I. The first progress report was received on 15 May 2006, a bound book with photos, with following details:

Activities carried out:

1. Launching study tours to successful communities on relevant subjects and put in to practice
2. Surveying the used quantity of chemicals , energy, and non-degradable plastic as well as respective expense
3. Organizing community forum
4. Producing and applying organic compost and insect repellence

Results and indicators:

1. Observable increased capacity of target groups (30 members) through being able to put what are learnt into practice: production of organic compost and biogas, practice of integrated farming and community solid waste management
2. Emergence of a network between target group and the visited populations in other communities
3. Emergence of data base on chemicals used, energy consumed and related expense-all leading to collective planning
4. Witnessed decrease of chemicals use and expense for 62 families
5. Replication of organic compost for agriculture by 60 non-project members

Project Communication: The communication has been carried out at community scale ? community loud speaker- about project activities.

II. During 18-20 October , leaders of the project participated in the mid-course evaluation. The observation is as follows:

Baan(village) Busai, one of the target village of an OP2, year-4 project, was a venue of the workshop where 45 attendants from 13 projects of OP3 year 2, NSC members, NC and PA gathered together to meet. Literally, these 13 projects were dubbed among SGP Thailand as GEF SGP Class 7/1 with project number starting from THA-05-01 to THA-05-13.

Workshop AT-A-Glance

As the venue was situated in target area of a back project THA-02-18 and adjacent to that of THA-04-22 which had been launching activities to reverse land degradation in watershed area of Lower Mekhong ecosystems, participants had learnt and shared experience with leaders of the two projects during field visits and briefing session. That was the first day.

First session of the following morning saw the NC occupying the floor confirming strategy of GEF SGP: Environment Protection , Community Empowerment, and Poverty Reduction. Then the floor was handed over to participants to conduct the session on sharing and discussion. Each project was given 30 minutes to relate background, activities undertaken and immediate results, problems/issues as well as questions and answers. The session was able to effectively cover 10 projects. That was the second day.

The morning of third day was given to the three remaining projects to cover their stories, to the NSC for observation and suggestion , to the NC to remind the grantees of what to do next according to the MOAs and finally to the grantees to collectively plan activities to strengthen this fledgling SGP environmental network and friendship. At the end, the chairperson , vice-chairperson and coordinator of Thailand GEF SGP class 7/1 emerged to take up coordinating role for all 13 projects. That was the final day of the workshop.

Each grantee was capable of articulating details of undertaken activities and their immediate results to the audiences. Project results were rated as promising. Some even gained recognition and financial supports by other stakeholders. Community members of two projects were able to increase their technical capacity in biogas technology. At an average, three projects were ahead of their proposed timeline , three a little bit behind, and seven just on time.

Nine projects presented through Power Points and audio-visual equipment, even though they are of Community ?Based Organization and not a national, tighter organization. There were four projects who accomplished their jobs by sets of photos and detailed documents.

III. The second progress report was received on December 8, 2006, with following details:

Activities carried out:
1. Launching dying activities to reduce the use of chemical dyes
2. Launching reforestation in marginal agricultural land , including pigment species
3.Launching campaigns through plays by youth group

Results and indicators:
1. Emergence of a group of 16 being interested and carrying out weaving activities substantively
2. Reduction of expense by 30 % and discernible increase of income
3. Youth group of 10 demonstrating skill on environment show
4. Established fund from the show of youth group
5. Emergence of a new group called ? Med Sai? or Sand Grain conducting plays to disseminate data and information contributing to conservation of local environment and energy
6. Formulated continuous collective plan on community development by youth

IV. The NC paid a monitoring visit to the project on May 9,2007, with following findings and observation ( four photos were taken and included in the gallery).

The target location, Baan (village) Kiangtai of about 100 households , is situated in a lowland of integrated ecosystems of the Mekong River where fish and rice have been the main culture. However, there are several other cultural groups sharing the provisions of the systems. Even in Baan Kiangtai itself whose community members are northern Thai, there are a few Yong families living together harmoniously.

