vcdplanningnotes_jul2013

Livestock and Fish Value Chain Development (VCD) Theme, Planning and Review Meeting Kampala, 22-24 July 2013

[|Group photo]
= Workshop agenda =

Session notes Objectives 1. Identify and create strategies to address Critical Success Factors for the VCD theme 2. Undertake short & long-term planning (a 10 year horizon) Outputs 1. Outline of an operation plan for the VCD theme 2. Plan of Work and Budget for 2014 3. Outline of plan of work for 2014-2016
 * Workshop opening by Acho Okike**

The VCD theme meeting is the earliest meeting taking into account what came up from the Annual Planning and Review meeting held in May 2013. There will be continued negotiation and discussion on what the theme is doing and analysis that the theme's activities are on the right track.

Participants felt that there was need to evaluate the link / relationships with the Systems' CRPs. It was noted as important to evaluate as a program how many Systems' CRPs we can link with and define the focus for these links.The Goat Cassava Project (GCP) in Tanzania was suggested as a good example for forming natural links with (Amos Omore to be provide more details).
 * Big picture review by Tom Randolph; Update from Montpelier**
 * Flagship projects to come after mid-term review (MTR) of on-going CRPs. Update after the meeting indicates that MTR for CRP L&F is currently scheduled for end of 2014 and all CRP L&F centres accept this timing.
 * Flagship projects presented by ILRI still lacks integrating elements naturally provided by including a flagship on VCD for value chain transformation
 * Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs) and targets: these were seen to be ok, but it was recommended that program should further expound and elaborate on them
 * Monitoring the progress on IDOs should be done with the program better clarifying the scale of progression
 * The differences between the discovery vs delivery flagship projects should be clearly defined
 * Links to other CRPs, especially Systems' CRPs need to be demonstrated - What is the CRP doing for the Systems' CRP? Recommended that the program needs to proactively start linking with them, (have some delivery links with the Systems' CRPs)

**(insert presentation)** The final set of IDOs will be ready by September 1 (subject to the finalization of baselines). Six VC specific Impact Pathways developed through participatory approaches to be ready by the end of the year. (insert presentation) 2013 reports have not yet been submitted due to mis-match in numbers at ILRI and delay in receiving the CIAT's plan of work and budget. With a more defined and standard reporting template, future reporting is expected to be less of a painful exercise. For 2013, a mid-year report and updating of indicators would make a good rehearsal towards the end of year report.
 * Program Monitoring and Evaluation Framework by Michael Kidoido**
 * Plan of Work and Budget & Annual Reporting by Pat Rainey**

3 groups were formed to review the program's outputs and milestones, by discussing the following questions: Group flip chart notes and comments are listed below:
 * Long term 2013-2023 visioning**
 * 1) What will the output look like if achieved by 2023?
 * 2) What are the 3-8 main steps/milestones that we need to achieve to get to the output?

**OUTPUT 1: Methods and tools developed and applied to identify potential interventions for improved VC performance** //(Michael K and team)// Milestones do not change but modified as below: Reword milestone 1 – delete ‘preliminary’ and replace with IPG Reword milestone 2 – Quality assessment of reports Assumption – not adding value chains India – end 2014 (milestone 1 & 2) / end of 2015 (milestone 3) Bangladesh - ? / Mali - ? Milestone 1&2 – 2014 Milestone 3 – 2015 **OUTPUT 2:“Best bets” piloted, validated and refined, also other new technical and institutional solutions, with partners and other value actors** The 2023 Milestone : A banquet of options with a few 'killer apps' having emerged and can serve as a set of options for national scaling or *DIFFERENT DEMAND AND EVIDENCE DRIVEN SUITES OF EVIDENCE ARE DEVELOPED AND TESTED IN WAVES. THE SUCCESS GRADUATE TO OUTPUT 3 WHICH IS 'TAKING TO SCALE'
 * Feedback and Comments**
 * Are there missing elements in the report like spatial analysis that could interfere with the reports quality?
 * The team needs to agree on the process of reviewing the tools and related documentation
 * Qn: Where does the program fit in the value chain assessment in the outputs? Ans: As various value chains are at different levels of implementation e.g. Uganda, Tanzania and Egypt are more progressed, this might be not be possible across the outputs but it is anticipated that over the next 4 years, the value chain assessment of the outputs can be launched for all sites.
 * Certain value chains can also leverage on other CRPs work e.g CRP4 and Vietnam work

__Critical Success Factors from Discovery to Testing/Delivery__ Milestones
 * Effective and socio-economically feasible
 * Process and capacity (//Test out the different options and see what works out best for national impact//)
 * "How to" manual developed
 * High impact factor evidence

