Project Results
I. The first progress report was received on 3 April 2006 with the following details:
Activities Carried out:
Building capacity of community members through training ,study tours and campaigning
Immediate result and indicators:
392 attendants being numbered for four capacity building activities organized during the reporting period, these project stakeholders demonstrating increased capacity through active participation and brainstorming during the sessions.
II. During 18-20 October 2006, 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 27 October 2006, a bound book of 50-page with photos showing on-going activities. The report can be summarized as follows:
Activities Carried out:
1. Building capacity of target population through training and study tours on ?organic substance replacing chemical ones? and organic farming
2. Putting into practice what were learnt in 1
3. Conducting soil test and bodily check for selected 30 project members
4. Contributing financially to the Centre of Organic Farming , the rotating fund and the Cooperatives shop
Immediate result and indicators:
1. Increased capacity of 59 members on the subject witnessed through their being able to apply what were learnt in the fields
2. Additional 32 native trees of medicinal value being planted and tried
3. In term of toxic substance contained in human bodies, 25 disclosed as no- toxic contained in bodies. The project was now targeting on certification for their product and packing.
4. Civil organization such as the district agricultural office, Tambol Administrative Organization and a private company providing additional support to the rotating fund at Baht: 128,000
IV. On 26 January 2007, the NC and one NSC visited the project. The findings and observations are as follows:
The project location is situated in the ecosystems of the Chee River where irrigation for agriculture is obtained by grid water pumping. With this sure water supply, several advantage farming communities tend to practice intensive agriculture. At an average, a family would grow rice twice a year , and one vegetable. Mostly after meeting their own consumption , both rice and vegetables are for sales to nearby urban areas, but for some, as far as Bangkok,
One plot of a project member in Baan (village) Phon Ngarm was visited. Few hectares were divided for paddy and horticulture. There was enough water for both species. Growing paddy by sowing , in stead of replanting , seemed to be the best option. It was related that the reduction of chemical fertilizer had been reduced by 50 %. Before the project campaign, the average figure of use was 200 kilogramme/ha. Two other plots were later visited. The results of activities were , more or less, the same. Some innovation were being tried with discernible promising results.
In the villages, there are signboards telling about the project at many crossroads and public places. With UNDP logo, the message on the boards talks about the merits of organic farming which interested persons could apply for membership at the offices of their village chiefs.
Project members appeared eager to discuss and show their activities and results. The group was clear about their goal: practicing alternative agriculture first , then proceeding to organic or non-toxic one later on. They expressed their existing capacity and satisfaction with the project and would reach out to neighbouring villages still applying excessive amount of chemical fertilizer and pesticide. In fact, the work of the group had made an impact at national level. The group was financially supported by a central government agency to build a central compost production facility. Hopeful for gradual result of its outreach programme, the group manage to contact a local government units to build the facility in a village most notorious for excessive application of chemical substances.
The project planned to have the evaluation upon completion during this coming rainy season.
V. The completion report was received on September 12, 2007 , two bound books ,each about 30 pages, one with description, the other photos of each undertaken activity.
Date of Participatory Evaluation: 23 May 2007
Number of Beneficiary/ Participating personnel:
Woman: 373
Man: 881
Children: 69
Number of person trained/ attending seminars, joining study tours:
Woman: 284
Man: 581
Children: 69
Expense:
Total: Baht: 575,565
Amount received from SGP: Baht: 423,902.38
Amount received from other : Baht: 669.030
Amount contributed by grantee/community: 363,607
Activities Carried out:
1. Building capacity of community members through training ,study tours and campaigning
2. Launching plantation of medicinal species
3. Conduction soil test and human bodily check
4. Conduction four workshops to disseminate project results
5. Joint meeting with local academic institute for development of curriculum on organic compost
6. Contributing financially to the Centre of Organic Farming , the rotating fund and the Cooperatives shop
7. Reaching out the activities to wider farming group
Immediate results:
1. The total quantity of animal manure, compost and organic fertilizer produced and applied in cultivated land of 225 ha was 171.93 tons, with ratio of applied dried organic substance to chemical substance of 9:1. The total quantity of produced and applied liquid organic substance was 571 with corresponding ration of 4:1
2. More farmers in Tambol Phon Ngarm paying more attention and applying organic substances but unable to totally reject chemical substances. However, the ratio of use for soil reconditioning was 60:40 implying achievement of the anticipated result
3. Emergence of two organic farming groups with increased capacity and one cooperation network
4. Emergence of Organic Product Fund with established network committee
Impacts:
1. The project had resulted in attitude changes among average community members. Application of organic substances in cultivated lands was
widely witnessed. Resistance to and doubts about the result of organic farming seemed to be reduced. In conclusion, all project members were able to access toxic-free agricultural systems as originally proposed.
