This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by Malcolm J. Odell, PhD; Joseph Dowhan, PhD; and S.M.A. Rashid, PhD, for the Accelerating Capacity for Monitoring and Evaluation (ACME) activity held by International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI). BENGAL TIGER CONSERVATION ACTIVITY (BAGH) MID-TERM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Final Report February 21, 2017 BENGAL TIGER CONSERVATION ACTIVITY (BAGH) MID-TERM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Final Report February 21, 2017 Mid-Term Performance Evaluation Final Report Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (BAGH) February 21, 2017 Original Submission: December 13, 2016 AID-388-C-14-00001 (USAID/Bangladesh Accelerating Capacity for Monitoring and Evaluation) International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 8618 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 400 Vienna, VA 22182 Cover Photo: Tiger taking refuge on rooftop after having killed a woman and cattle. Such incidents have greatly decreased with creation and expansion of Village Tiger Response Teams. (Photo: Bhabatosh Kumar, Chmn, Union Parishad, Burigoalini) DISCLAIMER The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Draft Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) i CONTENTS Acronyms................................................................................................................................................................................ iii Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 Overall Performance ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 Findings ................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Recommendations ...............................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined. Lessons Learned ................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Project Background ............................................................................................................................................................... 7 Evaluation Purpose and Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 8 Evaluation Questions ............................................................................................................................................................ 8 Evaluation Methodology and Limitations ......................................................................................................................... 9 Findings ................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Evaluation Question 1. Overall Performance ........................................................................................................... 12 Evaluation Question 2. Capacity Building and Efficiency ........................................................................................ 17 Evaluation Question 3. Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................... 20 Evaluation Question 4. Sustainability .......................................................................................................................... 21 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................................... 23 Evaluation Question 1. Overall Performance ........................................................................................................... 23 Evaluation Question 2. Capacity Building .................................................................................................................. 25 Evaluation Question 3. Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................... 25 Evaluation Question 4. Sustainability.......................................................................................................................... 26 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................................... 27 Lessons Learned ................................................................................................................................................................... 29 Table of Figures Figure 1. Sundarbans Areas visited during the evaluation 10 Table 1. Bagh Progress on 16 Key Performance Indicators 12 Table 2. Survey Respondents’ Familiarity with and Assessments of Bagh 13 Table 3. Estimated Numbers of Tigers in Sundarbans Using Different Survey Methods 14 Table 4. BaghBondhus: Numbers of Groups and Membership by Gender 15 Table 5. Bagh Components Ranked Most Important to Communities/Respondents 15 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Draft Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) ii ANNEXES ANNEX I Evaluation Statement of Work ........................................................................................................... 30 ANNEX II Evaluation Methods and Limitations ................................................................................................. 43 ANNEX III Data Collection Instruments..............................................................................................................63 ANNEX IV Evaluation Itinerary, Meetings, and Field Schedule ........................................................................81 ANNEX V List of Persons Contacted .................................................................................................................. 88 ANNEX VI List of Documents Reviewed .............................................................................................................. 91 ANNEX VII Quantitative Data Summary – Survey Responses ....................................................................... 103 ANNEX VIII Bagh Data Sheets/Thumbnails ........................................................................................................... 110 ANNEX IX Bagh Data Table on Performance Indicators ................................................................................ 112 ANNEX X Tiger Stories and Tales from the Sundarbans ............................................................................... 114 ANNEX XI Signed Disclosures of Conflicts of Interest Forms……………………………………….117 ANNEX XII Summary Information About Evaluation Team Members…..…………………………… 122 GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS bagh tiger (in Bangla) BaghBondhu Friends of Tigers – Locally selected tiger ambassadors who lead the village forums organized under the Bagh. Sundarbans A region comprising southern Bangladesh and West Bengal in India. It is the largest single block of tidal halophytic mangrove forest in the world, covering approximately 10,000 square km. It is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. upazila Sub-district or administrative unit in Bangladesh. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Draft Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) iii ACRONYMS ACDI/VOCA Agricultural Cooperative Development International/Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance ACME Accelerating Capacity for Monitoring and Evaluation AIG Alternate Income Generation AOR Agreement Officer’s Representative BCAS Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies BEDS Bangladesh Environment and Development Society BFD Bangladesh Forest Department BRAC Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee – an INGO CARINAM Centre for Advanced Research in Natural Resources & Management – a national NGO CA CCF Cooperative Agreement Chief Conservator of Forests CDCS Country Development Cooperation Strategy CF Conservator of Forests CISS Center for Integrated Studies on the Sundarbans CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora CMC Co-Management Committee CMO Community Management Organizations COP Chief of Party COR Contract Officer’s Representative CREL Climate- Resilient Ecosystems and Livelihoods CWT Combating Wildlife Trafficking DO Development Objective DOAG Development Objective Grant Agreement DOJ Department of Justice ETRT Emergency Tiger Response Team FD Forest Department FGD Focus Group Discussion FTRT Forest Tiger Response Team FY Fiscal Year GIZ Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH GOB Government of Bangladesh GWC Gender Working Committee HTC Human- Tiger Conflict HWC Human- Wildlife Conflict IBTCI International Business and Technical Consultants, Inc. ICCWC International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime ICITAP International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program IGA Income Generating Activities INGO International Non-Government Organization IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature IWM Institute of Water Modeling JICA Japanese International Cooperation Agency KII Key Informant Interview LOE Level of Effort M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOEF Ministry of Environment & Forest MOU Memorandum of Understanding NGO Non-Government Organization NRM Natural Resource Management USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Draft Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) iv NTFP Non-Timber Forest Product PPP Public-Private Partnerships RAB Rapid Action Battalion RI Relief International RUPANTAR A national NGO, whose name means social transformation in Bangla. SAC SAWEN Special Award Conditions South Asian Wildlife Enforcement Network SI The U.S. Smithsonian Institution SMART Spatial Monitoring and Recording Tool SOW Statement of Work SRCWP SUSHILAN Strengthening Regional Cooperation for Wildlife Protection in Asia A national NGO TAPP Technical Assistance Project Proposal ToT Training of Trainers UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime USAID U.S. Agency for International Development USG United States Government UTTARAN National NGO VTRT Village Tiger Response Team WCCU Wildlife Crime Control Unit WCS Wildlife Conservation Society WT WildTeam -– Local NGO implementing Bagh USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (referred to hereafter as “Bagh”) focuses on tiger conservation in the Sundarbans, home to the endangered Royal Bengal tiger. Under the leadership of the Bangladesh Forest Department (FD), USAID’s Bagh is implemented under a USAID Cooperative Agreement (CA) by WildTeam, a national organization working for biodiversity conservation in Bangladesh since 2003. Bagh receives technical support focusing on scientific research from the Smithsonian Institution (SI) and the Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies (BCAS). Bagh is a four￾year project operating from January 15, 2014, to January 14, 2018, with just over one year remaining at the time of this evaluation. Bagh is a key activity under USAID/Bangladesh’s Development Objective 4 (DO4): Responsiveness to Climate Change as described in the Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS). It includes five components: (1) Expanded Knowledge Base, (2) Reduced Wildlife Trafficking, (3) Minimized Human-Wildlife Conflict, (4) Enhanced Communications, Outreach, and Gender Engagement, and (5) Improved Livelihoods for Conservation. This evaluation was conducted between October 12, 2016, and December 15, 2016, using a mixed￾methods approach that included qualitative evidence from 99 meetings with 156 participants in all four Sundarbans ranges. These included Key Informant Interviews (KII); Focus Group Discussions (FGD) with participants, beneficiaries, and male and female community groups; and an additional non-random mini-survey given to 156 respondents, including KII and FGD participants and other local villagers. OVERALL PERFORMANCE Bagh faced start-up delays and obstacles, including the early resignation and replacement of the Bagh Chief of Party (COP), recruiting and hiring delays for key staff, the need for a Special Agreement with USAID, and delayed Technical Assistance Project Proposal (TAPP) agreements between Bagh and the Government of Bangladesh (GOB)1 and between WildTeam and the SI. Nevertheless, Bagh has made progress on several of its major components, especially in expanding the knowledge base and the introduction of new research methods (Component 1), effectively expanding SMART2 patrolling methodology and implementation (Component 2), and minimizing human-tiger conflicts through a vigorous program of Village Tiger Response Teams (VTRT) (Component 3). Anti-poaching and anti-wildlife trafficking activities are among the most effective activities of the Bagh project, suggesting a possible, though not confirmed, reduction in illegal wildlife trafficking. One consequence of the delayed start-up to the project was that SI’s status surveys for tigers, their prey, and their habitat were also belatedly initiated, resulting in a loss of opportunity to gather essential data. Because of the seasonal requirements of status surveys, it is likely that a third year of surveys in 2017-2018 may not be accomplished before the project implementation ends. Without additional field surveys, accurate trend estimates for tiger numbers will be extremely difficult.3 Impressive outreach/communications initiatives early in the project life, including a successful “Tiger Caravan” (a touring mobile exhibit on tigers and the Sundarbans), drew nationwide attention. The Caravan received extensive media coverage and attracted over 250,000 visitors, including the Prime Minister, the media, and top officials. This effort raised awareness in local communities and more widely across Bangladesh and beyond, reaching over 1 million via Facebook, despite lasting only three months.4 Nevertheless, Bagh successes, particularly around Components 2 and 3, have been tempered by below-par progress on community and gender engagement and livelihoods (Components 4 and 5). Bagh has missed important opportunities for broadly involving women, and 1 Summary Report on 16 indicators, Annex IX; Bagh Team meetings, 24 and 27 Oct. and 14 Nov. 2016. 2 SMART: Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool – conservation data collection software. 3 Smithsonian Interviews, 22 Oct., 5 Nov. 2016. 4 Key Informant Interview meetings and Community Focus Groups, Bagh Team & CEO meetings, 24 Oct.-17 Nov. 2016, 16 Indicators Summary below. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 2 livelihood opportunities through local crafts and community-based eco-tourism that promotes local community “ownership” for sustainability, something keenly sought by local villagers, VTRTs, BaghBondhus, and women’s groups. Three years into project implementation there is still insufficient scientific evidence to determine either tiger numbers or trends. Without further scientific research, there remains concern among international conservation NGOs, U.S. Government agencies, and local scientists interviewed that – in spite of law enforcement and effective anti-trafficking progress – actual numbers of Royal Bengal Tigers and overall condition of the Sundarbans mangrove ecosystem are not adequately known and, in fact, could be declining. FINDINGS Question 1. Overall Performance: To what extent is the Bagh on track, in terms of progress and outcomes, to meet its overall goals under its five components? Bagh has made progress toward achieving outcomes for its first three major components for (1) Expanding the Knowledge Base, (2) Reducing Illegal Wildlife Trafficking, and (3) Minimizing Human-Wildlife Conflict. Progress was made toward expanding the knowledge base, although it was limited due to the late start and the initial inability to use camera traps. There has been no progress on about half of the activity indicators. Interviews with implementers, partners, and FD staff confirmed that issues and obstacles, including delayed agreements between Bagh, SI, and GOB, resulted in SI scientists not being hired during this first year and thus being unable to initiate status surveys for tigers, their prey, and their habitat until the second year – a critical loss of opportunity to gather essential data for this project. The Evaluation Team’s KIIs and community meetings showed that capacity building efforts contributed to awareness building throughout Sundarbans communities and more broadly across Bangladesh. The extensive SMART Patrol and VTRT training was also judged by both trainees and other respondents to be very successful in reducing human-wildlife conflict. WildTeam’s internal capacity was strengthened, while a “Boot Camp” gave new skills to young researchers in data collection and analysis. These activities accelerated achievement of targets by enhancing the knowledge base through data collection, enabling wildlife crime investigation, and reducing human-wildlife conflict. Gender mainstreaming throughout Bagh is behind schedule. A Gender Specialist and an approved strategy to mainstream gender across all components have just recently been put in place. The WildTeam’s “WildWomen” think tank is reported to be meeting only occasionally, with very little activity to date. Across the Sundarbans communities, among VTRTs, FTRTs, BaghBondhu, and women’s groups – as well as in KII and survey interviews – the Evaluation Team found improved livelihoods for conservation to be the top priority among all Bagh components.5 However in spite of this interest, Bagh belatedly and inadequately explored potential activities to support alternative livelihoods or indigenous crafts, perhaps because it was not part of the original WildTeam agenda. Question 2. Capacity Building and Efficiency: What have been the results to date of Bagh’s institutional and individual capacity building efforts directed at the project’s key stakeholders: the Bangladesh Forest Department, other GOB agencies, WildTeam, and local communities? Spatial Monitoring and Recording Tool (SMART) patrolling and Village Tiger Response Team (VTRT) training have both worked well, as evidenced by several KIIs and community discussions. Although 5 Source: Survey of 156 respondents, including all women’s groups, VTRTs, and Key Informants. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 3 conclusive evidence was elusive, local communities, officials, and newspapers credited SMART patrols and VTRTs for reduced poaching and Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC)/ Human-Tiger Conflict (HTC) in most villages. In turn, members of VTRTs, as well as outside observers, credited BAGH training for making the VTRTs more successful in reducing HWC/HTC. The activity’s relevant performance indicator also supports such a conclusion, showing an improvement during the activity lifetime in the rate of HWC incidences that were “effectively managed.” Bagh and FD also point to declining arrests for wildlife-related crimes as an indication that SMART patrolling is being effective in discouraging poachers and other illegal forest users, but other stakeholders disagree this is conclusive evidence of reduced poaching. SMART training has been restricted to the western sanctuary. Bagh VTRTs also serve a valuable function in raising environmental awareness in their villages while promoting greater respect for tigers, other wildlife, and the forest ecosystem. VTRT members and volunteers demonstrated ownership and a sense of responsibility to the evaluation team and credited the support they receive from Bagh. According to staff of Bagh/WildTeam, training of trainers (ToTs), was not included in its work plan due to cost and time limitations. Departure of trained FD personnel from postings in the Sundarbans has resulted in the loss of key expertise on the Sundarbans. KIIs with Bagh and FD senior and mid-level management and knowledgeable observers confirmed that collaboration, coordination, and trust between Bagh/WildTeam and other government agencies, particularly the FD, has been poor, although it is improving. However, coordination at the field level between Bagh and frontline Forest Guards has been reported by management and VTRTs to be much better than at upper levels. Component 2 of the CA says Bagh should build capacity in the Wildlife Crime Control Unit (WCCU), but it has actually provided very little support, and WCCU is not functioning as the interagency coordinator on wildlife crime it was created to become. In March 2016, the Bagh/WildTeam facilitated multi-agency collaboration for the protection of tigers through a national-level dialogue involving all the major players in government, including policy￾makers. Workshops were held in both Dhaka and Sundarbans, and the forum received praise from the media for its high level of participation and agreement on important recommendations. Bagh says it has met over 90% of the requirements for internal capacity building imposed by its USAID SAC. Question 3. Effectiveness: Are project components implemented in a sufficiently complementary manner to achieve project objectives? Bagh/WildTeam appears to be working in a complementary manner internally; silos among components do not appear to be a problem. Evidence uncovered during the evaluation showed that the livelihoods/alternate income generation (AIG) component lacks the necessary creativity and engagement with communities to develop new innovative approaches for improving their economic well-being and reducing their dependence on forest products. As noted in the answer to Question 2, poor relations with GOB officials often make it more difficult to achieve project objectives. Question 4. Sustainability: What have been the major constraints and opportunities with respect to sustainability of the interventions? What specific measures should be taken to enhance sustainability? Under the terms of the CA, Bagh was supposed to establish a “Post-Bagh Continuation Working Group” specifically to map out a sustainability plan, including work on fundraising and public-private partnerships (PPPs) in Years 3-4 for activities to be continued outside the GOB budget, but the team found no evidence of the group and little evidence of such work. The team was told during its visit that a Bagh/WildTeam Sustainability Plan was in draft but not available yet. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 4 KII discussions with both Bagh partners and local NGOs and INGOs indicated that Bagh has not appeared particularly interested in partnerships with other organizations and has missed opportunities to involve local, national, or international organizations beyond SI, such as CARINAM, BEDS, Relief International, BRAC, RUPANTAR, and even FD itself, all of which would have been worth exploration by Bagh to enhance sustainability. Team observations, KIIs, and community meetings revealed that community ownership for the protection of the Sundarbans has not been encouraged. The Evaluation Team also learned that the communities and VTRTs do not have full trust in the Community Management Organizations (CMOs)/Co-Management Committees (CMCs) formed under USAID’s Climate-Resilient Ecosystems and Livelihoods (CREL) activity for the explicit purpose of building local ownership. Question 5. Strategic Options for Future Programming: See Recommendations section. CONCLUSIONS Question 1. Overall Performance: To what extent is the Bagh on track, in terms of progress and outcomes, to meet its overall goals under its five components? Although the Bagh has made some progress on its performance indicators, it has not achieved any results on half of these indicators. Delays in start-up, particularly the inability to conduct a survey during the first year, make it essentially impossible to accomplish all the activity’s goals within the activity implementation time frame. Bagh’s continuing promotion and conduct of SMART Patrol training has been a success in contributing to the reduction of illegal wildlife trafficking, but it is limited by being confined to only the western sanctuary. Bagh’s failure to assess existing livelihood schemes or examine best practices from other countries in the region and beyond led to missed opportunities to identify market-driven, climate-resilient alternative livelihood innovations that could have helped these vulnerable populations. Question 2. Capacity Building and Efficiency: What have been the results to date of Bagh’s institutional and individual capacity building efforts directed at the project’s key stakeholders: the Bangladesh Forest Department, other GOB agencies, WildTeam, and local communities? Bagh’s efforts to build capacity in VTRTs have borne fruit and the trained VTRTs perform vital services in reducing HWC/HTC. It has done relatively little training for other related GOB agencies outside of VTRTs and SMART patrols. Bagh’s relations with FD are good at the grassroots level (a potential basis for strong cooperation and ToT during Bagh’s last year should ToT be pursued), but get progressively weaker up the organization chain. It may have been unrealistic to expect Bagh to play an interagency coordinating role for the GOB. Bagh has not formed partnerships with Bangladesh NGOs, such as BEDS and BRAC, which could have offered expertise on livelihoods issues or eco-tourism. Question 3. Effectiveness: Are project components implemented in a sufficiently complementary manner to achieve project objectives? Gender engagement is not yet fully effective. Women’s traditional roles in conservation have not been seriously explored. By contrast, SMART Patrol and VTRT initiatives have been particularly effective and have complemented each other remarkably well. Bagh’s difficult relations with GOB agencies have complicated its ability to achieve project objectives. