency for International Development

VFA : Veterinary Field Assistant

Rafiqul Islam Khan

1.1 Background and Introduction

1.2 Objectives of the Assessment

1.3 Rationale of the Assessment

Private Extension Service Provider Total

2.3 SSI Conduction

2.4. Data analysis and reporting

3.1. INPUT RETAILER

3.1.2. Services and Practice

3.1.3. Basic Knowledge of Input Retailers

Table-3: At a glance knowledge level of Input Retailers

3.1.5. Capacity building support

Table-4: Status of capacity building training of IR.

3.1.6. Service Satisfaction Level

3.1.7. Constrains to provide irrigation services

3.1.8. Needs for further capacity building supports

3.1.8.2. Access to better services for women farmers

3.1.8.3. Input Retailers’ uggestions for better services

3.2. TILLEAGE SERVICE PROVIDERS

3.2.3. Basic Knowledge of TiSP

Table –6: Summary of suggestions of TiSP by crops.

3.2.4. Networking and Linkages

3.2.6. Service satisfaction level

3.2.7. Constrains to provide power tiller services

Table –7: Status of constrains faced by TISP

3.2.8.2. TiSPs suggestions for better services to farmers

3.3.2. Services and Practice

3.3.3. Basic Knowledge of Irrigation Service Providers

Table –8: Status of knowledge of ISPs for Advisory Suggestions.

Crop No answer Correct Partially correct Not correct

3.3.4. Networking and Linkages

Table –9: Status of capacity building training of ISP.