I. First progress report (September 3, 2008)
Activities undertaken:
1. Building capacity of target population on project planning, integrated farming and production of organic substances
2. Demonstrating water resources management
3. Launching integrated farming in selected areas

Results of activities:
1. Increased institutional and technical capacity of target population witnessed through ability to actively participate in discussion, collectively establish regulations/plans for launching activities and participatory evaluation
2. Twenty water ponds to retain humidity being completed and used effectively
3. 11 project members practicing integrated farming where food security and additional income starting to reveal

Project communication:
The project was made more visible through words of members. In addition, project leaders had communicated with local government agencies, such as Namrid Tambol Administrative Organization, Uttaradit Centre for Aqua Species and other NGO- Mae Tha Sustainable Agriculture Cooperative Network in Chiangmai, SGP project in adjacent province of Phijit( THA/SGP/OP4/CORE/07/02) to share experience.

Experience and lessons learnt:
1. There was technical problem in water resources management. As the area was comparatively dry, retaining water and humidity in some spots was not readily successful. More learning was required.
2. Communication with other SGP projects , especially those who are in the same class of grant award, could help solve emerging problems- probably easier than calling the NC who has lots of project to take care.

Project expense:
The project report the expense of THB 125,720 out of the first disbursement of THB 125,702.95.

II. Second progress report (March 23, 2009)
Activities undertaken:
1. Continuing building capacity of target population on project planning, integrated farming , production of organic substances and management of natural resources through meetings of working group , sharing experience and study tours
2. Continuing demonstrating water resources management
3. Continuing launching integrated farming

Results of activities:

Project communication:
The project kept on sharing experiences and lessons learnt with other network undertaking activities on sustainable agriculture within Uttaradit Province and other provinces. There were no substantial dissemination materials during this period.

Experience ,lessons learnt, problem and issue:
The project referred, during this reporting period, to resignation of five members of the working group as the main problem. These members reasoned their decision to personal burden and inconsistencies with project idea. The other remaining five members took the matter to discuss with target population and other network members who was taking care of other issues. It was proposed that the new member would be nominated from target population, instead of from the network management.
Project expense:
The project report the accumulated expense of THB: 255,181 out of the sum of the first & second disbursement of THB: 255,128.80.

III. Monitoring visit by the NC and one NSC (June 19, 2009)
Findings and observation:

The project location is a rain-fed cultivated area of three different terrains, i.e. low flat land, flat land in a valley and hilly land belonging to a group of traditional Thai who claimed they had been dwelling in the area for hundreds of years. Receiving natural water from mountainous forested upland in its northern vicinity, the area supplied water through several rivulets, into the Nan River. The 2006 notorious flash flood still left its effect to one?s eye. Now, the area is classified into three categories: safe, risky and unsafe from flash flood.

At the office of the grantee in Baan (?village?) Chai Khao, Tambol Namrid, one of the four participating villages, the visiting team met with 10 project leaders who shared their experience about the incidence of the 2006 flash flood; their current approach of preparedness, and some immediate outputs of project activities under GEF SGP and their degree of satisfaction with the project. In addition, some of them were able to share their awareness of global warming?s effect on climatic variance, especially on the unusual heavy rain that caused land slide in the forested upland. Simple dissemination materials through a series of photos were posted to tell a visitor of activities undertaken and some immediate observable results.

A plot of a project member in another participating village, Baan (village) Farkthung, was visited. The plot, a five-ha area, was situated in ?flat land in a valley?. Only one fifth of the area was a paddy field while the rest was maintained as woodland and vegetation land. A retaining pond to regulate flash water during rainy season and retain humidity in summer months was seen in place and referred to as productive.

A plot, about one ha, of another project member in Baan Farkthung was a garden of various native species. It was here that the water was harvested in a concrete tank before being released to maintain thriving landraces, many endemic to the area and well-known among an average Thai, such as durian, ipani, pineapple, litchi, etc. Other notable practice of the area appeared to be a selective trimming where non-productive trees were disposed of, then replaced by productive ones. Agro-waste was seen to be used in conditioning the soil.

The two plots directly visited and two others at a glance represented the other sixteen being maintained by the same approach of water and land use management. These 20 plots of about 25-ha cultivated area had been so far maintained by the projects. Reportedly, non-project members both from within and outside target location, paid special interest in the project approach. One major remaining activity was said to be a reforestation of landraces in the plots which the project planned to launch within a few months.

IV. Mid-course evaluation workshop (September 1-2, 2009)
Together with eight other projects of the same grant cycle ( Project number:THA-SGP-OP4-RAF-07-01 to THA-SGP-OP4-RAF-07-06 and THA-SGP-OP4-CORE-07-01 to THA-SGP-OP4-CORE-07-04), the project attended the mid-course evaluation workshop.

Workshop-at-a-glance:
The meeting room of Par Darng Camp, in Petburi Province?s Kaengkrajarn District, the venue of the workshop, welcomed 24 representatives from 9 SGP projects from 9 provinces across the country and other five members of GEF SGP country team comprising NSC members , National Coordinator and programme assistants participating in the event. Literally, these 9 projects were dubbed among SGP
Thailand as GEF SGP Class 9 with project numbers enumerated above. One project missed this sharing opportunity, due to its internal managerial problem.