Suite of options may be "vertical" or seen as "horizontal" Vertical: e.g Dairy platform + Dairy hub + Farmer training or Horizontal: e.g. ECF vaccine + women group + new feed **Feedback and Comments** **OUTPUT 3: Mechanisms for scaling up and out the successfully tested strategies for upgrading VC; Livestock and Fish program documented influence that is fostering implementation at scale supported by an enabling environment** Outputs Documentation by value chain / develop commodity manual/toolkit Synthesis on the body of evidence Approach on manual/toolkit development Supporting and monitoring implementation at scale and documenting Steps / Milestones 1.Agree on methodological framework on how to document and address approach (articulate an impact pathway on scaling up and out) 2. Develop method / toolkit on the elements of the approaches 3. Evidence-based case studies of adoption of upscaling 4. Synthesis (communication and partnership embedded) **Feedback and Comments** Updates on the value chains were provided by the value chain country leaders or representatives, presentations are shown:
 * Good scientific evidence from the program is expected from the donor community
 * Proof at scale needs to be done at the value chains and across countries
 * Separate who is leading the evidence for the intervention versus evidence generation
 * Key thing to consider is on the specific steps to take to achieve the outputs
 * Working with smallholders
 * Private sector - how to create enabling environment
 * Intervention (adapt, deliver, validate)
 * Innovation platforms
 * M&E
 * Partners should be in-charge with the program backstopping. The program roles should be decreasing with time as the partners role increase.
 * Seems to be an output 2 in terms of the toolkit and refining intervention until the point of scaling up, needs clarification
 * Clarification to be provided on scaling-up and refinement options
 * Distinction on the best bet toolkit and manual should be made
 * Promotion of tools as IPGs should feature predominately in the tools
 * 2013 Plans, Progress & Prognosis - Value chain updates presentations**
 * Egypt: [[file:vcdupdate_egypt_jul2013.pptx]] || Ethiopia: [[file:vcdupdate_ethiopia_jul2013.pptx]] ||
 * India: [[file:vcdupdate_india_jul2013.pptx]] || Nicaragua: [[file:vcdupdate_nicaragua_jul2013.pptx]] ||
 * Tanzania: [[file:vcdupdate_tanzania_jul2013.pptx]] || Uganda:[[file:Presentation SPVCD_July 2013.pptx]] ||
 * Vietnam: [[file:vcdupdate_vietnam_jul2013.pptx]] ||  ||

An update on the status of the value chain toolkit development process and the next steps was provided. See the tools Here Key messages from the presentation include: 1. The team decided to re-name the rapid assessment vc toolkit to value chain assessment toolkit 2. The process is largely completed 3. Tool applications: VC Toolkit Development: Next steps 1. Reviewing usage & usefulness of the tools 2. Development of database 3. Tracking of tool usage and revision based on lessons learned 4. Internal review process of tools, reports, best-bets - Decide on process for feedback on content, consistency and quality 6. Address question on tool ‘harmonization’: - Tools are being adapted, but what common themes & questions are being kept? 7. Discuss & agree on prioritization process for identifying best-bets interventions & ex ante analysis A great need to evaluate how much the program is using the tools, how much impact the tools are having and how much buy-in the tools have from the program was noted. Suggestion was made to have someone from the toolkit team go to country’s and see how much the tools are being used and also document the learning lessons from the tools. Proper documentation on the tools, questions, background was also noted to be of great importance. An update on the programs communications tools was presented:
 * Tool development by Froukje**
 * Value chain assessment tools applied in: Uganda pig vc, Tanzania dairy vc and Ethiopia small ruminants vc.
 * VC in-depth benchmarking tool: field tested and currently being applied in Botswana (Smallholder Competitiveness project)
 * Situational analyses (SA): currently being reviewed
 * SA of Tanzania, Ethiopia and Uganda: to be expanded to include sectorial modeling
 * Feedback on tools update**
 * Communications Tools Update by Evelyn **
 * Feedback**
 * Develop some sort of mailing list for the livestock and fish recipients where the program can be sharing out periodic news updates
 * Have a disclaimer on the wiki to inform users on the natures of the documents and materials for purpose of accuracy in re-using the information and redirect them to CGSpace for final documents and outputs.

Progress on the capacity development involvement in the program was provided. The unit has had interactions with the Uganda and Ethiopia sites and identified lots of opportunities to support their work. The unit hopes to interact with other countries to identify needs for supporting and engage with them: Some participants noted that there was some difficulty in differentiating the roles of KMIS and capacity development, and how the CapDev approach is different from the way in which scientists used to engage with partners in building capacity. Response: It was clarified that CapDev aims to support scientists in applying the latest thinking e.g. by developing current learning modules for various value chain trainings. CapDev support the learning aspects of the themes. Where it was not clear on what support the team expects from KMIS and CapDev, one was advised to send their request to both teams and the unit heads would advise accordingly. Supporting innovations work in Uganda: this can be through systematic documentation of the processes to facilitate learning. There was need to have CapDev support the program in developing more learning strategies from the program research theme. __Development of a livestock and fish capacity development strategy document is important.__ The CapDev team was invited to the August Tanzania diary value chain meeting in Kampala to support in capacity development for the partners.
 * Capacity Development (Capdev) by Iddo**
 * Discussion**

A presentation on food safety issues in livestock and fish was presented
 * Food Safety in Livestock & Fish by Delia**