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 5 Question 4. Sustainability: What have been the major constraints and opportunities with respect to sustainability of the interventions? What specific measures should be taken to enhance sustainability? Bagh and WildTeam have not achieved a significant level of sustainability for the majority of their current initiatives. VTRTs may be an exception. The Sustainability Strategy that was to begin in Year 1 has been significantly delayed and is only now under serious development. The evaluation team did not observe actions underway that can be of real use during the one year remaining for ensuring long-range sustainability. Sustainability depends on increasing local community ownership of all Bagh activities, and ultimately the Sundarbans itself. There does not seem to be a plan for continuing community mobilization, empowerment training, and facilitation beyond the Bagh. The reported mistrust between Bagh-supported VTRTs and CREL-supported CMOs/CMCs is a problem that needs to be better understood for the success of sustainability efforts. RECOMMENDATIONS Question 5. Strategic Options for Future Programming: Given the current state of wildlife trafficking in Bangladesh, how can USAID best direct future resources, both strategically and programmatically, to implement the United States Government’s National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking in Bangladesh? Specific to Bagh:  USAID should approve at least a six-month no-cost extension of Bagh to permit a third-year SI tiger population survey beginning at the end of 2017, and that survey should be extended to the whole Sundarbans using camera trapping.  WildTeam should pursue collaborative relationships with local and academic institutions and environmental I/NGOs for longer-term (post-Bagh) research and funding.  Bagh, or a follow-on activity, should assist the GOB with designing and deploying credible systems for reporting, monitoring, and analyzing poaching and HWC.  SMART patrol and VTRT training, patrols, and ToT should be expanded to the whole of the Sundarbans, and ToT capacity in the FD should be built. Following the end of Bagh, VTRT capacity building should be an FD responsibility.  Bagh should consider revising and making permanent its mobile “Tiger Caravan” community consciousness activity.  Gender should be mainstreamed through all Bagh activities.  During its last year of implementation, Bagh should redouble efforts to promote community￾based eco-tourism and handicrafts. To help it do so, it should examine the experience of other USAID Natural Resource Management (NRM) activities and lessons from eco-tourism in neighboring countries. It should also seek links with Bangladeshi NGOs/women’s groups with proven records in eco-tourism and livelihood activities.  Bagh should support local community “ownership” of their environmental resources. USAID should work with Bagh and CREL to understand the reported mistrust between stakeholders of their two projects and take steps to address it if necessary. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 6 USAID/USG can help by:  Supporting/facilitating capacity building for GOB agencies with wildlife crime-countering responsibilities training efforts through USG agencies with relevant experience.  Encouraging and assisting the WCCU in playing its originally envisioned interagency coordinating role and in establishing international and transboundary relationships and networking with bordering countries through the South Asian Wildlife Enforcement Network (SAWEN) and Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ Wildlife Enforcement Network (ASEAN-WEN). LESSONS LEARNED  The small WildTeam organization appears to have been provided with more funding than it could readily manage during its four-year level of effort (LOE) given its limited capacity, the interagency challenges, and the logistics of operating in the Sundarbans.  This activity also demonstrated the importance of getting to know the “players” in any activity early on. Bagh could have learned from the experience of other NGOs in Bangladesh with, for example, livelihoods activities and how to deal with the GOB.  Useful lessons regarding effective collaboration between government and local communities also can be learned from the successful experience of neighboring countries, especially Nepal, where SI has strong links worthy of creative exploration.  Bagh’s admitted deficiencies around community engagement, gender, and livelihoods could have been better addressed through immediate implementation of its well-conceived community￾based Eco-Tourism strategy. INTRODUCTION USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (referred to hereafter as “Bagh”), while focused on the Royal Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris), addresses an environmental issue with broader global significance. The tiger, critically endangered,6 represents the apex of an ecosystem that embraces the Sundarbans, the world’s largest mangrove forest (and among the most threatened), comprising the delta of Asia’s largest river systems. This vast delta on the Bay of Bengal is formed by the super confluence of the Ganges, Padma, Brahmaputra, and Meghna rivers across southern Bangladesh. The Sundarbans mangrove forests protect the delta from storm surges and sequester far more carbon than a non-coastal tropical forest.7 When tigers thrive in this wild area, they also ensure the survival of thousands of wild flora and fauna of the Sundarbans – designated by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as a World Heritage Site in 1997. The decline of apex predators may lead to overabundance of herbivores such as deer, which in turn has repercussions on tree regeneration and seed dispersal.8 Such effects cause long-term changes in natural flora and fauna, eventually leading to species loss. Tigers thus protect the green mangrove wall that supports the livelihoods of Sundarbans inhabitants and shields millions of people from cyclone and flood disasters that are likely to increase with climate change. 6 IUCN Redlist 2015, World Heritage Site: 1997. 7 USAID’s DO4 Development Hypothesis captures this bigger picture: “Improved management of natural resources alongside livelihood diversification, climate risk management and enhanced capacity for low emissions development will address adoption and mitigation of Global Climate Change (GCC), while providing sustainable economic benefits and clean energy resources for Bangladesh.” 8 http://globaltigerinitiative.org/about-tigers/why-tigers/ The absence of carnivores has led to over-population of white-tailed deer in Eastern United States, the blue bull in the Gangeatic plains of northern India, and the agouti in Barro Colorado Island, Panama. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 7 Bagh thus aims to ensure more than just the survival of Sundarbans tigers. USAID’s Development Hypothesis for Bagh is that “if wildlife conservation strategies are adopted and practiced by local communities and government entities, then the tigers will be protected, thereby conserving the Sundarbans and its biodiversity, increasing/allowing community’s access to sustainable resources for their respective livelihoods.” Under the leadership of the Bangladesh Forest Department (FD), USAID’s Bagh is implemented by WildTeam, a Bangladeshi NGO working for biodiversity conservation in the country since 2003. Bagh receives technical support from the Smithsonian Institution (SI) and the Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies (BCAS). Bagh seeks to address USAID’s Development Hypothesis by making the relationship between the Sundarbans and the adjacent people stronger and safer by empowering communities and institutions to take ownership of protecting the revered Bengal Tiger and its extraordinary forest home. Bagh’s implementation period is four years – January 15, 2014, to January 14, 2018 – of which it has completed almost three years. PROJECT BACKGROUND USAID’s Bagh builds on a long history of Sundarbans conservation, going back to the 19th century, which has received earlier support from USAID and other major donors, especially since being listed as a World Heritage Site two decades ago. The project is one of the activities under USAID/Bangladesh’s Development Objective 4 (DO4): Responsiveness to Climate Change, as described in the USAID Bangladesh Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS). Bagh includes five components: 1. Expanded Knowledge Base – Bagh supports priority research to inform wildlife management interventions for the targeted landscapes. It also develops tools and platforms for knowledge sharing, collaborative research, and learning. 2. Reduced Wildlife Trafficking – Bagh provides targeted support to the development of the national Wildlife Crime Control Unit (WCCU). The activity facilitates engagement with regional and international enforcement bodies, strengthens patrol efforts on the ground, and will pilot models for community-based anti-poaching action. 3. Minimized Human-Wildlife Conflict – Communities living adjacent to the Sundarbans still have unhealed wounds resulting from tiger-human conflict. Bagh is strengthening the VTRTs that deal with stray tigers by providing veterinary training for conflict tiger handling, establishing a system for conflict prediction and monitoring, and promoting safety skills inside the forest to minimize injury and fatalities to tigers and humans. 4. Enhanced Communications, Outreach, and Gender Engagement – Bagh’s communications focus is to engage different audiences to play their part in conserving the tiger as the flagship species and natural guardian of the Sundarbans, thus conserving natural resources for future generations. Bagh also continues and builds upon WildTeam’s ongoing “Mother-like Sundarbans” campaign to inspire the involvement of the local communities. Behavioral change through improved communications strategies, outreach, and gender engagement is being targeted throughout this campaign for addressing human threats to wildlife, including tigers, and the Sundarbans as their habitat. 5. Improved Livelihoods for Conservation – Bagh works on mapping forest resources that local communities use daily, as well as reviewing past and current Alternative Income Generating (AIG) activities and their viability in Bagh’s targeted sites. From this, Bagh is formulating its own strategy that may either work to expand existing alternative livelihoods, or create new options should there be a market for new products. Bagh also will launch a national competition to inspire innovative eco-friendly livelihood ideas for people who depend on the Sundarbans for food and income. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 8 EVALUATION PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES At the time of the evaluation, with one year remaining in Bagh’s implementation period, USAID tasked IBTCI’s Accelerating Capacity for Monitoring and Evaluation (ACME) project to evaluate the performance of the activity. Consistent with USAID’s 2011 Evaluation Policy, the primary goal of this evaluation is to provide evidence so that USAID can determine whether Bagh has been able to achieve its desired results to date. The secondary goal of the evaluation is to inform what course corrections, if any, are needed, to identify specific project interventions that can be scaled up further and to determine best ways to ensure sustainability of the activities, institutions, and capacities promoted by the project. This evaluation will also recommend key strategic and programmatic options to USAID for future engagement to combat trafficking of Bengal tigers, and to protect their habitats and other endangered wildlife species in Bangladesh. EVALUATION QUESTIONS Specifically, to address these two main goals, this evaluation addresses five major questions and 24 sub-questions that were specified by USAID to review Bagh and each of its five components. 1. Overall Performance To what extent is the Bagh on track, in terms of progress and outcomes, to meet its overall goals under its five components?  Responses to this question should include but are not limited to: o What factors (internal or external to the project) affected timely achievement of targets? o For those factors that impeded performance, are they still a threat to timely achievement of targets? If so, how can they be overcome? o For those factors that accelerated achievement of targets, how can they be leveraged to continue to do so?  Given the time remaining, what opportunities exist to enhance and strengthen programmatic effectiveness, such as by adding, changing, re-scaling, and/or removing activities to meet or surpass targets/objectives, within the stipulations of the Bagh agreement?  What specific results have been achieved today on gender integration into the Bagh?  What changes/developments have there been in the community in line with the outcomes since the start of the project? Which of these are attributable to this project? What differences have these changes made to people’s lives? 2. Capacity Building and Efficiency What have been the results to date of Bagh’s institutional and individual capacity building efforts directed at the project’s key stakeholders: the Bangladesh Forest Department (BFD), other GOB agencies, WildTeam (WT), and local communities?  In answering this question, the Contractor should identify which activities have worked well, which have not worked well, and what concrete actions can be taken to improve the impact of the project’s capacity development efforts.  To what extent have technical inputs – such as but not limited to the established WildTeam organizational structure, staff trainings, operational procedures and tools, and others – improved efficiency in implementation of Bagh?  In regard to GOB agencies, the Contractor should consider how effective the project has been at developing the critical government relationships and capacities necessary for the project’s success. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 9 3. Effectiveness Are project components implemented in a sufficiently complementary manner to achieve project objectives?  Specific questions used to assess project effectiveness include but are not limited to: o How effective have the project’s gender engagement activities been under Component 4? o Should the project continue with its approach to Component 5 (Improved Livelihoods for Conservation)? 4. Sustainability What have been the major constraints and opportunities with respect to sustainability of the interventions? What specific measures should be taken to enhance sustainability?  Specific questions used to assess sustainability include but are not limited to: o How can the project institutionalize Spatial Monitoring and Recording Tool (SMART) patrolling of the Sundarbans by the Forest Department (FD), Tiger Caravan campaign, camera traps, and others? o Are the Village Tiger Response Teams (VTRTs) on track to becoming sustainable institutions after the life of the project? o To what extent is WildTeam on track to developing funding streams and internal control and operational systems to sustain activities after the life of the project? 5. Strategic Options for Future Programming Given the current state of wildlife trafficking in Bangladesh, how can USAID best direct future resources, both strategically and programmatically, to implement the United States Government’s (USG) National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking (CWT) in Bangladesh?  Responses to this question should include but are not limited to: o What are the key lessons learned from Bagh implementation for consideration to USAID future program design and implementation? o What recommendations can be made to USAID in terms of improving CWT results framework and development hypothesis and its links to the USAID Bangladesh’s CDCS and the USG CWT Strategy? EVALUATION METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS The Evaluation Team (“Team”) used a mixed-methods approach that included Key Informant Interviews (KII), Focus Group Discussions (FGD), a mini-survey, extensive field observations, and comprehensive document review. The Team conducted site visits and interviews in Dhaka and all four Sundarbans Ranges, including a cross-section of districts, upazilas, unions, and villages. Both KIIs and FGDs sought evidence for (1) What works? What are Bagh’s greatest successes? (2) What does “even better” look like, including visions for maximum but realistic achievement during the relatively short project duration remaining, and (3) Suggested action plans for achieving realistic targets within the remaining time frame. The Design Matrix (Annex I) for the evaluation details the data sources, data collection methods, data collection instruments, and analysis of data to answer each of the evaluation questions. The Team ensured gender disaggregation of data and gave special attention to gender relations and the participation of women in training, income generation, and community engagement. Document review included 58 (38 annotated) Bagh, USAID, IUCN, FAO, GOB, and other secondary data sources as well as 26 current publications and news reports that appeared in the daily press during the duration of the evaluation. Using the semi-structured questionnaires (Annex III), the Team conducted a total of 29 Key Informant Interviews (KII) including the Bagh Agreement Officer’s USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 10 Representative (AOR); relevant USAID AORs; the Bagh Chief of Party (COP) and Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP); other Bagh/WildTeam staff; a range of donors and organizations involved with wildlife/habitat conservation; private sector representatives; and relevant GOB, NGO, and international organization officials involved in environmental conservation, particularly as related to the Sundarbans. Complementing KIIs, the Team also conducted in-depth focus group discussions with a sample of project communities and stakeholders, both male and female (Annex III). In all, the Team spent two full weeks in the field in all four Ranges of the Sundarbans and conducted 99 meetings with Bagh, SI, and Forest Department staff and local community members; including 29 KIIs, 11 Focus Groups of 6- 12 participants each in Sundarbans communities (including five Forest and Village Tiger Response Teams [FTRT/VTRT]); spoke to six BaghBondhus and women’s groups; and held 35 non-random interviews with local people encountered on the street (Annex III, V). The team utilized questionnaire A in Annex III to do a “mini-survey” of 156 individuals, including individuals who had already participated in KIIs (29) and FGDs (92), as well as the 35 non-random interviews mentioned above. Prior to the start of the evaluation, the Team met with USAID’s Office of Economic Growth in Dhaka to review the evaluation methodology and address any concerns the EG office may have had. Following field work, draft findings and conclusions were shared with USAID during initial and follow-up meetings and weekly reports with the Bagh team, key partners and stakeholders, including GOB officials, incorporating a second round of feedback in the final report. The Team’s itinerary and work plan schedule (Annex IV) was shared with ACME and USAID and adjusted based on feedback from both ACME and USAID. Two debriefing presentations of preliminary findings, conclusions and recommendations were held with USAID and stakeholders prior to the Team’s departure. Figure 1. Sundarbans areas visited during evaluation. The black lines indicate the routes of Team travels through each of the four Sundarbans Ranges. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 11 EVALUATION LIMITATIONS While the Team had excellent access to a broad range of Bagh staff, key informants, and community groups working and living in Sundarbans conservation areas and familiar with Bagh, based on security concerns and cyclone warnings, Bagh and the FD recommended that the team not visit some activity areas only accessible by boat. Therefore, the Team was not able to visit many of the villages and many of the FD guards posted along the rivers and at the mouth of the Sundarbans. Despite these limitations, the Team was still able to observe guard posts and visit a significant cross-section of communities and organizations directly involved in Bagh in all four ranges, including VTRTs, FTRTs, BaghBondhus, and women’s groups, and to interview a non-random sample of 35 local people. Potential bias inherent in KIIs was addressed by ensuring follow-up interviews with other informants to ensure diverse perspectives and to triangulate findings. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 12 FINDINGS We have taken up many initiatives to protect the Bengal tiger…. But it is not possible to keep them alive forever…. Initiatives … to protect Sundarbans’ tigers are ineffective since local influential political leaders are involved in poaching. 9 Minister of Environment and Forest, Anwar Hossain Manju, Dec. 3, 2016 EVALUATION QUESTION 1. OVERALL PERFORMANCE  To what extent is Bagh on track, in terms of progress and outcomes, to meet its overall goals under its five components? What factors (internal or external to the project) affected timely achievement of targets?  Responses to this question should include but are not limited to: o What factors (internal or external to the project) affected timely achievement of targets? o For those factors that impeded performance, are they still a threat to timely achievement of targets? If so, how can they be overcome? o For those factors that accelerated achievement of targets, how can they be leveraged to continue to do so?  Given the time remaining, what opportunities exist to enhance and strengthen programmatic effectiveness such as by adding, changing, re-scaling, and/or removing activities to meet or surpass targets/objectives, within the stipulations of the Bagh agreement?  What specific results have been achieved today on gender integration into Bagh?  What changes/developments have there been in the community in line with the outcomes since the start of the project? Which of these are attributable to this project? What differences have these changes made to people’s lives? Despite start-up delays and obstacles that prevented accomplishments during year one, Bagh has made important progress toward achieving outcomes for its first three major components for (1) Expanding the Knowledge Base, (2) Reducing Illegal Wildlife Trafficking, and (3) Minimizing Human￾Wildlife Conflict. Progress on (1), although limited due to the late start and not initially being able to use camera traps, includes a strong partnership with the Smithsonian Institution, the introduction of new research methods, effective and expanding SMART patrolling methodology and implementation, and improved collaboration with the Forest Department. Similarly, anti-poaching and anti-wildlife trafficking activities under (2) are proving to have positive impacts, suggesting a possible reduction in illegal wildlife trafficking. Likewise, a vigorous program of Village Tiger Response Teams (VTRT) is active, enthusiastic, and appears to be making a positive impact in reducing human-wildlife conflicts.10 9 Speaking at Bagh-sponsored event “Greater Dialogue for a Greater Cause” to save the Bengal Tiger population in the Sundarbans, Dhaka, Dec. 3, 2016. 10 Sources: Bagh and partner Key informant interviews (KII); field observations; community; VTRT BaghBondhu meetings; Focus Group community meetings, Mini-Survey conducted by Evaluation Team; See Annexes VII and X. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 13 Table 1. Bagh Progress on 16 Key Performance Indicators This table, along with additional information from interviews and focus groups, reveals that overall performance results have been mixed, largely due to start-up and FD approval delays. For indicators 1 and 2, the data indicate that there has been no reliable baseline established for tigers and key species such as spotted dear and wild boar. Similarly no progress is evident in drafting or adoption of laws, policies, plans, or regulations at the government level (indicator 3). Some measurable progress has been made, however, concerning outputs for knowledge-related indicators 4 and 5 that show a 10% increase from baseline in wildlife knowledge and positive attitudes among members of community groups.11 VTRT activities (no. 6) and NRM training (no. 7) have also shown measurable progress. Results for indicators 8-10 – research studies, improved NRM, and joint community patrolling groups – have shown little or no progress. Priority research – including DNA barcoding and prey species scat samples (animal droppings/fecal material) – could have been undertaken under Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with academic institutions (Khulna University, Chittagong Veterinary University, and Jahangirnagar University) that were drafted, but the MOUs were never implemented and research has yet to begin.12 Overall, performance against Indicators 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 14, 15, and 16 lags behind targets. The mini-survey conducted by the evaluation team (Table 2) revealed that the majority of persons contacted during the evaluation were reasonably familiar with Bagh, while almost a third were very familiar. Similarly, the majority felt Bagh was reasonably beneficial while over one-quarter found Bagh very beneficial, meeting their personal expectations regarding overall performance. Only one respondent found Bagh’s contribution not beneficial. 