2. The coordinating activities with major stakeholders had paved ways to multi-dimensional collaboration, such as, livelihood development and financial development. The former, project members ,in conjunction with some network members currently formulated proposal on cow raising to be submitted to the Thai-German Foundation for Development. On the latter, project members , in conjunction with several entrepreneurial groups in Mahasarakham Province, established the Mahasarakharm Credit Union Cooperatives Ltd, on June 6, 2007, with one branch operational in Tambol Phonngarm. Increase in cooperatives membership was witnessed.
3. The grantee was selected to participate in the government project entitled ? One Compost Facility, One District? where the National Science and Technology Research Institute provided financial support for the construction and equipment. In the future, the newly established Organic Product Fund would serve as the outlet.
VI. Note: on a participatory evaluation upon completion with other contemporary projects:
GEF Small Grants Programme: Evaluation upon Completion Workshop At-a-Glance
Country: Thailand
Project Number: THA-05-01 to THA-05-13
Date of Workshop: November 7- 9, 2007
Location: Boy Scout Camp, Khao Khitchakut District, Chanthaburi
1. BACKGROUND OF THE WORKSHOP
Specified in the Country Programme Strategy and long encouraged by Thailand GEF SGP, the workshop aimed to strengthen the participatory evaluation process, build capacity of target communities, and contribute to the formation of a strong network of GEF SGP grantees. The 3-day workshop provided an opportunity for these 13 projects?all nearing completion after 24 months?to present overall results, problems/issues and their solutions, to share lessons learned and to forge partnerships for sustainability.
2. WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
The Chanthaburi Boy Scout Camp in Khao Khitchakut District, the venue for the workshop, hosted 45 participants from 11 projects of OP3 Year One, a GEF SGP team (composed of a NSC member, the National Coordinator, and Programme Assistants), and a few other major stakeholders. The 11 projects were dubbed ?GEF SGP Class 7/1,? and assigned a project number between THA-05-01 and THA-05-13. In addition, four members from THA-06-02?a project of OP3 Year Two or ?GEF SGP Class 8/1??were present to share experiences. The participants showed great geographical diversity; they had traveled from Nan, Tak, Loei, Mahasarakharm, Kanchanaburi, Ayudhaya, Phayao, Nakhornsithammarat, Songkhla and Pattani Provinces.
3. Workshop At-a-Glance
Beginning in the afternoon of November 7th, several project members began preparing dissemination materials. Photos depicting project activities were posted in the meeting hall; brochures, completion reports, instruction manuals and project products were also available.
To allow all parties to arrive and set up, the exhibition did not commence until the morning of the second day. November 8th began with the official opening ceremony, in which the chief of district officers of Khao Khitchakut District presided and gave an encouraging keynote speech. Following the chief, the GEF SGP National Coordinator delivered his welcoming remarks by reviewing the history of GEF SGP and how he felt about this get-together. After the official opening, the chief spent almost half-an-hour visiting and conversing with project members at their respective dissemination stations in the hall. Also in attendance were other district officers, including staff from local schools and the Provincial Corrective Department, which was a major stakeholder of the host grantee (THA-05-13). The chief, when requested to give his reaction regarding what he had seen and heard, offered relevant and enthusiastic feedback.
The sharing of project summaries and results then began. Throughout the day, ten projects were presented, eight of which used PowerPoint and audio-visual equipment, (an impressive feat considering the limited resources and IT skills of most community-based organizations). Three projects relied upon sets of photos and detailed documents. The remaining session of the day was spent on a site visit to the host grantee?s project.
On the third day, the National Coordinator and his team took the floor to explain the future plan of GEF Phase 4, during which the grantees would work to upscale their current activities, and build and solidify their network. Advice on using interactive online mapping to strengthen the network was also given.
It will be interesting to follow how this group would proceed with their future plans. It is notable that during the workshop, the term global warming was often heard, even from two projects whose activities did not directly address this issue.