The workshop was opened with welcoming address by an NSC member stating workshop objectives and encouraging participants to openly share results of project activities and lessons learnt, including emerging problems/issues encountered during implementation.

With project posters on the walls and project outputs on the tables, the NC proceeded with the posters & outputs session. Each project was given ten minutes to brief its story with questions from the audiences.
A few projects spent adequate time elaborating their stories when being directed with questions.

With an NSC member as the chairperson and one volunteering minute taker from the projects, the following session saw presentation , both by power point and hanging posters/photos , from 8 projects repeating their background, undertaken activities, immediate results, lessons learnt , problems and issues. With 15 minutes allowed for each, the session went smoothly with average one topic/presentation for
sharing/discussion. Additional discussion ,especially during dinner. That was the first day.

The second day began with summarization of activities of the previous day and reconfirmation of the agenda, followed by a presentation of the one remaining project. The floor then was given to the NC for showing ,through video, activities of each project he recorded during project site visits. The video had proven to be a very good mechanism to make activities of each project more visible and better understood by participants. The NC also reminded projects about compiling completion reports , then shared strategy of Operational Phase 4 and prospects of Thailand GEF SGP.

The final session of the workshop included open discussion to keep this infantile natural environment network active. It was agreed that each project would keep on contacting one another and sharing experience. Some issues of common interest included compilation of relevant knowledge for future activities, setting up regional mechanism to facilitate networking process, and publication pocket book telling stories of each and every project. Two persons from two projects volunteered to be the class or network coordinator for publishing the pocket book and a focal point to produce the network website.

V. Completion Report ( Septemberl 30 ,2010 ):
Date of Participatory Evaluation( March 11 2010):

Number of Beneficiaries/ Participating personnel:
Women: 19
Men: 11
Children: 70

Number of persons trained/ attending seminars, joining study tours:
Women: 41
Men: 25
Children: -

Expense:

Amount received from SGP (3 disbursements): THB: 391,088.52
Total amount spent out of SGP budget: THB: 417,765
Balance: THB : (-26,676.52)
Amount authorized for the final payment: US$: 1,266.26
Amount of co-financing: THB: 223,500 (in Cash)
THB: 132,000 (in kind)
Activities undertaken:
1. Building capacity of target population on project planning, integrated farming and production of organic substances
2. Demonstrating water resources management
3. Launching integrated farming in selected areas
4. Conducting participatory evaluation
5. Disseminating project results, products and experience for replication

Results of activities:
1. Increased technical and institutional capacity and skill of 66 project members on integrated farming witnessed through ability to put into practice as follows:
? production of 3,000 kg and 1.600 litres of organic fertilizer applied in cultivated areas
? planning land and water management by 20 project members
? drafting of land ownership and development for affected project members
? initiating and establishing a saving group with 38 members
? conservation of five native plant (gourds) species by 70 students
2. About 552 native fruit trees in addition being thriving in cultivated land of 30 members
3. Re-vegetative area of about 23 ha being maintained against further land degradation
4. Reduction of toxic chemicals by approximately 50 %
5. Emergence of a network on agricultural practice and environment with adjacent Tambol Baan Darn Nakharm and Tambol Na Nok Kok

Project Communication:
In addition to making the project better understood through cross visits, the project participated in strategic meeting on community development plan for 2010-2013 with Tambol Namrid Municipality resulting in perceivable advocacy from local administrative organization.

Plans and Activities for Sustainability:
1. The project would keep on with sustainable ,organic farming and agro-forestry among current members and new members. For new members, it would be fairly easy to convince as old members accumulated enough relevant experience to transfer. Chai Khao Witthaya School, a community school, was one of the target institute.
2. To ensure food and livelihood security, the project would promote and support small scale husbandry by using ? food bank? approach.
3. To build more institutional capacity, the project would transfer and share knowledge on farmers? right and related public policies which would adversely affect their livelihoods.
4. Together with other CBOs in project location and on behalf of Khao Phi Pan Nam-Khao Phlueng Range Network, the project would participate in conservation activities in the location.
5. As a result of agro-forestry in project location, lots of trimmed twigs and branches would be plentiful. This biomass would be turned into a renewable energy source, in addition to corn cobs and rice husk.

Experience , Lessons Learnt , Problems and Issues:
1. Project activities , especially, the ones on capacity building were important mechanism to assure participation from community members. They had opened eyes and minds of communities, especially those who were not so privileged, thus instigated real actions and practices.
2. Project leaders felt that there was still ?a long way to go yet? to reverse land degradation trend in a more sustainable manner. In order to cope with this issue, young generation had to be brought in urgently.
3. With the emerged Khao Phi Pan Nam-Khao Phlueng Range Network, active in nine communities, the morale of project leaders was high. It was expected that more integrated approaches in environment protection would be launched with cooperation from network members.