11 Source: Bagh Reports, Summary of 16 Performance Indicators, Annex IX. 12 KII interview, Khulna University, 6 Nov. 16. Indicator No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Summary indicator definitions Tiger numbers Prey species Laws, regs., plans Wildlife knowledge in groups % Positive attitudes % VTRT activity nos. Training person hours Research studies Improved mgt. hectares Community patrol groups nos. SMART patrols nos. Users safety nos. HWC managed nos. Improved incomes nos. Eco-friendly AIGs Eco-friendly AIGs $ Achievement % 0 0 0 52 50 80 40 0 20 0 50 80 70 0 0 0 Gap M-medium < 40% S-Serious 0-39% S S S M M M M S S S M M M S S S USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 14 Table 2. Survey Respondents’ Familiarity with and Assessments of Bagh Source: Bagh Evaluation mini-survey The data gathered above comes from KII and FGD discussions with local people and key stakeholders. The data suggest that Bagh’s large-scale outreach/communications initiatives early in the project life were successful. In particular, the Tiger Caravan (a touring mobile bus with exhibits on tigers and the Sundarbans and accompanying street dramas) drew nationwide attention. The Caravan received extensive media coverage and attracted over 250,000 visitors, including the Prime Minister, the media, and top officials. This effort raised awareness of the dynamic and positive relationships among people, the Sundarbans, and tigers throughout local communities and more widely across Bangladesh and beyond, reaching over one million via Facebook, despite lasting only three months.13 Interviews with implementers, partners, and FD staff confirmed that issues and obstacles including delayed agreements between Bagh, SI, and GOB resulted in SI scientists not being hired during this first year, meaning Bagh was unable to initiate status surveys for tigers, their prey, and their habitat – a critical loss of opportunity to gather essential data for this project. Although more extensive research on tiger biology and habitat was mandated in Bagh’s CA with USAID, such research was never explicitly included in Bagh work plans. SI also reported it did not have the funds, time, support, or mandate for more extensive research on tiger biology and habitat. 13 Key Informant meetings and Community Focus Groups, Bagh Team & CEO meetings, 24 Oct.-17 Nov. 2016, 16 Indicators Summary, above. How familiar are you with the Bagh Project? Not at all Familiar Reasonably Familiar Very Familiar Don’t Know/NA Total Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 (1%) 3 (4%) 39 (43%) 33 (37%) 9 (10%) 3 (3%) 2 (2%) 90 (100%) What is your overall assessment of the Bagh Project? Not at all Beneficial Reasonably Beneficial Very Beneficial Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 (1%) 0 27 (31%) 21 (23%) 21 (23%) 18 (20%) 2 (2%) 90 (100%) To what extent is your community/ organization contributing to Sundarbans/ Tiger Conservation? Not at all Contributing Reasonable Contributions Substantial Contributions Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 (1%) 0 28 (31%) 16 (18%) 19 (21%) 22 (25%) 4 4% 90 (100%) How effective has the coordination been between your organization and Bagh? Not at all Effective Reasonably Effective Very Effective Male Female Male Female Male Female 2 (2%) 0 46 (51%) 38 (43%) 0 0 4 (4%) 90 (100%) To what extent are women being integrated into the Bagh? Not at all Integrated Reasonably Integrated Very Much Integrated Total Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 (1%) 3 (3%) 42 (46%) 34 (38%) 4 (5%) 1 (1%) 5 (6%) 90 (100%) USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 15 Bagh successes in Components 2 and 3 – Wildlife Trafficking and Human-Wildlife Conflict – have been tempered by less robust progress in Components 4 and 5, where progress on communications, community and gender engagement, and livelihoods has lagged behind targets for indicators 10-12 and 14-16. The question of tiger population numbers is particularly problematic – methods for estimating tiger numbers have changed markedly over the years (see Table 3 below). Field surveys utilizing observation have for some time put tiger numbers at between 300 and 400. Pugmark surveys have come up with similar numbers, but this method is generally discredited in the scientific community as it runs the risk of double-counting, leading to overestimates. Thus with support from SI, Bagh proposed to estimate tiger numbers using scientifically validated camera trapping, using automated cameras and tiger identification technology. While initially resisted by the FD until 2015, agreement was eventually reached and an improved survey with camera trapping is being conducted in the current field season (November 2016 to March 2017). This will establish a scientifically defensible baseline, although the sample size remains small and confined to one range. The FD has approved follow-up surveys using the same methodology to cover the whole of the Sundarbans in order to validate the initial baseline. Table 3. Estimated Numbers of Tigers in Sundarbans Using Different Survey Methods (Sources: See annotated bibliography in Annex VI) Although one objective of Bagh was to support the GOB’s recently established Wildlife Crime Control Unit (WCCU, established in 2012), not until 2016 did Bagh/WildTeam make direct attempts to gather the member agencies (the FD, Police, and Panthera) of the WCCU around the same table by organizing a workshop on the use of forensic tools to prevent the illegal wildlife meat trade – a good start, as technical workshops like this provide informal opportunities for trust and team￾building. However, the long-term success, sustainability, and effectiveness of this and other efforts to support and maintain a cooperative, coordinating, and fully functional interagency WCCU will need more follow up. While the mapping of forest resources used by local communities is underway through SI research, the engagement of communities in this research to develop sustainable local “ownership” of the Sundarbans natural resource base was not evident. There also has not been any progress on establishing the Wild Learning Center because of the lack of clarity and vision from the WildTeam. While human-tiger conflict incidents still occur on occasion, VTRT and FTRT members report that killing of villagers by tigers and killing of tigers by villagers has been much reduced from previous years and that tigers are being successfully driven back into the forest without injury to either tigers or humans. Fewer killings of livestock are also reported. Current estimates of tiger killings and attacks on humans range from 45 to 50 per year to as high as 100/year, while retaliatory tiger killings by humans in the villages (not poaching) are estimated at only 3-5 per year. Successful action by VTRTs has been taken in 78 out of 110 incidents (71%), involving a total of 25 tigers. One upazila chairman interviewed stated that before 2013, 50-60 people a year were killed by tigers in his area, but since 2015 there have been no killings of humans by tigers, which he attributes to Bagh’s involvement.14 Bagh has also facilitated HTC data collection and analysis, and provided safety equipment and first-aid training to nearly a thousand forest resource users (honey collectors and 14 Source: Meeting at Satkhira, Nov. 15, 2016. Year Author Methodology Estimated No. Tigers (Range) 1975 Bubert & Hendrichs Field Survey 350 1982 Salter Sample Field Survey 425 1984 Gittins & Akonda Field Survey in 110km2 430-450 1992 Forest Department Field Interviews 359 1993 Tamang & Dey Pugmark Census in 350km2 362 2004 FD/UNDP with Indian Experts Pugmark Census 440 (incl. 21 cubs; 121 male, 298 female) 2009 FD Track Survey & Monitoring 400-450 2015 FD/SRCWP Project Camera Trapping 106 (83-130) USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 16 fishermen). Bagh’s custom performance indicator no. 11showed “percentage of human-wildlife conflict incidences effectively managed” increasing from a baseline of 60% to 84.3% during the period of January 2015-June 2016, compared with the target of 70%. Although these reported successes in reducing HTC/HWC cannot be conclusively traced to Bagh training of VTRTs and SMART Patrols, interviews with stakeholders indicate they credit Bagh’s training for that success. Gender integration has made modest progress through the hiring of women and building awareness in the Bagh home office team, appointing a gender advisor in Year 3, and engaging a small number of women in previously all-male VTRTs. The progress of gender integration is slow, however: for example, only 5 VTRTs (out of 49) have women members, for a total of 14 female VTRT members. Table 4. BaghBondhus: Numbers of Groups and Membership by Gender Range Male % Female % Total Chandpai 9 53% 8 47% 17 Khulna 11 73% 4 27% 15 Sarankhola 8 57% 6 43% 14 Satkhira 8 53% 7 47% 15 All Ranges 36 59% 25 41% 61 SOURCE: Bagh Gender Specialist and MEL Specialist, 13 Nov. 2016 Gender mainstreaming throughout Bagh is behind schedule. A newly recruited Gender Specialist and an approved strategy to mainstream gender across all components have just recently been put in place. WildTeam’s “WildWomen” think tank is reported to be meeting only occasionally and has not been very active. Bagh has hired a Gender Specialist and it has a Gender Working Committee, but the committee only meets quarterly, has relatively few action items, and no gender training has been conducted under its auspices. There is no evidence of Bagh activities capitalizing on women’s traditional conservation commitments and activities. Bagh’s most important achievement regarding gender has been the creation and expansion of BaghBondhu (“Friends of the Tiger”) groups, which are reported to have 41% female members, although Team field observations suggest numbers of active women may be lower than reported. “Women-led eco-tourism is key to both income generation and eco-tourism. Livelihoods needs to become an entire new activity not just a component of a project in order to lay a foundation for the next phase, new project.” Bagh Management 27 Oct. 2016 Table 5. Bagh Components Ranked Most Important to Communities/Respondents Name of Component Rank Total Responses Male Female Improved livelihoods (C5) 1 65 35 30 Reduced human-tiger conflict (C3) 2 56 30 26 Increased community engagement (C2) 3 20 15 5 Increased gender engagement, women’s involvement (C4) 4 15 5 10 Total 156 85 71 Note: Component 1, Expanded Knowledge Base, is not something that affected communities. Source: Bagh Evaluation mini-survey All across the Sundarbans communities, among VTRTs, FTRTs, BaghBondhus, and women’s groups – as well as in KII and sample survey interviews summarized above – the Evaluation Team found improved livelihoods to be the Bagh component most important to stakeholders.15 15 Source: Survey of 156 respondents, including all women’s groups, VTRTs, and Key Informants. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 17 However, in spite of this interest, alternative indigenous livelihood systems or indigenous crafts have yet to be adequately explored by Bagh. Some communities were found by the Evaluation Team to be creating their own handicrafts from local materials and indigenous skills that clearly have local and tourism marketing potential.16 In June 2016, Bagh completed a two-month training for women in making “pebble doll” handicrafts. The Pebble Doll initiative, begun under CREL, engages groups of women in the production of small woven dolls, animals, and accessories that are marketed in Europe under a public-private partnership. Results have been limited: Bagh reported 103 women are active in seven centers, having produced 5,641 items in total, with reported earnings of about $400, or about 7 cents per item and less than $4 per woman. Bagh written reports indicate that promotion of local crafts – mentioned in its CA – has only recently been explored with the commission of an eco-tourism strategy study that was released during the course of the Bagh evaluation. Several locally initiated, self-help eco-tourism/eco-villages and budding eco-tourism activities visited by the Evaluation Team in Sundarbans communities showed both innovation and promise. Community-level meetings revealed considerable interest in eco-tourism among virtually all Sundarbans communities, VTRTs, and BaghBondhus contacted, where these groups almost universally indicated their belief that eco-tourism had great potential for both income generation and conservation of the Sundarbans and its tigers. EVALUATION QUESTION 2. CAPACITY BUILDING AND EFFICIENCY  What have been the results to date of Bagh’s institutional and individual capacity building efforts directed at the Project’s key stakeholders: the Bangladesh Forest Department (BFD), other GOB agencies, WildTeam (WT), and local communities?  Which activities have worked well, which have not worked well, and what concrete actions can be taken to improve the impact of the Project’s capacity development efforts?  To what extent have technical inputs such as the established WildTeam organizational structure, staff trainings, operational procedures and tools, and others, improved efficiency in implementation of Bagh? There is general agreement that Bagh’s greatest success has been in building capacity of the Spatial Monitoring and Recording Tool (SMART) Patrols and Village Tiger Response Teams (VTRT). For example, Bagh training taught SMART Patrol teams, composed of FD Forest Guards, how to conduct in-depth and credible investigations to report both crime-scene investigation data and also other biological data useful for the protection of tigers and other natural resources in the Sundarbans. Bagh has restricted its SMART Patrol training to the Western Sanctuary of the Sundarbans, as it determined expansion of the training to the other sanctuaries of the Sundarbans to the East to be too costly and not within its current budget. To date 36 Forest Guards (who are FD employees), out of an estimated 300 or so Forest Guards in the Sundarbans – or approximately 12% – have received SMART training from Bagh, and four SMART Patrol Teams have been formed; at least 22 patrols were conducted by those teams from June 2015 to October 2016. SMART training by Bagh has also included FD Analysts and mid-level staff and 25 Community Patrol Groups, including VTRTs. Bagh’s training of VTRT teams, which consist mostly of undereducated village volunteers, teaches them how to deal with potentially dangerous situations to protect both humans and wildlife (e.g., 16 The quality of some of the handicrafts encountered with the women’s group was sufficiently high that all team members purchased products to take to their families. Women’s ‘Pebble Doll’ group sharing visions for improved livelihoods. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 18 tigers) that might otherwise result in fatalities or injuries on both sides. Although VTRTs were established by the FD before Bagh began, with assistance from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Bagh efforts have helped the VTRTs become active, vigorous, and dedicated teams that appear to be making a positive impact in reducing human-wildlife conflicts throughout the Sundarbans, all on a voluntary basis. Bagh is clearly on track with respect to this component and has greatly expanded the program so that there are now 49 VTRTs with over 370 members covering all four Ranges within the Sundarbans. In addition to the VTRTs, there is also a three-member Forest Tiger Response Team (FTRT), whose salaries are paid by Bagh/WildTeam. FTRTs retrieve dead bodies killed by tigers from the forest to return to village family members. Bagh and FD view the evidence of declining arrests for wildlife crimes, from 110 in 2015 to 40 as of December 2016, as an indication that SMART Patrolling is effective in discouraging poachers and other illegal forest users. However, there are widely divergent views within GOB and international law enforcement bodies (see discussion on p.19) on current levels of poaching and whether it is actually declining. Given the uneven cooperation between the various GOB agencies, limited access of the team to law enforcement officials outside the FD, and lack of hard evidence on the size of the tiger and prey populations in the Sundarbans (much less the level of poaching on those populations), the evaluation team does not feel it is in a position to judge what those statistics really mean in terms of poaching level – in contrast to its confidence that Bagh’s VTRT and SMART patrol training has reduced HTC/HWC. VTRTs also serve a valuable function in raising environmental awareness in their villagers while promoting greater respect for tigers, other wildlife, and the forest ecosystem. VTRT members take their responsibilities seriously and entirely of their own volition. These volunteers credit Bagh staff with providing them inspiration and information needed to undertake these outreach activities within their communities and to assist the Emergency Tiger Response Teams in tending to injured tigers and other wildlife as well as immobilizing and relocating problem tigers. Overall, VTRTs and the 61 new BaghBondhus have conducted nearly 1,400 individual activities, including rescue operations, community campaigns, and patrolling, engaging over 38,000 community members. Under the CA with USAID for Bagh, the project implementer (WildTeam) was required by Special Award Conditions (SACs) to address capacity gaps within the organization. Areas to be addressed included human resources, management, financial management, procurement management, project management, and USAID grants management. The United Nations Office for Project Services assisted WildTeam in establishing organizational policies related to project operation, human resources, and procurement. WildTeam reports that it has achieved 90% or more of the Special Award requirements, increasing its organizational capacity to implement Bagh. According to staff of Bagh/WildTeam, conducting training of trainers (ToTs) activities was never a part of their original work plan due to cost and time limitations. FD personnel transfers also have had an impact on capacity building of all Bagh components. For example, a number of local FD officials in the Sundarbans region were trained by Bagh in 2015, but by 2016 none of them were still in the Sundarbans (many had been hired for the World Bank Strengthening Regional Cooperation for Wildlife Protection in Asia (SRCWP)). Bagh also supported a Boot Camp, organized by SI and conducted by foreign experts, to train FD and WildTeam staff, university graduates, and NGO representatives in collecting, analyzing, and interpreting scientific data. Most Bagh research staff are Bangladeshi graduates who have skills in research methodologies and analysis and are able to meaningfully contribute not only to this project but to future projects of a similar kind. With the additional expertise provided by Bagh, they have the potential for training and mentoring future field biologists and ecologists in the conservation and management of ecosystems like the Sundarbans. A proposed Wild Learning Center to facilitate research and training has not moved beyond the discussion stage, despite interest from the Smithsonian, because of inaction on the part of WildTeam and unresolved questions regarding what links there should be between the Wild Learning Center and a Wildlife Center that FD has developed near Dhaka under the World Bank SRCWP. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 19 The delays in signing the initial agreement with SI, followed by further delays before FD approval of the use of camera trap surveys by SI, meant delays in training of people to do the surveys and related analysis on tiger and prey populations. Likewise, Bagh MOUs with universities for research on tiger and prey biology, habitats, and other issues were drafted but had not been implemented as of the date of the evaluation team’s visit. KIIs with Bagh and FD senior and mid-level management and knowledgeable observers indicated that collaboration, coordination, and trust between Bagh/WildTeam and other government agencies, particularly the FD, has been poor, although it is improving. Relationships are particularly poor at the regional level and not much better with the Chief Conservator of Forests (CCF) and the Conservator of Forests (CF), Khulna Circle, who also is the Bagh Project Director. The new WildTeam Regional Manager at Khulna has not yet been able to develop close coordination with the Conservator of Forests who, interviews reveal, is yet to be conversant with the Bagh project’s overall objectives or components. Many FD officials state that coordination by Bagh has not been good, particularly in failing to inform them of Bagh activities. Bagh/WildTeam managers, however, take exception to this, claiming that they have gone out of their way to try to meet regularly with FD officials and to send documents for their information and review, which the FD has either not acknowledged or claimed they did not receive. There is obviously some disagreement from both parties, pointing out a need for continued dialogue. Coordination at the field level, however, between Bagh and frontline Forest Guards has been reported by management and VTRTs to be much better than at upper levels, and the evaluation team often heard Bagh staff receiving praise from villagers and VTRT teams for their help and assistance. Bagh’s training of FD SMART Patrols is obviously of greatest interest and appreciation at the field level as they are not at all involved or interested in the politics and coordination of what goes on at the higher levels of both Bagh and FD. According to Forest Guards and their supervisors, FD coordination with other GOB Law Enforcement agencies also is mixed. When it is convenient for them, other agencies (e.g., the Coast Guard, Border Patrol, and Police) have often been of considerable assistance in helping the Forest Guards to apprehend criminals, especially pirates, but just as often they have been unable to assist because of other priorities or not receiving permission from their supervisors. There is no formal agreement or obligation for the other agencies to assist the FD in these cases. Stakeholder KIIs indicate that Bagh’s coordination with the FD also has been hindered by differing interpretations of which guidance documents should govern its work. Some agreements related to Bagh are just between USAID and WildTeam, others between USAID and the GOB, and some internal to the GOB. Many stakeholders, including Bagh staff, are not sure which document is the ruling document that should be followed. However, Bagh is contractually obligated to follow the annual work plans that are approved by USAID. A 2015 evaluation of CREL found very similar problems. In March 2016, the Bagh/WildTeam facilitated multi-agency collaboration for the protection of tigers through the National Dialogue for the Protection of Tigers in the Sundarbans. The Dialogue included a workshop in Dhaka on 1 March and a high-level dialogue in the Sundarbans on 8 and 9 March 2016. The goal was to convene high-level decision-makers from relevant ministries, departments, and stakeholder groups to strengthen efforts for protecting tigers and the Sundarbans. Discussions in the Dialogue focused primarily on more effective combatting of wildlife crimes (with a special focus on tiger protection and cracking down on traffic in Tiger parts), increasing capacity for sustainable conservation efforts, community engagement for protecting tigers, and improving interagency coordination on conservation efforts. The forum received praise from participants and the media for its high level of participation and agreement on important recommendations. The GOB’s Wildlife Crime Control Unit (WCCU) was established in Bangladesh in 2012 with World Bank funding as part of its Strengthening Regional Cooperation for Wildlife Protection in Asia (SRCWP) project. Designed to implement the Bangladesh Wildlife Conservation and Security Act of 2012, the WCCU was intended to internally coordinate the activities of the Forest Department (FD) with the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), Border Guard, Coast Guard, Customs, Police, and Ministry USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 20 of Foreign Affairs to combat wildlife crime in Bangladesh, as well as to collaborate with international groups such as TRAFFIC, UNODC, INTERPOL, and the International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC). Support for the WCCU is part of Component 2 of the Bagh CA. To date, however, there is little evidence that the WCCU is functioning as a multi-agency law enforcement unit as originally envisioned by the World Bank, or that the Bagh/WildTeam project has accomplished much in supporting the unit as it was intended. The WCCU has its office and focus in Dhaka, with no presence in Khulna or in the field. There is no clear agreement or formal documents that bind all of the other agencies under the WCCU umbrella. Furthermore, there is a general view by the other agencies that the WCCU is strictly a program under the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) and the FD and not the other ministries. Until all the ministries agree to work with each other collectively and cooperatively under the WCCU, the FD remains the only active participant in the WCCU. Bagh/WildTeam efforts to bring the agencies and their ministers together to create a functional and truly cooperative interagency WCCU have been limited in both scope and results. SMART Patrol teams trained by Bagh appear to have reduced the poaching of tigers and prey species within the Sundarbans forests compared with previous levels, although views also persist among many villagers and VTRTs that poaching has not been greatly reduced, and that corruption remains a problem, as do well-organized pirate gangs active in trafficking that limit the effectiveness of SMART Patrolling and Law Enforcement efforts. Bagh and FD, for example, estimate that 8-10 tigers are poached annually, while the U.S. Department of Justice/International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program (ICITAP) estimates at least twice that figure.17 ICITAP also credits the presence of RAB units within the Sundarbans in the past two years – and not the SMART Patrols – with any possible decrease in poaching activities. EVALUATION QUESTION 3. EFFECTIVENESS Are project components implemented in a sufficiently complementary manner to achieve project objectives?  