Sharing progress and results of activities and experience were conducted at the village meeting hall. There were about 50 project members representing both adult and youth group of the project. Every proposed activities was said to be in progress satisfactorily and follow the plan except for the construction of biogas pits which was a bit behind the schedule. Limit technical capacity of project members -thus slow and careful steps in construction - was referred to as the main cause. In order to addressing this issue, the NC suggested that expertise from other successful SGP projects be sought for. Two projects of OP3 (THA-05-06 and THA-05-12) were referred to.

Three families of 62 who are project members were visited. Compost facilities were seen in operational. So far , each project members had produced about one ton of the compost to be used in the cultivated lands, which include both paddy and horticulture. Biogas pits was about 70 % completed, reuse/recycle activities of youth group well functioning with an established garbage fund , and pigment trees of native species thriving successfully.

This brief visit had sensed a fairly good participation and eagerness of community members. Several were able to express results of activities, lessons learnt as well as relevant thoughts and ideas. The establishment of the grantee and successive implementation of this SGP project had congregated majority of villagers to take care of the well beings of the village, while before , members seemed to be generally individualistic.

Project leaders initiated an interesting idea to synergize effort of all 13 SGP projects of their contemporary ( so called project of class 7/1). The first activity seemed to be a workshop to share experience after project completion in which learnt data and information would be used to scale up / focus for further GEF activities. The Chair and Vice Chair of the class would be consulted.

V. On June 1, 2007 , a progress report and completion report were received , with following details:

Activities carried out:
1. Launching capacity by training on biogas facility construction for working group and skilled workers
2. Building biogas pits and putting into use
3. Launching community forum to evaluate project activities

Results and indicators
1. Increased technical capacity of trainees witnessed through ability to complete building the biogas pits
2. Emergence of five pilot households being models for target communities and neighboring ones
3. Reduction of unfavorable odors from animal manure , number of flies , resulting in a better community atmosphere
4. Witnessed active participation from community
5. Emergence of plans for further energy conservation and collective community capacity

Project Communication: In addition to community radio and community news, project activities were disseminated through village exhibition.

Experience: 1. Primary target population still lacks experience/initiatives to persistently continue the
project
2. Reaching out to local administrative units and academic institutes could not fully
achieve its result, due mostly to limit personnel and infrastructure-focused plan of
these organizations.

Completion Report:

Date of Participatory Evaluation 23 May 2007
Number of Beneficiary/ Participating personnel:
Woman: 40
Man: 75
Children: 45
Number of person trained/ attending seminars, joining study tours:
Woman: 180
Man: 244
Children: 85

Expense Total: Baht: 646,312
Amount received from SGP: Baht: 425,320.50
Amount received from other : Baht: 100,000
Amount contributed by grantee/community: 46,312

Undertaken activities:
1. Studying and digesting related community database
2. Organizing community forums
3. Conducting study tour on natural dying and weaving , energy and environment conservation, organic compost production and construction of biogas facility
4. Training youth groups on stage play
5. Producing organic compost
6. Building biogas pits and putting into use
7. Launching energy-environment campaigns through stage plays
8. Planting native , especially pigment trees
9. Disseminating project activities and results

Descriptive results:
Project activities were important tools that resulted in wider community vision and increased capacity. Community members learnt more about the collective working process leading to emergence of tangible groups accompanied by further activities reaching out to community school and other networks at provincial level.

To a certain extent, the objectives were achieved in term of community capacity and conservation awareness. However, the community still needed a specific support in term of institutional management and continuous support in term of useful an relevant technicality.

After implementing the project for a certain period, community requested for financial support from a government programme ? Building Village and Community?s Potential Under Sufficiency Economy? and was granted Baht: 100,000 to be used for up-scaling activities on organic compost production ? more organic compost for use in cultivated land , reversing the trend of land degradation.