The program architecture was presented and discussion on the position of the value theme within the program discussed. Possible solution presented include: 1. Recognize value chains as cross-cutting, not simply subsumed under the Value Chain Development Theme 2. Strengthen role and responsibilities of VC Coordinator 3. Strengthen shared objectives of Themes so that incentives to implement within value chains are compelling 4. Clearly identify Theme focal point for each value chain responsible for joint planning and reporting
 * Critical Success Factors (CSFs)**
 * Clarifying staff roles for efficient implementation by Tom **

Reviewing the various options as discussed in the Annual Program Meeting in May and possible solutions, __the team felt that it was important to have a full time value chain coordinator as well as theme focal points for each value chain responsible for joint planning and reporting__. Various issues and factors that need to be consider for the full time value chain coordinator such as; funding restrictions, nature of the position and skill sets - national recruited staff verses international recruited (WorldFish graduation of titles for the country managers can offer a good example to borrow from), good manager, non-scientific person who understands value chains etc. minimum threshold of success on the value chains that can be reported on and having success stories in order to gauge/evaluate our success, need to be analysed. India was mentioned as being about to hire a national recruited VC coordinator and have a funding strategy that will help the value chain gain momentum. In general, the idea seemed to resonate well among the leaders and more thought on this was encouraged. TomR would be making a proposition on the same to the management.

Participants formed 3 groups that discussed the programs CSFs and how the VCD theme is supporting discovery and delivery for other themes? What and how to do this? What would success look like and what CSFs from the program ones (below) would be most needed for each output area? // Program CSFs // Group notes are shown below:
 * CSFs Group Discussion**
 * 1) //Address the right issues//
 * 2) //Build effective delivery teams//
 * 3) //Promote Animal Source Food & Livestock and Fish program//
 * 4) //Build partnerships//
 * 5) //Governance & Leadership//

A. Tool Development B. Use of Tools
 * OUTPUT 1:** LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE ; ADDRESSING RIGHT ISSUES (Keith and team)
 * Fit for purpose (including flexibility)
 * User friendly
 * Available when needed
 * Peer reviewed / Quality controlled
 * Effectively managed with groups (time, money)
 * Involvement of partners
 * Core component required plus adaptation
 * Partners use them
 * Capacity built for their use
 * Feedback**
 * A tool monitoring mechanisms to analyse the use of the tools among partners needs to be put in place.

> -bridging VCD, interventions (ex-ante) > > **OUTPUT 3** (Froukje and team) 1.NGOs, policy makers and donors recognize the Livestock and Fish approach as useful and successful and apply the approach in development of livestock and fish value chains 2. The Livestock and Fish approach is part of the policies of developing country government for their respective livestock and fish sector Addressing the right issues through a strong learning approach without this there will be no uptake
 * OUTPUT 2:** BEST BET (Amos and team)
 * Prioritization within value chains
 * Harmonization across VCs
 * Leveraging capacities, resources, partnerships
 * Applying common mythologies for evaluation
 * Effective communication and shared learning (peer to peer)
 * Inter-multi- trans disciplinary
 * Ensuring evidence based best-bets
 * Feedback**
 * Something on CSF needed
 * Insert the methodology for carrying out the ex-ante assessment
 * Best bet for testing – where should the best bet prioritization be well placed? Looking at the nature of the ex-ante works? The value chain work ex-ante work should be prioritized with work that the targeting team is carrying out.
 * An addition to output 2; how do we facilitate the change in the value chain?, this is something that need to be incorporated – how do we get people to work together (methodological details need to be defined) – issues to do with innovation platform.
 * Capacity development of partners is needed so as to fill some the gaps in the implementation
 * Elements**
 * Building effective delivery teams to make sure that we provide the evidence
 * Building partnerships to enable the scaling up & out

A joint 2014 logframe was developed by the team
 * Logframe Review (detailing the 2014-2016 rolling workplan) by TR**

The team now needs to find out how much of the budget is allocated to each activity. Value chain leaders further need to find out who exactly will be carrying out the activities within the team and indicate how much time/money/resources (within the CRP budget) is committed to the activities and their outputs.**Timeline** for the above was set as 1.5 month from July Secondly, other bilateral project activities need also to be added in the log frame including the budget that is allocated to those activities. __The plan of work and budget should be completed by end of next week, August 2nd, by each value chain country leader__. Gender research: the (%) of time allocated to gender research needs to be calculated and reported to the consortium, a template for this will be provided by Pat Rainey. Mid year annual report: this should be done by the leaders so that all are conscious of what has been done and whats to be done.The template will be shared to the team which will feed to the annual report that shows what has been achieved and documented in the year.
 * Next steps and other related issues**

Some of the key meeting highlights included:
 * Closing Remarks by Acho**
 * Translating the CSF into actionable plans by thinking through the various activities and how the value chain development theme contributes to achieving the programs impact
 * Country updates and a review of how the theme is achieving impact / aiming to achieve impact
 * Putting the 10 years themes greater vision into the 2014 log frame
 * Importance on the value chain work and the agreed need to get a value chain leader
 * IDO 6; wording remain the same and the team need to work on the related policy issues of that IDO

Comment from Froukje The flagship programs that the themes presented at ARPM e.g. environment and nutrition did not feature in the flagship projects presented by ILRI at Montpelier. Tom, promised to think through the flagship program and give feedback.