Have the project’s gender engagement activities been effective? Should the project continue with its approach to Component 5? Bagh/WildTeam appears to be working in a complementary manner internally; silos among components do not appear to be a problem. As noted above, gender engagement has been seriously delayed and is not yet fully effective. Strained Bagh relations with the FD, and between the FD and other GOB law enforcement agencies hamper coordination at middle and upper levels, and thus impede achievement of project objectives. Bagh support for the WCCU also suffers from the GOB interagency coordination problems. SMART Patrol and VTRT initiatives, on the other hand, have been particularly effective and have complemented each other remarkably well. Also as observed above, evidence uncovered during the evaluation showed that Bagh’s approach to Component 5 has not been successful, and needs to be radically changed. The livelihoods/AIG component lacks the necessary creativity and engagement with communities to develop new innovative approaches toward improving their economic well-being and reducing their dependence on forest products that provide only marginal returns. There has been no significant exploration 17 An FD report of seizures lists eight tiger skins (in addition to assorted tiger bones and teeth) seized in 2015, but without any DNA evidence as to their origin or even when the animals may have been poached, they are subject to scrutiny. They are only estimates as these activities are carried out illegally, mostly by pirates, so there is no hard database about how many tigers are truly poached and trafficked each year, which is why a monitoring system is called for in this report. But without a hard database of how many tigers there even are in the Sundarbans, and without knowing how many are actually killed and smuggled each year, the estimates obtained are rough at best and are likely underestimated. Furthermore, no one has actually been caught in the act of killing/poaching a tiger or has been successfully prosecuted. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 21 with communities of eco-tourism potential, although there is widespread agreement that great potential for programs to increase community livelihoods through eco-tourism. Likewise, the Bagh/WildTeam has done little to explore possible links with other NGOs or donor-funded activities in the Sundarbans. For example, there appeared to be little or no awareness within Bagh concerning Bangladesh Environment and Development Society (BEDS), a dynamic local NGO operating in the Sundarbans that has developed excellent school materials, maps, games, and ecological educational curricula. EVALUATION QUESTION 4. SUSTAINABILITY  What have been the major constraints and opportunities with respect to the sustainability of the interventions?  What specific measures should be taken to enhance sustainability?  How can the project institutionalize Spatial Monitoring and Recording Tool (SMART) patrolling of the Sundarbans by the Forest Department, the Tiger Caravan campaign, camera traps, and others?  Are the Village Tiger Response Teams (VTRTs) on track to becoming sustainable institutions after the life of the project?  To what extent is WildTeam on track to developing funding streams and internal control and operational systems to sustain activities after the life of the project? The Bagh CA outlines expectations for Bagh to ensure sustainability, but all of these expectations rest on the two pillars of government and community – the two permanent institutions upon which the future depends. The key role of the community partnership was made clear in the CA, but never fully embraced by Bagh programming under Components 4 and 5. During Year 1, Bagh was to embed strengthened systems into WildTeam and BCAS, and set up a GOB-led “Post-Bagh Continuation” Working Group to identify and commence implementation of actions and to mainstream activities into the GOB. This has yet to occur. According to the CA, during the first two years of the activity, Bagh was to bring in national and international experts to provide on-the-job and classroom training to WildTeam and BCAS conservation practitioners and to FD. Then in Years 3 and 4 they were to include implementation of new fundraising and PPP plans to support continuation of any Bagh activities identified by the working group to be continued outside of the GOB budget. It was reported to the Evaluation Team that a Bagh/WildTeam Sustainability Plan is under preparation but not yet available. The Team did not encounter any mention in KIIs, FGDs, or site visits of a Post-Bagh Continuation Working Group, evidence of its activities, or significant fundraising or PPP planning sufficient to carry forward the most important Bagh activities. There is an earlier VTRT Sustainability Strategy from 2015, but it appears from discussions with Bagh staff that it has not been pursued with any vigor. At the time of this evaluation, Bagh reported that a new Sustainability Management Strategy Plan for the VTRTs was being drafted and due to be completed by the end of November 2016 with implementation scheduled for early 2017, and led by a university professor consultant. Generally, KIIs and Community/VTRT/BaghBondhu and women’s group meetings reveal little if any field evidence of substantial planning for sustainability after project conclusion. As noted above, KII discussions with both Bagh partners and local NGOs and INGOs indicated that Bagh has not appeared particularly interested in partnerships with other organizations and has missed opportunities to involve local, national, or international organizations beyond SI such as CARINAM, BEDS, Relief International, BRAC, RUPANTAR, and even FD itself, all of which would have been worth exploration by Bagh to enhance sustainability. From data provided by Bagh and reports from numerous KIIs and FGDs, we learned there was widespread appreciation for the Tiger Caravan and the visibility and awareness it generated for USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 22 tigers and Sundarbans. The initiative demonstrated wide coverage of 47 districts with wide audience engagement and appreciation. Team observations, KIIs, and community meetings revealed that community ownership for the protection of the Sundarbans has not been encouraged. On the local government side, Community Management Organizations (CMOs)/Co-Management Committees (CMCs) created under an earlier USAID initiative and continued under the current CREL activity have legal status and are supposed to build local ownership. However, KIIs suggest that the CMCs may largely be on paper and ineffective. The Evaluation Team also learned that the communities and VTRTs do not have full trust in the CMCs and see Sundarbans as actually “owned” by the Forest Department. Also, while Bagh’s Mother Sundarbans and Our Sundarbans initiatives promote feelings of ownership, community groups report that they too often feel like “intruders” rather than owners, in contrast to communities in Nepal, for example.18 The only remedy, suggested by KII and SI observers, is inclusive and long-term capacity building with special efforts to engage the marginal members of society who will need to be brought under the CMC umbrella if the latter are ever to be successful. The SI scientists are not currently planning any immediate further studies, beyond their important baseline and survey protocol, on the status of Sundarbans tigers, prey, and vegetation that will be available for any follow-up surveys by either the FD, local universities (another sustainable institutional system), or other scientific organizations. SI will help in the publication of all the scientific works in peer-reviewed journals according to USAID, and is exploring future engagement in Bangladesh through MOUs with FD, BCAS, and WildTeam. SI is seeking specific activities that can be funded and started soon. A solid research base for evaluating the status of the Sundarbans requires detailed studies on diseases, genetics, vegetation chemistry, and ecological studies of the tiger itself. While ongoing SI links show promise, it is unclear when or if any of these studies will be able to be initiated before the conclusion of the Bagh Project.19 18 See “Annotated Bibliography and Notes on Preliminary Meetings and Consultations” in Annex VI for background information on local community “ownership” and tiger conservation in Nepal’s national parks. 19 Correspondence with SI scientist Dec. 11, 2016. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 23 CONCLUSIONS Evaluation Question 1. Overall Performance  To what extent is Bagh on track, in terms of progress and outcomes, to meet its overall goals under its five components? What factors (internal or external to the project) affected timely achievement of targets?  Responses to this question should include but are not limited to: o What factors (internal or external to the project) affected timely achievement of targets? o For those factors that impeded performance, are they still a threat to timely achievement of targets? If so, how can they be overcome? o For those factors that accelerated achievement of targets, how can they be leveraged to continue to do so?  Given the time remaining, what opportunities exist to enhance and strengthen programmatic effectiveness such as by adding, changing, re-scaling, and/or removing activities to meet or surpass targets/objectives, within the stipulations of the Bagh agreement?  What specific results have been achieved today on gender integration into Bagh?  What changes/developments have there been in the community in line with the outcomes since the start of the project? Which of these are attributable to this project? What differences have these changes made to people’s lives? 1) Opportunities were missed for exploring indigenous livelihood opportunities – ranked No. 1 in importance to communities in both interviews and Evaluation Team mini-survey. Given particularly strong interest in eco-tourism among men and women in VTRTs, BaghBondhus, and women’s groups, FD experience with substantial domestic tourism and an encouraging eco-tourism strategy, it was difficult for the Evaluation Team to understand why this opportunity was not explored during Bagh’s earliest endeavors. Bagh also has not adequately explored other livelihood activities such as honey gathering. 2) Unfortunately, as noted above, Bagh efforts at supporting priority research – while having developed excellent tools and platforms for knowledge sharing such as the website and e￾newsletter “Tiger Tuesday” – are likely to miss its targets. Among the most important of these is acquiring baseline information on tiger and prey abundance necessary to determine and project trends in the changes in tiger population size and prey abundance. Currently there are no reliable scientific data to confirm what are widely believed to be declining tiger numbers.20 To achieve such a baseline, the surveys required must be carried out at least twice during the project period using the same camera trapping methodology for consistency, especially since the camera trap survey done previously covered only Satkhira Range. This is not possible within the time remaining in the project. 3) Bagh’s continuing promotion and conduct of SMART Patrol training has been a success in contributing to efforts to reduce illegal wildlife trafficking. However, limiting the SMART training to only one of the four sanctuary areas due to cost also limited its ability to have a comprehensive impact across the entire Sundarbans. 4) It is unclear whether the number of wildlife crime arrests in recent years is an indicator of the effectiveness of efforts to deter poaching (the Bagh/WildTeam and FD view) or of less 20 See Table 3 showing widely varying estimates over time of tiger numbers, which can only be confirmed by producing a comprehensive baseline study. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 24 effectiveness on the part of law enforcement in making arrests. This issue requires more study. 5) Overall, evaluation KIIs and community meetings revealed very limited evidence of Bagh livelihood efforts beyond continuing with CREL’s public-private partnership Pebble Doll initiative and some belated proposals for honey harvesting and marketing.21 Feedback from Evaluation Team field observations, community meetings, and KIIs, indicates no appreciable impact of Bagh activities on people’s livelihoods. 6) Because Bagh has not appreciably studied the experience of existing livelihood schemes in the Sundarbans or elsewhere in Bangladesh, nor closely examined global or regional best practice innovations to identify market-driven, desirable alternative livelihoods, opportunities have been missed for exploring successful innovations that are climate change-resilient and adoptable by groups that are most vulnerable to climate change and human-tiger conflict. Failing to explore ties with reputable and highly regarded local and international organizations (such as World Vision, BEDS, Relief International, BRAC, IUCN, CARINAM, and/or RUPANTAR) was another missed opportunity. 7) Given the extensive territory to be covered throughout the Sundarbans – not just the Western Sanctuary – the team concluded from KIIs and discussion with the SI scientists that the SI research team is understaffed for surveying, monitoring, and training people for the whole survey and data analysis. 8) Despite excellent training and demonstrated success of the VTRT initiative, the lack of follow-up ToT for promoting further expansion and sustainability of VTRTs, FTRTs, BaghBondhu, and CMCs was a missed opportunity. It is possible that this issue may be addressed in a Sustainability Management Plan/Strategy for VTRTs, which is currently under development by a Bagh consultant. 9) The WCCU, which Bagh was charged with providing targeted support to, is apparently not functioning as the multi-agency law enforcement coordination unit it was intended to, nor is it clear that Bagh could reasonably been expected to overcome the bureaucratic obstacles WCCU faces without outside intervention. 10) A robust data gathering, analysis, and management system for recording poaching and trafficking still appears to be lacking and is needed if there is to be any credible monitoring of the effectiveness of any anti-poaching efforts. 11) VTRTs have successfully influenced and reduced HWCs in the Sundarbans, in part because of the training and support training provided by the Bagh/WildTeam. 12) Gender mainstreaming throughout Bagh during Years 1 and 2 remains behind schedule in Year 3; targeted women’s empowerment is absent, and women’s traditional roles for conservation, protection of the Sundarbans, and honoring the tiger appear not to have been explored. 21 KII interview with DCOP, Gender Specialist, and Livelihoods Specialist, and Bagh annual and monthly reports. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 25 Evaluation Question 2. Capacity Building What have been the results to date of Bagh’s institutional and individual capacity building efforts directed at the Project’s key stakeholders: the Bangladesh Forest Department (BFD), other GOB agencies, WildTeam (WT), and local communities? 1) SMART Patrol and VTRT training have been a success for the Bagh’s Activity. However this has been confined to the western area of the Sundarbans. 2) KIIs with local and international experts and experienced Team members observe that Bagh, as an outside entity, can do little more than help coordinate the important roles of the Forest Department, its home Ministry of Environment and Forest, the Justice Department, Navy, Coast Guard, Police, RAB, and Border Guards. While project design indicated Bagh should seek to bring these independent entities together to develop common policies, roles, and responsibilities, and while serious efforts have been made, Bagh’s inter-ministerial and inter-departmental relations and linkages have not been particularly successful, thus making the project less effective than it could be. 3) Bagh’s relations with FD are slowly improving and provide a potential basis for strong cooperation and ToT during Bagh’s last year if this is to be pursued by Bagh. 4) There are unresolved differences over work plans and responsibilities between the Bagh CA with USAID, USAID’s agreement with the GOB on Bagh, and GOB internal documents concerning Bagh. Lack of agreement over which document(s) should govern its activities has made it difficult for Bagh to gain the full support of the Forest Department that it needs to be successful, although Bagh staff believes they have satisfied 85%-90% of FD requirements. 5) Beyond the SMART Patrol and VTRT training, Bagh has done minimal capacity building for the Forest Department or other GOB agencies: Bagh’s internal capacity building efforts for WildTeam have been limited to the training of local VTRTs and BaghBondhus. 6) Bagh could benefit from cooperation with local NGOs such as BEDS. For example, BEDS’s excellent environmental education materials and participatory empowerment methodology could enrich Bagh’s outreach and communication initiatives both in Sundarbans communities and more widely across the country. They could also be widely distributed through a reimagined Tiger Caravan campaign. Evaluation Question 3. Effectiveness Are project components implemented in a sufficiently complementary manner to achieve project objectives? 1) Bagh’s five components complement each other well if fully functional. 2) Gender engagement and integration is delayed and not yet fully effective. Women’s traditional roles in conservation evidently have not been seriously explored. Most promising, perhaps, is that women have been encouraged to join BaghBondhu (Friends of the Tiger). Stakeholders recognize this group as valuable and expect it to expand in number of groups and in women members. These are important steps forward that can be made during the time remaining for Bagh. 3) By contrast, SMART Patrol and VTRT initiatives have been particularly effective and have complemented each other remarkably well. 4) Bagh’s inter-ministerial and inter-departmental relations and linkages, also noted above, have not been particularly successful, thus making the project less effective and successful than it could be. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 26 Evaluation Question 4. Sustainability What have been the major constraints and opportunities with respect to sustainability of the interventions? 1) Bagh and WildTeam are not likely to achieve a significant level of sustainability for the majority of their current initiatives. The Sustainability Strategy that was to begin in Year 1 has been significantly delayed and is only now under serious development. The evaluation team did not observe actions underway that can be of real use during the one year remaining for ensuring long-range sustainability. 2) Bagh’s VTRT training has resulted in committed VTRTs who are confident that their voluntary activities will continue in their protection of both village communities and tigers (as well as other wildlife) after the Bagh project is concluded and does not require any additional funding for their continuance. 3) Sustainability depends on increasing local community ownership of all Bagh activities, and ultimately the Sundarbans itself. There does not seem to be a plan for community mobilization, empowerment training, and facilitation after Bagh ends. 4) The reported mistrust between Bagh-supported VTRTs and local communities, on the one side, and the CREL-supported CMOs/CMCs that are designed to promote local “ownership” of natural resources is a problem that needs to be better understood if both activities are to be effective. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 27 RECOMMENDATIONS (NOTE: This section also serves as the answer to Question #5. Strategic Options for Future Programming: Given the current state of wildlife trafficking in Bangladesh, how can USAID best direct future resources, both strategically and programmatically, to implement the United States Government’s National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking in Bangladesh?) Recommendations specifically related to Bagh include: Expanded Knowledge Base  Given the critical importance of establishing a baseline tiger population, USAID should at a minimum approve a no-cost extension to the CA of at least six months to permit a third-year SI tiger population survey beginning at the end of 2017.  If such an extension is granted, Bagh should direct the additional resources needed to do a camera trapping survey covering the whole of the Sundarbans, which the FD has finally approved.  WildTeam, drawing on SI networks, should pursue and develop collaborative relationships with local and international academic institutions and environmental I/NGOs working on environment related issues to explore avenues for long-term collaborative research beyond the Bagh project and for generating new sources of funding support. Some suggestions the team has identified include the Mohamed bin Zayed Species Conservation Fund, Nagao Nature Conservation Fund, Save the Tiger Fund-Panthera, Wildlife Conservation Society, Born Free Foundation-UK, Darwin Initiative-UK, Disney Conservation Fund, the German Development Bank (KfW) and IUCN’s Tiger Habitat Conservation Programme (ITHCP), the World Bank, and Asian Development Bank.  Allow time and resources to support research about tiger biology, behavior, habitat preferences, prey availability, and other priority research studies – scientific information that is crucial to the management of tigers. Future projects should include this activity in their statement of work (SOW). Reduced Illegal Wildlife Trafficking  Bagh or a follow-on activity should work with the FD and GOB law enforcement agencies to design and implement a robust and credible data recording, analysis, and monitoring system for determining actual levels of poaching, thereby measuring success and identifying critical hotspots.  Recognizing the start-up obstacles discussed above, particularly regarding the WCCI, Bagh should redouble efforts to build strong working relationships with the Forest Department, Justice Department, Navy, Coast Guard, Police, RAB, and Border Guards. Serious consideration should be given to facilitated team-building workshops, perhaps convened under the sponsorship of USAID and the PM’s office. Take action to resolve problematic issues between DOAG and TAPP agreements through more formal and informal meetings, exchanges, and facilitated team￾building workshops.  Expand SMART Patrol and VTRT training, TOT, and patrols across all Sundarbans Ranges and build TOT capacity within Bagh’s Forest Department partner – introducing a new curriculum in the Forest Training Institute if possible to include the mastering and practicing of the SMART patrol system and learning how to train others throughout other forest areas, no matter where they are posted, in the theory and practice of the SMART system. Minimized Human-Wildlife Conflict  Develop a robust, centralized HWC recording and reporting system – perhaps using a SMART￾type tool – to document HWC incidents and how they were resolved, for distribution to VTRTs and managers. Identify HWC hotspots. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 28  Capacity building of the VTRTs should be proposed for incorporation within the FD following the end of Bagh, as there is no other organizational unit currently in existence capable of providing the important services offered by the VTRTs in reducing HWC/HTC.  Some incentives from the FD for VTRTs are necessary in the form of equipment, raincoats, boots, and cameras for recording observations of illegal poaching activities. This would help.  The routine transfer of staff within government agencies needs to be accompanied by a commitment from the FD to retain trained staff for long enough to transfer the knowledge among the FD team members. Enhanced Communications, Outreach, and Gender Engagement  Explore revival and adaptation of Tiger Caravan as a permanent WildTeam asset, particularly for outreach in the project area with special emphasis on engaging communities, youth, women, and students at all levels, where it can provide an important incentive for science education among Sundarbans and other students. Engage BEDS in creation, dissemination, and teacher training with their innovative methods and materials directed toward Sundarbans and tiger conservation through engaging local students and teachers.  Mainstream gender throughout all Bagh activities and components. Explore and enhance traditional women’s leading roles in Sundarbans and tiger protection. Reawaken the WildWomen think tank for exploring cutting-edge gender options/action to explore and build on women’s interest and roles for leading eco-tourism and craft initiatives. Improved Livelihoods for Conservation  During the last year of implementation, Bagh should step up its efforts to promote community-based eco-tourism, and any follow-on activity should do the same. Eco-tourism builds the essential framework for true community “ownership” for conservation. It has the potential for expanding the knowledge base through people’s participation, reducing wildlife trafficking and human-wildlife conflict through community engagement in patrolling, and providing sustainable and significant income opportunities for men and women that bind them to the Sundarbans ecosystem. A 2015 evaluation of USAID’s CREL activity made similar recommendations about the need to expand community-based eco-tourism and alternate livelihoods as a way of advancing the local community’s ownership and co-management of the Sundarbans protected areas.  Bagh should support local community “ownership” of environmental resources through community/social forestry and community-driven livelihood strategies that build bonds with the environment and provide sustainable incomes.  Re-examine approaches and outcomes of other USAID-funded NRM activities for lessons learned regarding eco-tourism. Study successful eco-tourism in neighboring countries, especially Nepal, where eco-tourism combined with community engagement and anti-poaching enforcement has reduced trafficking of rhinos and tigers to virtually zero.  Partner with local NGOs and talented women’s groups with proven track records in livelihoods and eco-tourism.  Sustainability requires addressing the urgent need to increase local community ownership of all Bagh activities in order to lay the foundation for community ownership of the Sundarbans and its wildlife essential for their long-term conservation. Xxxxxx selling some of her fine eco-tourism village handicrafts to an Evaluati on Team leader. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 29  USAID should work together with Bagh, CREL, and other interested parties to better understand the reported mistrust between VTRTs/local communities and CMO/CMCs and take steps to address it as necessary. Options for how USAID can direct future resources towards implementing the USG’s “National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking” in Bangladesh, in addition to those mentioned above, include:  Supporting or facilitating training programs and provision of equipment through U.S. agencies with wildlife conservation and/or combating wildlife crimes, such as the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and National Park Service, DOI/ITAP (Dept. of the Interior/International Technical Assistance Project), and DOJ/ICITAP (Dept. of Justice/ International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program) to all law enforcement agencies within Bangladesh listed above (Forest Department, Justice Department, Navy, Coast Guard, Police, RAB, and Border Guards) in order to enhance the capacity of relevant GOB agencies in anti-poaching and anti-trafficking techniques, intelligence gathering and sharing, and critically needed technical assistance and state-of-the-art training  Together with the Embassy, exploring ways to help the WCCU to function as it was intended, possibly by working with donors such as the World Bank or USG law enforcement assistance arms such as DOJ/ICITAP to convene a meeting of all Ministers involved (Environment and Forests, Homeland and Law) to come to agreement to work cooperatively around law enforcement of wildlife crimes.  Supporting strengthening of international and transboundary relationships and networking with bordering countries through the South Asian Wildlife Enforcement Network (SAWEN) and Southeast Asian Wildlife Enforcement Network (ASEAN-WEN). LESSONS LEARNED  The small WildTeam organization appears to have been provided with more funding than it could readily manage during its four-year LOE, especially given the problematic start-up phase that might have been anticipated for the major organizational scale-up required, and the complicated logistics required for operating in a project area as large and inaccessible as the Sundarbans.  This activity also demonstrated the importance of getting to know the “players” in any activity early on. Bagh might have benefited from the knowledge earned by that, and avoided potential conflict with other local NGOs and USAID contractors such as CREL. They also might have learned lessons about how to better deal with the GOB.  Bagh Activities’ admitted deficiencies around community engagement, gender, and livelihoods could have been better addressed through immediate implementation of its well-conceived community-based eco-tourism strategy. While full implementation will require a time frame beyond Bagh’s current LOE, Bagh can, within the time remaining, support talented indigenous women’s groups, eco-village sites, and experienced NGOs like BEDS and Relief International, to begin the process of developing an economically promising eco-tourism industry. Useful lessons regarding effective collaboration between government and local communities can be learned from the successful experience of neighboring countries, especially Nepal, where SI has strong links worthy of creative exploration. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 30 ANNEXES ANNEX I Evaluation Statement of Work .................................................................................................. 30 ANNEX II Evaluation Methods and Limitations ......................................................................................... 44 ANNEX III Data Collection Instruments.....................................................................................................64 ANNEX IV Evaluation Itinerary, Meetings, and Field Schedule.............................................................. 82 ANNEX V List of Persons Contacted ......................................................................................................... 89 ANNEX VI List of Documents Reviewed .................................................................................................... 91 ANNEX VII Quantitative Data Summary – Survey Responses ............................................................. 103 ANNEX VIII Bagh Data Sheets/Thumbnails ................................................................................................. 110 ANNEX IX Bagh Data Table on Performance Indicators ....................................................................... 112 ANNEX X Tiger Stories and Tales from the Sundarbans ..................................................................... 114 ANNEX XI Signed Disclosures of Conflicts of Interest Form…………………………………..117 ANNEX XII Summary Information About Evaluation Team Members……..……………………122 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 31 ANNEX I EVALUATION STATEMENT OF WORK Mid-term Performance Evaluation of USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation (Bagh) Activity United States Agency for International Development (USAID)/Bangladesh Office of Economic Growth December 2015 POINT OF CONTACT Renerio Acosta AOR, Bagh Project Office of Economic Growth USAID Bangladesh Tel: (+88-02) 5566-2341; Cell: +88 0171 3141186 Email: racosta@usaid.gov Shayan Shafi COR, Accelerating Capacity for Monitoring and Evaluation (ACME) Office of Economic Growth USAID Bangladesh Tel: (+88-02) 5566-2446 Email: sshafi@usaid.gov Contents I. Background II. Program Components and Description III. Evaluation Purpose IV. Evaluation Questions V. Evaluation Methodology VI. Existing Sources of Information VII. Deliverables VIII. Evaluation Team Composition IX. Level of Effort X. Scheduling and Logistics I. BACKGROUND USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (referred hereafter as the “Bagh Activity” or the “project”) focuses on tiger conservation in the Sundarbans, home to the Bengal tiger. Under the leadership of the Bangladesh Forest Department, USAID’s Bagh Activity is implemented by WildTeam, an organization working for biodiversity conservation in Bangladesh since 2003. The Bagh Activity receives technical support from the Smithsonian Institution (SI) and the Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies (BCAS). The project period is 4 years, from 15 January 2014 to 14 Project Information Project Name USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (Bagh) project Award Number Cooperative Agreement: AID-388-A-14-00001 Original Project Dates 15 January 2014 – 14 January 2018 Original Funding $11,887,007.25 Implementing Partner WildTeam USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 32 January 2018. The project is one of the key activities under “Development Objective 4 (DO4): Responsiveness to Climate Change” of USAID Bangladesh’s Country Development Cooperative Strategy (CDCS). The Bagh Activity has completed approximately 2.5 years; therefore, USAID wishes to evaluate the performance of the project at the mid-point of its four-year program. Consistent with USAID’s 2011 Evaluation Policy, the primary goal of this mid-term evaluation is to provide evidence so that USAID/Bangladesh can determine whether the Bagh Activity has been able to achieve its desired results or not. Other goals of the evaluation are to inform what course corrections, if any, are needed, identifying specific project interventions that can be scaled up further and to determine best ways to ensure sustainability of the activities, institutions and capacities promoted by the project. Finally, this evaluation will provide strategic options for future USAID/Bangladesh engagement in combating wildlife trafficking and tiger poaching. II. PROGRAM COMPONENTS AND DESCRIPTION As USAID’s Bagh Activity moves forward, it will ensure more than the survival of Sundarbans tigers. When tigers thrive in the wild, it also will ensure the survival of thousands of wild-flora and fauna of the Sundarbans and protect the green mangrove wall that shields millions of people from natural disasters and supports their livelihood. The Bagh Activity will work on making the relationship between the Sundarbans and the adjacent people stronger and safer by empowering communities and institutions in taking ownership of protecting the majestic Bengal Tiger and its magnificent forest home. The Bagh Activity has five components, listed below. COMPONENT 1 (C1): EXPANDED KNOWLEDGE BASE Bagh supports priority research to inform wildlife management interventions for the targeted landscapes. The Activity also develops tools and platforms for knowledge sharing, collaborative research, and learning. COMPONENT 2 (C2): REDUCED ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING Based on a comprehensive needs assessment, Bagh provides targeted support to the development of the national Wildlife Crime Control Unit (WCCU). The activity facilitates engagement with regional and international enforcement bodies, strengthens patrol efforts on the ground, and will pilot models for community-based anti-poaching action. COMPONENT 3 (C3): MINIMIZED HUMAN-WILDLIFE CONFLICT Communities living adjacent to the Sundarbans still have unhealed wounds resulting from tiger￾human conflict. Bagh is strengthening the Village Tiger Response Teams who manage stray tigers, provides veterinary training for conflict tiger handling, establishes a system for conflict prediction and monitoring and promotes safety skills inside the forest to minimize injury and fatalities to tigers and humans. COMPONENT 4 (C4): ENHANCED COMMUNICATION, OUTREACH AND GENDER ENGAGEMENT At the national and international levels, Bagh’s communications focus will be to engage different audiences to play their part in conserving the tiger as the flagship species and natural guardian of the Sundarbans, thus conserving natural resources for future generations. Bagh also will continue and build upon WildTeam’s ongoing “Mother-like Sundarbans” campaign to inspire the involvement of the local communities to engage themselves collectively and individually in understanding how their actions partly define the Sundarbans current status. Behavioral change through improved communications strategies, outreach, and gender engagement will be targeted throughout this campaign for addressing human threats to wildlife, including tigers and the Sundarbans as their habitat. Additionally, at the local level, Bagh will build on the learning and successes of the VTRT behavioral change initiative to tackle deer poaching and consumption behavior. Building on WildTeam’s already existing “WildWomen” think tank, Bagh’s Gender Specialist has created a Bagh Gender Working Committee (GWC) to incorporate Bagh’s Gender Approach USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 33 throughout their activities. The Bagh GWC builds capacity of its team members – and thus the communities in which Bagh works – to implement these guiding principles throughout the Bagh activities. COMPONENT 5 (C5): IMPROVED LIVELIHOODS FOR CONSERVATION Promoting environmentally sustainable livelihood ideas in the Sundarbans region is imperative for conserving the forest. Bagh will work on mapping forest resources that local communities use daily, as well as review past and current Alternative Income Generating (AIG) activities and their viability in Bagh’s targeted sites. From this, Bagh will formulate its own strategy that may either work to expand existing alternative livelihoods, or create new options should there be a market for new products, in addition to launching a national competition to inspire innovative eco-friendly livelihood ideas for people who depend on the Sundarbans for food and income. Bagh will gather information and assess the effectiveness and environmental, social, and economic impact of existing livelihood schemes, and will learn from global best practice innovations to identify market-driven, desirable alternative livelihoods that are climate change-resilient and adoptable by groups that are most vulnerable to climate change and human tiger conflict. Bagh also is looking at solutions through public private partnerships to generate mobility for niche market value chains, as well as develop an ecotourism strategy paper to stimulate further jobs in and near the Sundarbans. BAGH LINK TO USAID / BANGLADESH’S COUNTRY DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION STRATEGY USAID / Bangladesh supports the GOB’s Vision 2021 through the goal statement, “Bangladesh, a knowledge-based, healthy, food secure and climate resilient middle income democracy,” and will contribute to the GOB’s long term development goals while focusing on improving the lives of the poor. The results framework for the Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) 2011-2016 presents four Development Objectives (DOs) that contribute to USAID / Bangladesh’s overall development goal and Bagh contributes to DO4: Responsiveness to climate change improved. USAID/ Bangladesh has a specific commitment to improved climate change responsiveness. Its 2011- 2016 CDCS is oriented around four DOs. Development Objective 4 (Responsiveness to Climate Change Improved) aims to increase the nation’s responsiveness, adaptation, and mitigation of climate change through the following three interrelated Intermediate Results (IR): IR4.1Improved management of natural resources and biodiversity; IR4.2 Increased adaptation capacity and resilience to shocks; and IR4.3 Strengthened capacities to reduce emissions. In line with USAID / Bangladesh’s CDCS, the Bagh Activity will contribute to the achievement of Development Objective 4: Responsiveness to Climate Change Improved – by focusing on promoting sound natural resource management, supporting the reduction of illegal wildlife trafficking, minimizing human-wildlife conflict, expanding the knowledge base for wildlife conservation, and improving livelihoods for conservation. The Activity will contribute to conserving populations of Bengal Tigers and other charismatic species and to maintaining the integrity of their habitat. The Bagh project will contribute specifically to the achievement of CDCS IR4.1: Improved Management of Natural Resources and Biodiversity and IR4.2: Enhanced Adaptation Capacity to Resilience to Shocks. The results that Bagh’s Components will contribute to are shown in Figure 1. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 34 Bagh Results Framework and Development Hypothesis USAID has identified the development hypothesis under DO4 as: "Improved management of natural resources alongside livelihood diversification, climate risk management and enhanced capacity for low emissions development will address adoption and mitigation of Global Climate Change (GCC), while providing sustainable economic benefits and clean energy resources for Bangladesh."22 The Bagh Activity hypothesis is interlinked with the USAID’s development hypothesis as follows: “If wildlife conservation strategies are adopted and practiced by local communities and government entities, then the tigers will be protected thereby conserving the Sundarbans and its biodiversity, increasing/ allowing community’s access to sustainable resources for their respective livelihoods.” The Bagh Results Framework is shown in figure 2. 22 USAID. 2012. Development Objective 4: Responsiveness to Climate Change Improved: Performance Management Plan. September 2012. Dhaka. page 5. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 35 Figure 2: Bagh Results Framework (RF) Critical Assumptions:  Commitment and cooperation from GOB’s Forest Department remain strong  Stable political conditions with minimal upheaval that may disrupt project implementation  There will be no major natural hazards and disasters Bagh Objective: Improved biodiversity conservation in the Sundarbans by protecting the Bengal Tiger IR1: Wildlife conservation practices improved IR2: Targeted threats to wildlife decreased IR3: Environmentally sustainable livelihoods improved Sub IR3.2: Increased investment in eco-friendly enterprises Sub IR3.1: Increased adoption of eco-friendly AIG activities Sub IR2.2: Improved management to decrease human-wildlife conflict Sub IR2.1: Improved law enforcement and monitoring to reduce wildlife trafficking Sub IR1.2: Increased knowledge base on wild life conservation Sub IR1.1: Enhanced capacity to adopt wildlife conservation practices C RO SS-C U TTIN G ISSU ES IR & Su b IRs: Enh a n ce d co m m u nicatio n, o utre a c h, gen d er en g a g e m e nt a n d s u stainability of o utcom e s O utp ut Impact Outcome USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 36 III. EVALUATION PURPOSE Consistent with USAID’s 2011 Evaluation Policy, the primary goal of this mid-term performance evaluation is to provide evidence so USAID/Bangladesh can determine whether the Bagh project has achieved its desired results to date. A secondary goal is to inform what course corrections, if any, are needed in the time remaining of the Bagh activity implementation. Additionally, through this evaluation, recommend to USAID key strategic and programmatic options for future engagement to combat trafficking of Bengal tigers, its habitats, and other endangered wildlife species in Bangladesh. IV. EVALUATION QUESTIONS The contractor’s evaluation of Bagh must be comprehensive. Whenever possible, the evaluation team must ensure that data is gender disaggregated and subject to gender analysis. The contractor shall assess Bagh performance and achievements against the performance indicators, targets, reporting requirements, outputs and deliverables described in the approved M&E plan, Annual Work Plans and the agreement. While this evaluation is not a data quality audit, the contractor shall assess and describe the quality and use of performance monitoring data and information generated during Bagh implementation. Evidence-based conclusions and recommendations on how Bagh used performance monitoring data and information in performance management are required when describing Bagh effectiveness in component management. The following questions should be addressed: 1. Overall performance: To what extent is the Bagh activity on track, in terms of progress and outcomes, to meet its overall goals under its five components? Responses to this question should include but are not limited to:  What factors (internal or external to the project) affected timely achievement of targets?  For those factors that impeded performance, are they still a threat to timely achievement of targets? If so, how can they be overcome?  For those factors that accelerated achievement of targets, how can they be leveraged to continue to do so?  Given the time remaining, what opportunities exist to enhance and strengthen programmatic effectiveness such as by adding, changing, re-scaling and/or removing activities to meet or surpass targets/objectives, within the stipulations of the Bagh agreement?  What specific results have been achieved today on gender integration into the Bagh activity?  What changes/developments have there been in the community in line with the outcomes since the start of the project? Which of these are attributable to this project? What differences have these changes made to peoples’ lives? 2. Capacity building and efficiency: What have been the results to date of Bagh’s institutional and individual capacity building efforts directed at the project’s key stakeholders: the Bangladesh forest department, other gob agencies, WildTeam, and local communities?  In answering this question, the contractor should identify which activities have worked well, which have not worked well and what concrete actions can be taken to improve the impact of the project’s capacity development efforts.  To what extent have technical inputs – such as but not limited to the established WildTeam organizational structure, staff trainings, operational procedures and tools, and others – improved efficiency in implementation of Bagh activity?  In regard to GOB agencies, the contractor should consider how effective the project has been at developing the critical government relationships and capacities necessary for the project’s success. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 37 3. Effectiveness: Are project components implemented in a sufficiently complementary manner to achieve project objectives?  Specific questions used to assess project effectiveness include but are not limited to: O How effective have the project’s gender engagement activities been under component 4? O Should the project continue with its approach to component 5 (improved livelihoods for conservation)? 4. Sustainability: What have been the major constraints and opportunities with respect to sustainability of the interventions? What specific measures should be taken to enhance sustainability?  Specific questions used to assess sustainability include but are not limited to: o How can the project institutionalize spatial monitoring and recording tool (smart) patrolling of the Sundarbans by the forest department, tiger caravan campaign, camera traps, and others? o Are the village tiger response teams (VTRTs) on track to becoming sustainable institutions after the life of the project? o To what extent is WildTeam on track to developing funding streams and internal control and operational systems to sustain activities after the life of the project? 5. Strategic options for future programming: Given the current state of wildlife trafficking in Bangladesh, how can USAID best direct future resources, both strategically and programmatically, to implement the United States government’s national strategy for combating wildlife trafficking in Bangladesh?  Responses to this question should include but are not limited to: o What are the key lessons learned from Bagh activity implementation for consideration to USAID future program design and implementation? o What recommendations can be made to USAID in terms of improving cwt results framework and development hypothesis and its links to the USAID Bangladesh’s CDCS and the USG CWT strategy? V. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY The Contractor must propose a robust evaluation methodology to answer the key evaluation questions identified above. The evaluation methodology must follow a mixed–method approach using both quantitative and qualitative techniques in gathering reliable data and valid evidence of project outcomes or impacts including review of relevant Bagh, USAID, IUCN, FAO, GOB, and other secondary data sources. Particularly, the contractor must develop a Mixed Methods Evaluation Design Matrix that will detail the data source, data collection methods, data collection instruments and analysis of data to answer each of the evaluation questions. By using a mixed-method approach, the evaluation team is expected to gain insight on the impact of Bagh project activities (mostly from quantitative data collected by the project and others) and the processes (mostly qualitative information provided by the project staff and key informants) that lead to those impacts. It should generate gender disaggregated data and reflect attention to gender relations such as the participation of women in training. Sequential and iterative approaches should be used to integrate the mixture of methods at various stages of the evaluation. Under the mixed method evaluation approach, the Contractor should start its work with a review of documents provided by USAID, ACME, and Bagh. Afterwards, the Contractor should conduct key informant interview with the Bagh AOR, relevant USAID Agreement/Contracting Officers’ Representatives (A/CORs), Bagh Chief of Party (COP), Bagh staff, other donors and organizations involved with wildlife / habitat conservation, private sector representatives and relevant GOB officials. The Contractor should conduct focus group discussions with a sample of project stakeholders both USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 38 male and female. Finally, the Contractor will conduct an in-depth interview with a sample of the direct beneficiaries of Bagh administering a semi-structured or structured questionnaire. The sample of project beneficiaries must be representative of Bagh beneficiary population.23 The Contractor should propose a data quality assurance method and data analysis strategy corresponding to the Mixed Methods Evaluation Design Matrix. In respect of data quality assurance, the contractor should design a method following the USAID data quality assessment concept to ensure validity, reliability, precision, timeliness and integrity of the data. With regard to data analysis, the Contractor must integrate multiple data analysis techniques in order to determine and understand key evaluation findings. Some suggested data analysis techniques may include key word coding or main theme analysis for qualitative data and for quantitative data the contractor may use cross tabulations. The Contractor must include a list of methodological limitations associated with the evaluation design methodology. The methodology must include a process for sharing draft findings and conclusions with key stakeholders, including beneficiaries and GOB officials, and incorporating a second round of their feedback in the final report, to be agreed upon by USAID.24 Prior to the start of the evaluation, the contractor shall meet with the Office of Economic Growth to refine the evaluation methodology, and address any other concerns the EG office may have. VI. EXISTING SOURCES OF INFORMATION The evaluation team should consult a broad range of background documents apart from project documents provided by USAID / Bangladesh. These should include, but are not limited to, documents on research and project reports on tiger / wildlife conservation and habitat management both in and outside of Bangladesh. An important evaluation question is whether the Bagh project design adequately incorporated knowledge and lessons learned elsewhere. The evaluation team also should review relevant GOB national strategies and policies, as well as relevant projects and strategies of other aid agencies and international conservation organizations active in Bangladesh. USAID, ACME, and the Bagh project will provide the assessment team with a package of briefing materials, including:  The agreement for Bagh activity  M&E plan of Bagh project  Project quarterly and annual reports, work plans, and management reviews developed as part of routine monitoring  Training reports  DQA reports  USAID/Bangladesh Country Development Cooperation Strategy 2011-16 (Public version)  USAID Bangladesh DO:4 PMP  Bangladesh Tiger Action Plan  “Tiger Tuesday” weekly updates  Training modules  Performance Indicator Tracking Table (PITT)  M&E tools  Research/Study report – if any  GIS map – if any  Training & Beneficiary database  Case/success story – if any 23 We have left the resource TBD by the evaluation team; however, the LOE would have to be adjusted if USAID anticipates the need for a full-scale survey of beneficiaries rather than targeted rapid methodologies and/or mini-surveys. 24 Question to USAID: What type of debriefing with beneficiaries is intended? For those in the field, we suggest that the national consultant and ACME evaluation coordinator travel back to Khulna to a roundtable presentation at the district level. The international staff would do debriefing with the stakeholders in Dhaka. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 39  Component-wise project expenditure  One pager/brochure/pamphlet – if available  Any other relevant reports/documents. VII. DELIVERABLES All deliverables are internal to USAID, ACME and the Evaluation Team unless otherwise instructed by USAID. Evaluation deliverables include: Evaluation Team Planning Meeting: Essential in organizing the team’s efforts. During the meeting, the team should review and discuss the SOW in its entirety, clarify team members’ role and responsibilities, work plan, develop data collection methods, review and clarify any logistical and administrative procedures for the assignment and instruments and to prepare for the in-brief with USAID/Bangladesh. Work Plan: The Contractor will prepare a detailed work plan that includes task timeline, methodology outlining approach to be used in answering each evaluation question, team responsibility, document review, key informant and stakeholder meetings, site visits, survey implementation, travel time, debriefings (for USAID, implementing partner and, if decided, the GOB), draft and final report writing. The work plan will include a data analysis plan. The work plan will be submitted to the ACME COR and Bagh activity manager at USAID/Bangladesh for approval no later than the fifth day the Evaluation team arrives in Bangladesh. In-brief Meeting with USAID/Bangladesh and ACME: Within two working days of international team members’ arrival in Bangladesh. Evaluation Design Matrix: A table that lists each evaluation question and the corresponding information sought, information sources, data collection sources, data analysis methods, and limitations. The matrix should be finalized and shared with USAID/Bangladesh before evaluation field work starts. It should also be included as an annex in the evaluation report. Data Collection Instruments: Development and submission of data collection instruments to USAID/Bangladesh during the design phase and after the evaluation is completed; Regular Updates: The Evaluation Team Leader will brief the ACME COR, ACME COP, and the Bagh activity manager on progress with the evaluation on at least a weekly basis, in person or by electronic communication. Any delays or complications must be quickly communicated to USAID/Bangladesh as early as possible to allow quick resolution and to minimize any disruptions to the evaluation. Emerging opportunities to strengthen the evaluation should also be discussed with USAID/Bangladesh as they arise. Preliminary Draft Evaluation Report: The Contractor will submit a Preliminary Draft Evaluation Report to the ACME COR, Bagh activity manager, and ACME COP five working days before the Mission debriefing. Within three working days after receipt, USAID and ACME staff will provide preliminary comments prior to the Mission debriefing. Debriefing with USAID: The Contractor will present the major evaluation findings to USAID/Bangladesh through a PowerPoint presentation before the team’s departure from country. The debriefing will include a discussion of achievements and issues as well as any preliminary recommendations. The team will consider USAID and ACME comments and incorporate them in the Draft Evaluation Report. Debriefing with Key Stakeholders: The team will present the major findings from the evaluation to key stakeholders (as appropriate and as defined by USAID) through a PowerPoint presentation prior to the team’s departure from the country. The debriefing will include a discussion of achievements and activities only, with no recommendations for possible modifications to project approaches, results, or activities. The team will consider key stakeholder comments and incorporate them appropriately in drafting the evaluation report. Draft Evaluation Report: A draft report on the findings and recommendations should be submitted to USAID/Bangladesh and ACME 10 working days after departure of international team members USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 40 from Bangladesh. The written report should clearly describe findings, conclusions, and recommendations. The draft report must be of high quality with no grammatical errors or typos. A report is high quality when it represents a thoughtful, well-researched, and well-organized effort to objectively evaluate what worked in the project, what did not and why. The draft report must have well-constructed sentences that are presented in a way that clearly presents findings, conclusions and recommendations. The report should answer all the evaluation questions and the structure of the report should make it clear how the questions were answered. The draft report must meet the criteria set forth under the Final Report section below. USAID will provide comments on the draft report within 10 working days of submission. Final Evaluation Report: The Contractor will submit two versions of the Final Evaluation Report (one for “public” that is uploaded into the DEC and the other one specific for USAID that may include sensitive information such as response that will be used for new design or procurement or sensitive to the host government) that incorporate Mission comments and suggestions no later than five working days after USAID/Bangladesh provides written comments on the Draft Evaluation Report. The format of the final reports is provided below. The report will be submitted in English, electronically. The public version of the final report which will be uploaded to the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) will not include the annex on “Strategic Options for Future Programming” – evaluation question number six. The USAID-only, procurement sensitive version of the final report will include the aforementioned annex on evaluation question number six. The final report should meet the following criteria to ensure the quality of the report:  The evaluation report should represent a thoughtful, well-researched and well-organized effort to objectively evaluate what worked in the project, what did not and why.  Evaluation report shall address all evaluation questions included in the scope of work.  The evaluation report should include the scope of work as an annex. All modifications to the scope of work, whether in technical requirements, evaluation questions, evaluation team composition, methodology, or timeline need to be agreed upon in writing by the ACME COR and Bagh activity manager.  The evaluation report must include a separate annex to answer evaluation question number five “Strategic Options for Future Programming.” As this annex is procurement sensitive, it will not be shared with any other entity other than USAID/Bangladesh.  Evaluation methodology shall be explained in detail and all tools used in conducting the evaluation such as questionnaires, checklists, and discussion guides will be included in an Annex in the final report.  Limitations to the evaluation shall be disclosed in the report, with particular attention to the limitations associated with the evaluation methodology (selection bias, recall bias, etc.).  Evaluation findings should be presented as analyzed facts, evidence, and data and not based on anecdotes, hearsay, or the compilation of people’s opinions. Findings should be specific, concise, and supported by strong quantitative or qualitative evidence.  Sources of information need to be properly identified and listed in an annex.  Recommendations need to be supported by a specific set of findings.  Recommendations should be action-oriented, practical and specific, with defined responsibility for the action. The format of the final evaluation report should strike a balance between depth and length. The report will include a table of contents, table of figures (as appropriate), acronyms, executive summary, introduction, purpose of the evaluation, research design and methodology, findings, conclusions, lessons learned, and recommendations. Where appropriate, the evaluation should utilize tables and graphs to link with data and other relevant information. The report should include, in the annex, any dissenting views by any team member or by USAID on any of the findings or recommendations. The report should not exceed 30 pages, excluding annexes. A second version of this report excluding any potentially procurement-sensitive information will be submitted (also electronically, in English) to Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) and for dissemination among implementing partners and other stakeholders. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 41 All quantitative data, if gathered, should be (1) provided in an electronic file in easily readable format; (2) organized and fully documented for use by those not fully familiar with the project or the evaluation; (3) owned by USAID and made available to the public barring rare exceptions. A thumb drive with all the data could be provided to the ACME COR and ACME COP. The final report will be edited and formatted by the Contractor and provided to USAID/Bangladesh 5 working days after the Mission has reviewed the content and approved the final revised version of the report. VIII. EVALUATION TEAM COMPOSITION The team will include two international and two local consultants. The former should include specialists with the following areas of expertise: project evaluations and assessments (ideally natural resource management evaluations), wildlife conservation, parks/protected area management, ecosystems (especially mangroves) management, zoology and/or related scientific fields. The local consultants should have an excellent understanding of wildlife management and wetlands ecosystems in Bangladesh. At least one team member must have experience developing strategies to combat wildlife trafficking. Team Leader (Evaluation Specialist – International): The Team Leader should have a post-graduate degree in an appropriate field, with at least 10 years of international experience leading evaluation teams, ideally for natural resources management (NRM) and/or wildlife conservation projects. The Team Leader should be experienced in preparing documents that are objective, evidence-based, and well organized. S/he should have extensive experience in conducting quantitative and qualitative evaluations. The Team Leader must be familiar with USAID regulations and systems including performance monitoring, gender policies and guidance, project management, budgeting and financial analysis, and reporting. Experience in international donor development program management and overseeing multiple program areas simultaneously is preferred. Excellent oral and written skills in English are required. Relevant experience in Bangladesh or South Asia preferred. The Team Leader will provide overall leadership for the team, and s/he will finalize the evaluation design, coordinate activities, arrange periodic meetings, consolidate individual input from team members, and coordinate the process of assembling the final findings and recommendations into a high quality document. S/he will lead the preparation and presentation of the key evaluation findings and recommendations to the USAID/Bangladesh team and other major partners. Senior Wildlife Conservation/Natural Resources Management Specialist (International): The Senior Wildlife Conservation/NRM Specialist will have a post graduate degree in wildlife management, ecology (ideally related to wetlands), zoology, or a related environmental science. S/he should have a minimum of 8 years of international field experience in wildlife/protected area management, preferably with tigers in South Asia. S/he should have M&E experience with at least one similar USAID project, or that of another international donor, and have familiarity with USAID regulations and systems. The Senior Wildlife Conservation/NRM Specialist will be responsible for assessing the effectiveness of project implementation according to the M&E plan, while addressing the evaluation questions above. S/he will provide technical leadership with respect to wildlife conservation, natural resources management and ecology. S/he will also provide technical leadership on the evaluation question concerning USAID’s strategic options for future programming to combat wildlife trafficking in Bangladesh. S/he will participate in team meetings, key informant interviews, group meetings, site visits, and draft the sections of the report relevant to his/her expertise and role in the team. S/he will also participate in presenting the report to USAID or other stakeholders and be responsible for addressing pertinent comments provided by USAID/Bangladesh or other stakeholders. National Consultant USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 42 The National Consultant should have a post-graduate degree in the natural sciences, especially related to wildlife management, ecology, or zoology. S/he will be a Bangladeshi national with at least 7 years of field experience with wildlife conservation, parks/protected area management and/or NRM projects. S/he will have experience working on evaluations of natural resource management projects. Ideally this person will have field experience with tiger conservation and/or the Sundarbans ecosystem and will apply this experience to ensure each evaluation question is answered in the context of the current state of wildlife conservation in Bangladesh. The National Consultant will participate in team meetings, key informant interviews, group meetings, site visits, and draft the sections of the report relevant to his/her expertise and role in the team. S/he also will participate in presenting the report to USAID or other stakeholders and be responsible for addressing pertinent comments provided by USAID/Bangladesh or other stakeholders. Conflict of Interest All evaluation team members will provide a signed statement attesting to a lack of conflict of interest, or describing an existing conflict of interest relative to the project being evaluated. USAID will provide the conflict of interest forms. IX. LEVEL OF EFFORT (LOE) OF STUDY TEAM BY TASK DELIVERABLES Below is an estimate of the evaluation level of effort (LOE). Level of Efforts of Team Members by Task Deliverables Task/Deliverable Duration / LOE Days Team Leader Sr. Wildlife Conservation Specialist National Consultant Review background documents and home-based preparation work 5 5 5 Travel to Bangladesh 2 2 0 Team planning meeting and meeting with USAID 2 2 2 Development of Evaluation Work Plan (concurrent with document review and initial meetings) 2 2 2 Development of data collection instruments 2 2 2 Information and data collection. Includes interviews with key informants (stakeholders and USAID staff) and site visits 14 14 14 Discussion, analysis, and preliminary draft evaluation report in country including discussion with USAID 5 5 5 Debrief meetings with USAID (preliminary draft report due to USAID) 1 1 1 Debrief meetings with key stakeholders 1 1 1 Team Leader meets with Technical Specialists and USAID to synthesize findings/discussion 1 1 1 Depart Bangladesh/Travel to U.S. 2 2 0 Finalization of draft and internal review (IBTCI) remote 4 4 4 USAID provides comments on draft report 0 0 0 Team revises draft report and submits final to USAID (out of country) 7 4 4 USAID completes final review 0 0 0 Editing and formatting of report (one month) 0 0 0 Total Estimated LOE 48 45 41 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 43 X. SCHEDULING AND LOGISTICS Funding and Logistical Support USAID/Bangladesh’s ACME project will be responsible for all off-shore and in-country administrative and logistical support, including identification and fielding appropriate local staff. They will take care of arranging and scheduling meetings, international and local travel, hotel bookings, working/office spaces, computers, printing, and photocopying. A local administrative assistant/coordinator may be hired to arrange field visits, local travel, hotel, and appointments with stakeholders and provide translation services. Scheduling Work is to be carried out over a period of approximately 6 weeks. At this point in time, we anticipate that the evaluation would begin September 17, after the ‘Eid vacation, with field work completed the second of October and final report and close out concluding mid-November. The anticipated September 17th start date in country provides over one month to finalize, clear the SOW, recruit and approve the consultants, and complete background research prior to approval. We anticipate that September 9 – 16 would be an unproductive period in which to conduct the evaluation due to a general inability to access stakeholders during this period. See Annex-1 for Bangladesh Mission Holiday Schedule. A six-day work week (Saturday-Thursday) is authorized for the evaluation team while in Bangladesh. The evaluation team will submit a work plan as part of the evaluation methodology proposal with timeline and develop a GANTT chart displaying the time periods during which activities occur. Pre-departure arrangements should include travel approval, airline tickets, visa, lodging, work facility and vehicle transport arrangements, dates for meetings with USAID/Bangladesh EG staff and key contacts, in-country travel agenda, and accommodations. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 44 ANNEX II EVALUATION METHODS AND LIMITATIONS SUMMARY OF EVALUATION METHODOLOGY The Contractor used a robust mixed-method evaluation methodology to answer the five key evaluation questions identified above, using both quantitative and qualitative techniques, within an Appreciative Inquiry framework to seek evidence through pictures drawn by participants to share. (1) What works? Bagh’s greatest successes – what they are proud of about their village, the Sundarbans, tigers. (2) What “even better” looks like, including visions for maximum but realistic achievement during the relatively short project duration remaining. (3) A suggested action plan for achieving realistic targets within remaining time frame, including what Bagh’s priorities should be for final year. To assess the performance of the Bagh project, the Team implemented a three-tiered approach that provides analytic breadth and depth, including Literature Review; Site Assessments in Dhaka, Sundarbans Districts, Upazilas, and sample Unions; and tailored Key Informant and Focus Group protocols. The Design Matrix for the evaluation detailed the data sources, data collection methods, data collection instruments, and analysis of data to answer each of the evaluation questions.25 The Team generated gender disaggregated data and gave special attention to gender relations, such as the participation of women in training, income generation, and community engagement in tiger protection activities and their perceptions of the Bagh Activity, the Sundarbans, and the importance of tiger conservation. Document review included 53 available and relevant Bagh, USAID, IUCN, FAO, GOB, and other secondary data sources as well as 26 current publications and news reports that appeared in the daily press during the duration of the evaluation. Using a set of three semi￾structured questionnaires, the Team conducted a total of 29 key informant interviews, including the Bagh AOR, relevant USAID Agreement/Contracting Officers’ Representatives (A/CORs), Bagh Chief of Party (COP), Bagh staff, other donors and organizations involved with wildlife/habitat conservation, private sector representatives, and relevant GOB, NGO, and international organization officials involved in environmental conservation, particularly as related to Sundarbans. Complementing these key informant interviews, the contractor also conducted almost a dozen in-depth focus group discussions with a sample of project communities and stakeholders, both male and female. These ultimately included:  58+ additional documents reviewed, 38 annotated  2 weeks in the field, in all 4 Ranges  99 meetings  156 interviews/meetings with participants, including: o 29 Key Informant Interviews  Dhaka and Khulna-Bagh Team and partners  NGO/INGOs  Universities  International donor organizations o 13 Sundarbans communities  11 Focus Groups o 5 Forest and Village Tiger Response Teams (FTRT/VTRT) 25 See ANNEX XIII: following Evaluation Team making its way from boat into Sundarbans village. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 45 o 6 BaghBondhus and women’s groups o 35 non-random interviews with local people Prior to the start of the evaluation, the contractor met with USAID’s Office of Economic Growth in Dhaka to review the evaluation methodology and address any concerns the EG office may have had. Following field work, draft findings and conclusions were shared with USAID, the Bagh team, key partners, and stakeholders, including GOB officials, and a second round of feedback was incorporated in the final report. The Evaluation Team’s itinerary and work plan schedule are attached as Annex IV. EVALUATION LIMITATIONS Overall, the Evaluation Team had excellent access to a broad range of Bagh staff, key informants, and community groups working and living in Sundarbans conservation and familiar with Bagh. Due to security and cyclone warnings that made normal and recommended access by boat impossible, the Team was not able to visit many of the villages and almost all Forest Department (FD) guard posts along the rivers and at the mouth of the Sundarbans. Thus we were not able to meet with a broad cross-section of community members not involved with Bagh – the common man – or with Forest Guards, the ultimate beneficiaries of SMART Patrol and other Bagh trainings. In some of our travels, however, particularly along the upper reaches of several rivers, we came across several empty FD outposts. The Forest Guards reportedly were out on patrol or on duty for the Rash Mela on Dubla Island, although the Team observed patrol boats at times engaged with their duties to protect the tigers and the Sundarbans. That subjective evidence was telling in itself and in a small way compensated for the lack of personal interviews with them. Despite these limitations, as summarized above, the Team was able to visit a significant cross-section of communities in all four Ranges directly involved in the Bagh Activity, including VTRTs, FTRTs, BaghBondhus, and women’s groups, and interviewed an informal sample of 35 local people. “If there is any hope for the world at all, it does not live in climate change conference rooms or in cities with tall buildings. It lives low to the ground, with its arms around the people who go to battle every day to protect their forests, their mountains and their rivers because they know that the forests, the mountains and the rivers protect them.” – Arundhati Roy, Walking with the Comrades EVALUATION METHODOLOGY AND WORK PLAN Background USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (referred hereafter as the “Bagh Activity” or the “project”) focuses on tiger conservation in the Sundarbans, home to the Bengal tiger. Under the leadership of the Bangladesh Forest Department, USAID’s Bagh Activity is implemented by WildTeam, an organization working for biodiversity conservation in Bangladesh since 2003. The Bagh Activity receives technical support from the Smithsonian Institution (SI) and the Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies (BCAS). The project period is four years, from 15 January 2014 to 14 January 2018. The project is one of the key activities under “Development Objective 4 (DO4): Responsiveness to Climate Change” of USAID Bangladesh’s Country Development Cooperative Strategy (CDCS). Women’s Group shares its vision for Sundarbans and Tiger protection and what Bagh should do during final year. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 46 Evaluation Purpose The Bagh Activity has completed approximately 2.5 years of its four-year contract; therefore, USAID has asked IBTCI’s Accelerating Capacity for Monitoring and Evaluation (ACME) project to evaluate the performance of the project at the midpoint of its four-year program. Evaluation Objectives Consistent with USAID’s 2011 Evaluation Policy, the primary goal of this mid-term evaluation is to provide evidence so that USAID/Bangladesh can determine whether the Bagh Activity has been able to achieve its desired results. The secondary goal of the evaluation is to inform what course corrections, if any, are needed, identifying specific project interventions that can be scaled up further and to determine best ways to ensure sustainability of the activities, institutions, and capacities promoted by the project. Third, this evaluation will recommend to USAID key strategic and programmatic options for future engagement to combat trafficking of the Bengal tiger, its habitats, and other endangered wildlife species in Bangladesh. The contractor’s evaluation of Bagh will be comprehensive. Whenever possible, the evaluation team will ensure that data is gender disaggregated and subject to gender and age analysis. The contractor will assess Bagh performance and achievements against the performance indicators, targets, reporting requirements, outputs, and deliverables described in the approved Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) plan, Annual Work Plans, and the agreement. While this evaluation is not a data quality audit, the contractor will assess and describe the quality and use of performance monitoring data and information generated during Bagh implementation. Evidence-based conclusions and recommendations on how Bagh used performance monitoring data and information in performance management will be presented when describing Bagh effectiveness in component management. The evaluation is expected to answer five questions: 1. Overall Performance To what extent is the Bagh activity on track, in terms of progress and outcomes, to meet its overall goals under its five components? Responses to this question should include but are not limited to:  What factors (internal or external to the project) affected timely achievement of targets?  For those factors that impeded performance, are they still a threat to timely achievement of targets? If so, how can they be overcome?  For those factors that accelerated achievement of targets, how can they be leveraged to continue to do so?  Given the time remaining, what opportunities exist to enhance and strengthen programmatic effectiveness such as by adding, changing, re-scaling, and/or removing activities to meet or surpass targets/objectives, within the stipulations of the Bagh agreement?  What specific results have been achieved today on gender integration into the Bagh activity?  What changes/developments have there been in the community in line with the outcomes since the start of the project? Which of these are attributable to this project? What differences have these changes made to people’s lives? 2. Capacity building and efficiency:  What have been the results to date of Bagh’s institutional and individual capacity building efforts directed at the project’s key stakeholders: the Bangladesh Forest Department, other GOB agencies, WildTeam, and local communities?  In answering this question, the Contractor should identify which activities have worked well, which have not worked well, and what concrete actions can be taken to improve the impact of the project’s capacity development efforts. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 47  To what extent have technical inputs – such as but not limited to the established WildTeam organizational structure, staff trainings, operational procedures and tools, and others – improved efficiency in implementation of Bagh activity?  In regard to GOB agencies, the Contractor should consider how effective the project has been at developing the critical government relationships and capacities necessary for the project’s success. 3. Effectiveness:  Are project components implemented in a sufficiently complementary manner to achieve project objectives? Specific questions used to assess project effectiveness include but are not limited to:  How effective have the project’s gender engagement activities been under Component 4?  Should the project continue with its approach to Component 5 (Improved Livelihoods for Conservation)? 4. Sustainability:  What have been the major constraints and opportunities with respect to sustainability of the interventions?  What specific measures should be taken to enhance sustainability? Specific questions used to assess sustainability include but are not limited to:  How can the project institutionalize Spatial Monitoring and Recording Tool (SMART) patrolling of the Sundarbans by the Forest Department, Tiger Caravan campaign, camera traps, and others?  Are the Village Tiger Response Teams (VTRTs) on track to becoming sustainable institutions after the life of the project?  To what extent is WildTeam on track to developing funding streams and internal control and operational systems to sustain activities after the life of the project? 5. Strategic Options for Future Programming: Given the current state of wildlife trafficking in Bangladesh, how can USAID best direct future resources, both strategically and programmatically, to implement the United States Government’s National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking in Bangladesh? Responses to this question should include but are not limited to:  What are the key lessons learned from Bagh activity implementation for consideration to USAID future program design and implementation?  What recommendations can be made to USAID in terms of improving Combating Wildlife Trafficking (CWT) results framework and development hypothesis and its links to the USAID Bangladesh’s CDCS and the USG CWT Strategy? Evaluation Methodology The Contractor proposes a robust evaluation methodology to answer the five key evaluation questions identified above. The evaluation methodology follows a mixed–method approach using both quantitative and qualitative techniques, within an Appreciative Inquiry framework to seek evidence for (1) What works? Greatest successes, (2) What “even better” looks like, including visions for maximum but realistic achievement during the relatively short project duration remaining, and (3) Suggested action plans for achieving realistic targets within remaining time frame. In gathering reliable data and valid evidence of project outcomes or impacts, the evaluation team will review relevant Bagh, USAID, IUCN, FAO, GOB, and other secondary data sources. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 48 With regard to the Mixed Methods Evaluation, a Design Matrix will be prepared to detail the data source, data collection methods, data collection instruments, and analysis of data to answer each of the evaluation questions. By using a mixed-method approach, the evaluation team is expected to gain insight on the impact of Bagh project activities (mostly from quantitative data collected by the project and others) and the processes (mostly qualitative information provided by the project staff and key informants) that led to those impacts. To the extent possible the team will generate gender disaggregated data and reflect special attention to gender relations such as the participation of women in training, income generation, and community engagement in tiger protection activities. Sequential and iterative approaches will be used to integrate the mixture of methods at various stages of the evaluation. Under the mixed method evaluation approach, the Contractor will start its work with a review of documents provided by USAID, ACME, and Bagh. Afterward, the Contractor should conduct key informant interview with the Bagh AOR, relevant USAID Agreement/ Contracting Officers’ Representatives (A/CORs), Bagh Chief of Party (COP), Bagh staff, other donors and organizations involved with wildlife/habitat conservation, private sector representatives, and relevant GOB, NGO, and international organization officials involved in environmental conservation, particularly as related to Sundarbans. The Contractor will conduct focus group discussions with a sample of project communities and stakeholders, both male and female. Finally, the contractor will conduct an in-depth interview with a sample of the direct beneficiaries of Bagh, administering a semi-structured or structured questionnaire. The sample of project beneficiaries will to the maximum realistic extent be representative of Bagh beneficiary population.26 While Data Quality Assurance is being separately assessed and guided by the ACME program, the Contractor will undertake a brief data quality assurance review using a data analysis strategy corresponding to the Mixed Methods Evaluation Design Matrix that follows the USAID data quality assessment concept to ensure validity, reliability, precision, timeliness and integrity of the data. With regard to data analysis, the Contractor will integrate several data analysis techniques in order to determine and understand key evaluation findings including key word coding or main theme analysis for qualitative data and cross tabulations for quantitative data. The Contractor will include a list of methodological limitations associated with the evaluation design methodology. The methodology includes a process for sharing draft findings and conclusions with key stakeholders, including beneficiaries and GOB officials, and incorporating a second round of their feedback in the final report, to be agreed upon by USAID.27 A draft itinerary and work plan schedule is attached as Annex A, indicating the timing for sharing draft findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Prior to the start of the evaluation, the contractor shall meet with USAID’s Office of Economic Growth to review the evaluation methodology, and address any concerns the EG office may have. To assess the performance of the Bagh project, the team will implement a three-tiered approach that provides analytic breadth and depth.  Literature Review.  Site Assessments in both Dhaka, Sundarbans Districts, Upazilas and sample Unions  Key informant and Focus Group protocols and tools as needed. Component 1: Literature Review 26 We have left the resource TBD by the evaluation team; however, the LOE would have to be adjusted if USAID anticipates the need for a full-scale survey of beneficiaries rather than targeted rapid methodologies and/or mini￾surveys. 27 Question to USAID: What type of debriefing with beneficiaries is intended? For those in the field, we suggest that the national consultant and ACME evaluation coordinator travel back to Khulna to a roundtable presentation at the district level. The international staff would do debriefing with the stakeholders in Dhaka. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 49 List of initial documents to be reviewed # Name of Documents Received from Date of receipt 1 The agreement for BAGH activity BAGH Project October 03, 2016 2 M&E plan of Bagh project BAGH Project October 03, 2016 3 Project quarterly and annual reports, work plans, and management reviews developed as part of routine monitoring BAGH Project October 03, 2016 4 Training reports BAGH Project October 03, 2016 5 USAID/Bangladesh Country Development Cooperation Strategy FY2011- FY2016 (Public version) ACME October 03, 2016 6 Bangladesh Tiger Action Plan BAGH Project October 03, 2016 7 Tiger Tuesday weekly updates BAGH Project October 03, 2016 8 Training modules BAGH Project October 03, 2016 9 Performance Indicator Tracking Table (PITT) BAGH Project October 03, 2016 10 M&E tools BAGH Project October 03, 2016 11 Research/Study report – if any BAGH Project October 03, 2016 12 GIS map – if any ACME October 03, 2016 13 Training & Beneficiary database BAGH Project October 03, 2016 14 Case/success story – if any BAGH Project October 03, 2016 15 Component-wise project expenditure BAGH Project October 03, 2016 16 One-pager/brochure/pamphlet – if available BAGH Project October 03, 2016 17 Any other relevant report/documents. BAGH Project October 03, 2016 18 Information on BAGH Activity in BD – including working areas BAGH Project October 19, 2016 19 VTRT information BAGH Project October 24, 2016 20 List of BaghBondhus BAGH Project October 24, 2016 21 Revised M&E plan BAGH Project October 24, 2016 22 Revised BD Tiger Action Plan BAGH Project October 24, 2016 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 50 Component 2: Site Assessments and Interviews, Including Proposed Focus Group Community Interviews/VTRTs Day/Date Itinerary Activity Time Mode of transport Remarks 01 Nov, Tuesday Travel to Khulna By US-Bangla (1st flight) LPIN & BRAC KII 2 - 3 pm Car Evaluation team set appointment BAGH Office KII 3.20 pm - 5 pm Car BAGH to confirm 02 Nov, Wednesday Meeting with CF, DFO Wildlife east & west, and 4 range officers KII 9 - 11 am Car BAGH to confirm Meeting with Sushilan KII 12 - 1 pm Car Evaluation team set appointment Save the Sundarbans/CREL/GIZ KII 2 - 3 pm Car BAGH to confirm 03 Nov, Thursday Satkhira travel from Khulna Car DC, Satkhira; UZ Chairman KII 11.30 - 1 pm Car BAGH to confirm 04 Nov, Friday Burigoalini/Munshiganj (VTRT & BaghBondhu) FGD 9 - 11 am Car BAGH to confirm Gabura, Koikhali KII 12 - 1 pm *Speed/ House Boat BAGH to confirm 05 Nov, Saturday Koyra, Sutarkhali FGD (Female) 2.30 - 4.30 pm *Speed/ House Boat BAGH to confirm Return to Khulna 06 Nov, Sunday Meet DFO, Bagerhat; Sarankhola; meet UNO KII 11 - 12 pm Car BAGH to confirm Charduani: meet UZ Chairman (VTRT) KII 1.30 - 2.30 pm *Speed Boat BAGH to confirm Return to Khulna Car BAGH to confirm 07 Nov, Monday Khulna University, CISS KII 9.30 - 10.30 am Car BAGH to confirm Rupantar, Uttaran KII 11.30 - 12.30 pm Car Evaluation team will set appointment 08 Nov, Tuesday Visit Village Tiger Response Team - Laudube (BaghBondhu) FGD 11 - 1 pm Boat BAGH to confirm 09 Nov, Wednesday Forest Tiger Response Team (Bagh Bondhu), Joymoni KII & FGD (Female) 10 - 12 pm Car BAGH to confirm 10 Nov, Thursday Follow-up meeting with CF, DFO Wildlife east & west, and 4 range officers KII 9 - 11 am Car BAGH to confirm 11 Nov, Friday Report writing Evaluation Team will work on it 12 Nov, Saturday Report writing 13 Nov, Sunday Travel to Dhaka Fly back to Dhaka by Sea Plane (MAF) *Speed Boat/House Boat – Need assistance from BAGH to hire/arrange boats VTRT – 345 members (only 14 of them are Female) BaghBondhu – 0 members (24 Female) AIGA – 300, all Female Community Awareness – 50% of them are Female Key Informant Interviews  Dhaka: Proposed officials, others for interviews USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 51 List of Confirmed Meetings – BAGH Evaluation # Meeting with Day & Date Time Place 1 COP & Evaluation Coordinator, ACME October 22, Saturday 9.30 – 11.30 am ACME office 2 USAID/ Bangladesh October 23, Sunday 11 am – 12 pm USAID/BD 3 Technical staffs ACME October 23, Sunday 2 pm – 4 pm ACME office 4 Project staffs of BAGH October 24, Monday 2 pm – 5 pm BAGH office 5 CREL October 25, Tuesday 2 pm – 2.40 pm CREL office 6 Institute of Water Modelling (IWM) October 25, Tuesday 3 pm – 4 pm IWM office 7 UNDP October 25, Tuesday 4 pm – 5 pm UNDP office 8 Save the Sundarbans October 27, Thursday 10 - 11 am H-75, R-17, Block￾C, 1st floor, Banani 9 Project staffs of BAGH October 27, Thursday 2 pm – 4 pm BAGH office 10 EU October 30, Sunday 2.30 pm – 3.15 pm EU office 11 Chief Conservator of Forests (CCF) October 30, Sunday 4 pm – 5 pm CCF’s office 12 JICA October 31, Monday 9.30 am - 10.30 am JICA office 13 GIZ Not set yet Not set yet GIZ office 14 ADB Not set yet Not set yet ADB office 15 World Bank Not set yet Not set yet World Bank office 16 Dr. Monirul Islam (PhD on TIGER) Not set yet Not set yet Jahangirnarag University USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 52 USAID's Bagh Activity Working Area Division District Upazila Union Khulna Bagerhat Mongla Chila Sundarbans Morrelganj Nishanbaria Sarankhola Dhansagar Southkhali Royenda Satkhira Shyamnagar Ramjan Nagar Munshiganj Buri Goalini Kaikhali Bhetkhali Gabura Khulna Koyra Dakshin Bedkashi Uttar Bedkashi Maharajpur Maheshwaripur Dacope Sutarkhali Kailasganj Banishanta Barisal Pirojpur Mathbaria Sapleza Barguna Patharghata Char Duanti 2 divisions 5 districts 8 upazilas 21 unions Direct Observation The team will conduct non-random observational transect scans using checklist for noting proxy indicators for incomes/well-being noting visible assets (e.g., house construction, roof materials, boats with/without motors, bicycles, motorbikes, TV antennas, and temples/ shrines). USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 53 Evaluation Design Matrix # Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub￾question Data Source BAGH Team & Partners Tool Used Tool Used Data Source External Orgs. Tool Used Data Source External Key Informants Tool Used OVERALL PERFORMANCE 1 To what extent is the Bagh Activity on track, in terms of progress and outcomes, to meet its overall goals under its five components? What factors (internal or external to the project) affected timely achievement of targets? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr A QQr B QQr C QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant/ group discussion interviews QQr A QQr C Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D For those factors that impeded performance, are they still a threat to timely achievement of targets? If so, how can they be overcome? BAGH team Forest Department CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr A QQr B QQr C QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant/ group discussion interviews QQr A QQr C Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQ D For those factors that accelerated achievement of targets, how can they be leveraged to continue to do so? BAGH team Forest Department CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr A QQr B QQr C QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant/ group discussion interviews QQr A QQr C Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 54 # Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub￾question Data Source BAGH Team & Partners Tool Used Tool Used Data Source External Orgs. Tool Used Data Source External Key Informants Tool Used Given the time remaining, what opportunities exist to enhance and strengthen programmatic effectiveness, such as by adding, changing, re￾scaling, and/or removing activities to meet or surpass targets/objectives, within the stipulations of the Bagh agreement? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr A QQr B QQr C QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant/ group discussion interviews QQr A QQr C Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D What specific results have been achieved today on gender integration into the Bagh Activity? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr A QQr B QQr C QQr E CREL, UNDP, Communities, BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant/ group discussion interviews QQr A QQr C Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 55 # Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub￾question Data Source BAGH Team & Partners Tool Used Tool Used Data Source External Orgs. Tool Used Data Source External Key Informants Tool Used What changes/ developments have there been in the community in line with the outcomes since the start of the project? Which of these are attributable to this project? What differences have these changes made to people’s lives? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr A QQr B QQr C QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant/ group discussion interviews QQr A QQr C Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D 2 CAPACITY BUILDING AND EFFICIENCY WHAT HAVE BEEN THE RESULTS TO DATE OF BAGH’S INSTITUTIONAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY BUILDING EFFORTS DIRECTED AT THE PROJECT’S KEY STAKEHOLDERS: THE BANGLADESH FOREST DEPARTMENT, OTHER GOB AGENCIES, WILDTEAM, AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES? Which activities have worked well? Which have not worked well? What concrete actions can be taken to improve the impact of the project’s capacity development efforts? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL Communities Local women BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr A QQr B QQr C QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant/ group discussion interviews QQr A QQr C Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D To what extent have technical inputs – such as but not limited to BAGH team Forest Department Implementers BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly Group & key informant interviews BAGH team Key informant/ group Tiger specialists/ Key informant interviews QQr D USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 56 # Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub￾question Data Source BAGH Team & Partners Tool Used Tool Used Data Source External Orgs. Tool Used Data Source External Key Informants Tool Used the established WildTeam organizational structure, staff trainings, operational procedures, and tools – improved efficiency in implementation of Bagh activity? reports, M&E data QQr C QQr E discussion interviews QQr A QQr C authors, NRM leaders, observers 3 EFFECTIVENESS In regard to GOB agencies, how effective has the project been at developing the critical government relationships and capacities necessary for the project’s success? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr C QQr D QQr E BAGH team, Forest Department, Implementers Key informant/ group discussion interviews QQr A QQr C Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D Are project components implemented in a sufficiently complementary manner to How effective have the project’s gender engagement activities been under Component 4? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr C QQr B QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant/ group discussion interviews QQr A QQr C Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 57 # Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub￾question Data Source BAGH Team & Partners Tool Used Tool Used Data Source External Orgs. Tool Used Data Source External Key Informants Tool Used achieve project objectives? Local women BRAC/LPIN 4 SUSTAINABILITY Should the project continue with its approach to Component 5 (Improved Livelihoods for Conservation)? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr C QQr B QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant interviews QQr D QQr B Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D What have been the major constraints and opportunities with respect to sustainability of the interventions? What specific measures should be taken to enhance sustainability? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr C QQr B QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant interviews QQr D QQr B Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 58 # Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub￾question Data Source BAGH Team & Partners Tool Used Tool Used Data Source External Orgs. Tool Used Data Source External Key Informants Tool Used How can the project institution-alize Spatial Monitoring and Recording Tool (SMART) patrolling of the Sundarbans by the Forest Department, Tiger Caravan campaign, camera traps, and others? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr C QQr B QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant interviews QQr D QQr B Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D Are the Village Tiger Response Teams (VTRTs) on track to becoming sustainable institutions after the life of the project? BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr C QQr B QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant interviews QQr D QQr B Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D 5 STRATEGIC OPTIONS FOR FUTURE PROGRAMMING To what extent is WildTeam on track to develop funding streams, internal control, and operational systems to sustain BAGH team Forest Department Implementers CREL UNDP Communities BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr C QQr B QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant interviews QQr D QQr B Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 59 # Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub￾question Data Source BAGH Team & Partners Tool Used Tool Used Data Source External Orgs. Tool Used Data Source External Key Informants Tool Used activities after the life of the project? Local women BRAC/LPIN Given the current state of wildlife trafficking in Bangladesh, how can USAID best direct future resources, both strategically and programmatical￾ly, to implement the United States Government’s National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking in Bangladesh? What are the key lessons learned from Bagh activity implementation for consideration in USAID future program design BAGH team Forest Department Implementers Communities Local women BRAC/LPIN BAGH documents, annual/ quarterly reports, M&E data Group & key informant interviews QQr C QQr B QQr E CREL UNDP Communities BRAC/LPIN BD SAWEN Rep Key informant interviews QQr D QQr B Tiger specialists/ authors, NRM leaders, observers Key informant interviews QQr D USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 60 # Evaluation Question Evaluation Sub￾question Data Source BAGH Team & Partners Tool Used Tool Used Data Source External Orgs. Tool Used Data Source External Key Informants Tool Used and implementa￾tion? BD SAWEN Rep Coast Guard Bangladesh Navy Bangladesh Police Bangladesh Border Guards Work Plan and Timeline Section B. This section outlines major elements of the work plan for: Preparatory Work 1. Comprehensive document collection and review. 2. Prepare draft evaluation methodology and work plan. 3. Team planning meetings. 4. Briefing and planning meeting with USAID/Bangladesh. 5. Develop data collection and interview instruments, scheduling. 6. Dhaka and Sundarbans interviews. 7. Data Gathering (period): Dhaka and Sundarbans. Data Analysis/Report Drafting (period) 8. Site visit data analysis and report preparation. 9. Survey data analysis and report preparation. 10. Presentation of Preliminary Draft Evaluation Report to USAID. 11. Presentation of draft findings to stakeholders. 12. Data analysis/draft evaluation report. 13. Submit draft evaluation report. 14. Receipt of USAID comments on draft final report TBD. 15. Submit final evaluation report. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 61 GANTT Chart for team activities. Task/Deliverables (as per LOE) Oct￾22 Oct￾23 Oct￾24 Oct￾25 Oct￾26 Oct￾27 Oct￾29 Oct￾30 Oct￾31 Nov￾01 Nov￾02 Nov￾03 Nov￾05 Nov￾06 Nov￾07 Nov￾08 Nov￾09 Nov￾10 Nov￾11 Nov￾12 Nov￾13 Nov￾14 Nov￾15 Team meeting (Consultants, COP, and EC) Team meeting with USAID, Team planning meeting at ACME Team meeting with IP Development of Evaluation Work Plan Development of Evaluation Work Plan Development of data collection instruments Information and data collection. Includes interviews with key informants (stakeholders and USAID staff) and site visits. Information and data collection. Includes interviews with key informants (stakeholders and USAID staff) and site visits. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 62 Task/Deliverables (as per LOE) Oct￾22 Oct￾23 Oct￾24 Oct￾25 Oct￾26 Oct￾27 Oct￾29 Oct￾30 Oct￾31 Nov￾01 Nov￾02 Nov￾03 Nov￾05 Nov￾06 Nov￾07 Nov￾08 Nov￾09 Nov￾10 Nov￾11 Nov￾12 Nov￾13 Nov￾14 Nov￾15 Information and data collection. Includes interviews with key informants (stakeholders and USAID staff) and site visits. Field visit (Khulna) Field visit (Khulna) Field visit (Satkhira) Field visit (Khulna) Field visit (Khulna) Field visit (Khulna) Field visit (Khulna) Field visit (Khulna) Field visit (Khulna) Field visit (Khulna) Field visit (Khulna) KIIs and Preliminary Draft Report KIIs and Preliminary Draft Report to COP Task/Deliverables (as per LOE) Nov￾15 Nov￾16 Nov￾17 Nov￾18 Nov￾19 Nov￾20 Nov￾21 Nov￾22 Discussion, analysis, and preparation of preliminary draft evaluation report in country, including discussion with USAID. Discussion, analysis, and preparation of preliminary draft evaluation report in country, including suggested follow-up meeting with USAID. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 63 Task/Deliverables (as per LOE) Nov￾15 Nov￾16 Nov￾17 Nov￾18 Nov￾19 Nov￾20 Nov￾21 Nov￾22 Discussion, analysis, and preparation of preliminary draft evaluation report in country, including discussion with USAID. Debrief meetings with USAID and revise draft report. Debrief meetings with key stakeholders/WildTeam/BCAS/Forest Dept. and revise draft report. Team Leader meets with Technical Specialists and USAID to synthesize findings/discussion. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 64 ANNEX III DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS QUESTIONNAIRE A For Communities, Organizations to Supplement Roundtable Discussions Name of Community/Organization: ___________________________________________________________ How many members? _____________ Primary Livelihoods? __________________________________ Any other relevant information on its membership (e.g., number of men and women)? Number of people present for Community Discussion/Workshop: Men______ Women______ (Sign-up sheet will be distributed indicating names of participants present, age, and occupation.) 1. How familiar are you with the Bagh Project and, if so, in what way (e.g., workshops, training, environmental education, technical or other support, etc.)? (1 = Not at all familiar 5 = Very familiar) Not at all familiar Reasonably familiar Very familiar # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ Describe Through what activities have you become familiar? 2. Of the several components of the Bagh Project that directly involve your community – minimizing human-tiger conflict, enhanced communication/outreach/gender engagement, and improved livelihoods for conservation – which one(s) do you feel the Bagh Project has contributed or helped most to your community and to what extent ? (1 = Not at all beneficial 5 = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 3. Describe a. Which components of the Bagh Project have done best to benefit your community? Choose one: i. Reducing human-tiger conflict? ii. Increasing community engagement? iii. Increasing gender engagement, women’s involvement? iv. Improved livelihoods? b. What could they be doing even better? 4. To what extent and in what ways is your community contributing in support of the Bagh Project and in furthering the conservation of Tigers and the Sundarbans as a whole? (‘1’ = Not contributing ‘5’ = Contributing substantially) USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 65 Not at all contributing Reasonable contributions Substantial contributions Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ What specific ways, if any, is your community contributing in support of Bagh Project (e.g., VTRTs, volunteers, distributing information on value of tigers)? What more could your community be doing? 5. To what extent are women being welcomed and integrated into the Bagh Project and in what capacities/roles? (‘1’ = Not at all involved ‘5’ = Very much involved) Not at all involved Reasonably involved Very much involved Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 6. What overall impact do you think the planned Rampal Coal-fired Power Plant and adjacent industrial development will have on the Sundarbans and its tigers? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ Specifically, what will the impact be on: o The Tiger’s Sundarbans habitat? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ o Survival of the Tiger? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ o Quality of life for your community/family? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ o Local culture, customs, traditional relationships with Sundarbans and its tigers? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 66 Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ o Personal/community livelihoods? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___  Do you have any other comments you wish to share with the Evaluation Team concerning the Bagh Project? QUESTIONNAIRE B For Forest Department (FD) Law Enforcement Personnel working in the Sundarbans – to be used for both District Officers and Front-Line Forest Guards/Rangers 1. Please describe your role and activities in the Sundarbans relative to the Conservation of Tigers through the Bagh Project. 2. How familiar are you with the overall Bagh Project and specifically its 5 components? 1) Expanded Knowledge Base/Surveys (‘1’ = Not at all familiar ‘5’ = Very familiar) Not at all familiar Reasonably familiar Very familiar Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 2) Reduced Illegal Trafficking (‘1’ = Not at all familiar ‘5’ = Very familiar) Not at all familiar Reasonably familiar Very familiar Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 3) Minimized Human-Tiger Conflict (‘1’ = Not at all familiar ‘5’ = Very familiar) Not at all familiar Reasonably familiar Very familiar Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 4) Enhanced Communication (‘1’ = Not at all familiar ‘5’ = Very familiar) Not at all familiar Reasonably familiar Very familiar Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 5) Improved Livelihoods for Conservation (‘1’ = Not at all familiar ‘5’ = Very familiar) Not at all familiar Reasonably familiar Very familiar Participants USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 67 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___  Describe Through what activities have you become familiar? 3. To what extent are you personally involved in specifically dealing with any of these components? (‘1’ = Not at all involved ‘5’ = Very much involved) Not at all involved Reasonably involved Very much involved Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 4. How familiar are you with the Bangladesh Tiger Action Plan and Integrated Resources Management Plan for the Sundarbans developed by the Forest Department? (‘1’ = Not at all familiar ‘5’ = Very familiar) Not at all familiar Reasonably familiar Very familiar Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 5. To what extent are you involved in carrying out the objectives and strategic actions contained in these plans? (‘1’ = Not at all involved ‘5’ = Very much involved) Not at all involved Reasonably involved Very much involved Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 6. What, in your opinion, are the greatest threats to the Tigers of the Sundarbans, and to what official extent are you involved in addressing these threats? 7. Based on your experience and observations of the overall Bagh Project and WildTeam’s involvement, what are your views on the value and successes of the project and organization in furthering tiger, prey, and habitat conservation in the Sundarbans to date?  What do you base this on – more or fewer tigers, improved habitat quality, fewer conflicts? 8. In your opinion, what are some of the best things that the Bagh Project has been doing to date? 9. What could they be doing to make it even better? USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 68 10. Have you personally benefited from any of the Bagh-related activities (e.g., technical training, increased knowledge and awareness of conservation, SMART Patrols or any others)? Be specific. 11. How effective do you feel law enforcement activities by the FD/Bagh Project are as they relate to poaching and illegal wildlife trafficking? (‘1’ = Not at all effective ‘5’ = Very effective) Not at all effective Reasonably effective Very effective Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 12. How effective do you feel law enforcement activities by the FD/Bagh Project are in reducing human-tiger conflicts? (‘1’ = Not at all effective ‘5’ = Very effective) Not at all effective Reasonably effective Very effective Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___  What are they doing best with regard to law enforcement?  What could they be doing to make law enforcement even better? 13. What do the FD Rangers/Guards need to make them even more effective in conserving tigers and combating wildlife crime and conflicts: more training; more equipment; more or better water/land transportation, risk insurance/compensation, or others? 14. How effective are the Village Tiger Response Teams and Forest Tiger Response Teams in dealing with problem tigers (or crocodiles)? (‘1’ = Not at all effective ‘5’ = Very effective) Not at all effective Reasonably effective Very effective Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___  To what extent has the Bagh Project contributed to these efforts? (‘1’ = Not contributing ‘5’ = Contributing substantially) Not at all contributing Reasonable contributions Substantial contributions Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 15. How many women and how many men are involved in Law Enforcement activities in the Sundarbans? # Men___ # Women___ USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 69 What role are women playing in Law Enforcement activities in the Sundarbans? 16. What overall impact do you think the planned Rampal Coal-fired Power Plant and adjacent industrial development will have on the Sundarbans and its tigers? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ Specifically, what will the impact be on: o The Tiger’s Sundarbans habitat? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ o Survival of the Tiger? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ o Quality of life for your community/family? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ o Local culture, customs, traditional relationships with Sundarbans and its tigers? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ o Personal/community livelihoods? (‘1’ = Not at all beneficial ‘5’ = Very beneficial) Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial # Participants 1 2 3 4 5 #Men___#Women___ 17. Do you have any other comments you wish to share with the Evaluation Team concerning the Bagh Project? USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 70 QUESTIONNAIRE C INTERNAL DISCUSSION/KEY INFORMANT QUESTIONNAIRE FOR BAGH EVALUATION (Based on SOW Evaluation QQs Organization Respondent(s) Key Informant(s) Date Evaluation Questions Sub￾Questions Responses Notes BAGH PROGRAM Overall Performance 1. What are the greatest threats to the Tigers of the Sundarbans? To what extent is the Bagh Activity on track in addressing these threats, in terms of progress and outcomes, to meet its overall goals for all its five components? Expanded knowledge base Reduced illegal wildlife trafficking Minimized human-wildlife conflict Enhanced communication, outreach, and gender engagement Improved livelihoods for conservation What are your best examples, successes? How could BAGH do even better in future? What needs to be done to make that happen within the time remaining? (Action plan?) 2. Capacity Building and Efficiency: What have been the results to date of Bagh’s institutional and individual capacity building efforts directed at the Project’s key stakeholders: The Bangladesh Forest Department? What are your best examples, successes? How could BAGH do even USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 71 Other GOB agencies? WildTeam? Local communities? better in future? (obstacles?) What needs to be done to make that happen within the time remaining? (Action plan?) 3. Effectiveness: Are each of project components being implemented in an effective manner to achieve project objectives? In particular, Gender engagement Community engagement Improved Livelihoods for Conservation What are your best examples, successes? How could BAGH do even better in future? (obstacles?) What needs to be done to make that happen within the time remaining? (Action plan?) 4. Sustainability: What has your organization been doing to ensure long -term sustainability of the BAGH project, particularly in the absence of future USAID funding? What specific measures should be taken to enhance sustainability? Including Institutionalizing: What are your best examples, successes? How could BAGH do even better in future? (obstacles?) What needs to be done to make that happen USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 72 Spatial Monitoring and Recording Tool (SMART) patrolling of the Sundarbans by the Forest Department Tiger Caravan campaign Camera traps Village Tiger Response Teams (VTRTs) Developing: Funding streams Internal control and operational systems within the time remaining? (Action plan?) 5. Strategic Options for Future Programming: What do you think is the current state of wildlife trafficking in Bangladesh? How would your organization advise USAID to best direct future resources? To implement the United States Government’s National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking in Bangladesh? To address tiger and other wildlife conservation issues? What are your best examples, successes? How could BAGH do even better in future? (obstacles?) What needs to be done to make that happen within the time remaining? (Action plan?) USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 73 QUESTIONNAIRE D SAMPLE EXTERNAL KEY INFORMANT QUESTIONNAIRE FOR BAGH EVALUATION Organization Respondent Key Informant Date Evaluation Questions Sub-Questions Responses Notes BAGH PROGRAM Overall Performance 1. BACKGROUND What is your organization's primary mission/focus both in general and specifically as it relates to Bengal Tiger conservation in South Asia? What are your best examples, greatest successes? What’s your vision for ‘even better’ for future achievement? What do you plan to do to make that happen? (Action plan?) 2. To what extent are you aware of or in any way directly or indirectly involved, in any capacity, in Wild Team's Bagh Conservation Project? What has been your most successful engagement with BAGH? 3. Based on your experience, observations, and knowledge of the Bagh Project and WildTeam, what, to date, have been your views on the value and successes of the program in furthering Tiger conservation and habitat conservation in the Sundarbans? What are BAGH’s most significant successes around tiger conservation in the Sundarbans? 4. Do you think that the Bagh Project and WildTeam are doing a good job in furthering Tiger conservation in South Asia? What are BAGH’s most significant successes around tiger conservation in South Asia? What indicators or data do you have that would inform you in your opinion on USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 74 their progress to date? What could BAGH be doing even better? What does BAGH need to do to make that happen? (Action plan?) 5. Are there data, observations , or informed opinions that would suggest or support that the Bagh Project is achieving its goals of  Implementing both tiger conservation (i.e. , improving/enhancing tiger population numbers)?  Ensuring long -term population viability and habitat conservation, particularly in the face of rising sea level and other global changes affecting tiger forest/mangrove habitat? What are BAGH’s best examples of relevant data? Best examples regarding tiger conservation? Best examples of habitat conservation in face of rising sea levels? 6. In your experience, do you think that the Bagh Conservation Project could or should be doing additional things to improve or enhance Tiger conservation in the Sundarbans? What would you suggest? What would ‘even better’ look like for the BAGH program? 7. What are your views concerning the effectiveness of Law Enforcement activities in this region as they pertain to anti -poaching and illegal wildlife trafficking of Bengal tigers and their parts? Best examples of effective law enforcement? Do you view the current Law Enforcement program, both in the central government and locally , as being particularly effective in combating poaching and illegal trafficking of tigers? Best examples? Are there data to support this one way or the other? Best data? What do the rangers need in order to be more effective: o More equipment? What do you think is most important USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 75 o More weapons? o More capacity building and training? o More community involvement to support and supplement rangers? among all these? Why? 8. Human-Wildlife Conflicts are an increasingly important concern in local communities in the Sundarbans, where human deaths due to tigers and crocodiles occur in significant numbers. In your view, is the Bagh Project doing enough at this point to deal with and mitigate or resolve this issue? 9. What about "Village Tiger Response Teams" – have they been effective in dealing with problem tigers? VTRTs’ greatest successes? What could VTRTs be doing more to make them even better, more effective? 10. Outreach and Public Education are obviously important components of any successful community-based NRM involving tiger conservation in this area.  What kinds of outreach tools have been implemented in furtherance of this effort?  To what extent has your organization contributed to this effort or is willing to do so in the future? Do you think that Bagh is succeeding in this effort? What are the most significant achievements? Best outreach tools? What more is needed to make these even better? What have been your most significant contributions? USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 76 11. In your experience, how significant is gender integration in this project?  Are women being welcomed and integrated as an important part of this project? Best examples of gender integration? What specific roles are they playing? What more can be done to make gender integration even better? USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 77 QUESTIONNAIRE E SPECIFIC TO IMPLEMENTING PARTNERS and/or COLLABORATORS (SMITHSONIAN) Evaluation Questions Sub￾Questions Responses Notes BAGH PROGRAM Overall Performance 1. How familiar are you with the BAGH project, its objective, and components? What is your general assessment of the progress and the accomplish￾ments of the Bagh Project/ Cooperative Agreement to date? What is your assessment of Bagh’s 5 components with respect to Tiger Conservation in the Sundarbans?  Increasing knowledge base,  Reducing illegal trafficking  Minimizing human￾wildlife conflict What are your best examples, Bagh’s greatest successes? What’s your vision for ‘even better’ for future achieve￾ment? USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 78  Enhancing communicati ons, gender engagement  Improving livelihoods 2. On what information/ data is your assessment based:  Quarterly/ annual reports  Indicators and available data  Regular coordina - tion meetings with WildTeam  Information from third parties  Field visits? 3. In your opinion, how effective has the coordination been between the Bagh/ WildTeam and your organization? Best examples? What’s your vision for ‘even better’ for future coordination ? 4. Sustainability: What have BAGH and your institution been doing to ensure long -term sustainability of the project, particularly in the absence of future USAID funding? What specific measures should be taken to USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 79 enhance sustainability? 5. What overall impact do you think the planned Rampal Coal￾fired Power Plant and adjacent industrial development will have on the tigers and their Sundarbans habitat? USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 80 QUESTIONNAIRE F Bangladesh BAGH Project Community Engagement in Protecting the Bengal Tiger Community/Group Protocol Date: Project Site: Village/Neighborhood: Interviewer/Recorder: Attendees: Women: Men: Vulnerable group mbrs: Key Informants/Leaders present (List all participants separately with signatures/mark as appropriate) Meeting Purpose:  Introduce BAGH Project to Community—Protecting the Bengal Tiger  Community Self-Help Achievements supporting Protection of the Bengal Tiger  Visions for Positive Engagement with BAGH Project  Plans for community mobilization to complement and support BAGH project  Plans for data collection for BAGH project  Special activities for women, women’s groups  Special activities for disabled, vulnerable groups  Special activities for youth  Commitments of community members for preparing and realizing plans Topics/Issues/Resolutions: Introductions, brief description, community familiarity with BAGH project DISCOVERY – Community Self-help Achievements Supporting Protection of the Bengal Tiger  What do you especially appreciate by the Bagh Activity—Successes, what has Bagh done best?  Tell us about what you have done together here in this community/VTRT that you are especially proud of that contributes to the Protection of the Bengal Tiger? Activities you did on your own, without outside assistance? Activities you would like your children, grandchildren to remember? USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 81  What strengths, skills, knowledge, and experience do these achievements represent? DREAM – Visions of the future for your children, grandchildren  What dreams do you have for your community’s relation to Tigers, to the Sundarbans?  What are your dreams for the BAGH Project as it affects this community?  What are your dreams for successful Protection of the Bengal Tiger?  What obstacles, or negative impacts might come from the Project?  What are your dreams for overcoming such obstacles? DESIGN – Plans for achieving your community dreams?  What are your plans for successful supporting Protection of the Bengal Tiger for affected people and families?  What will you do during the coming year to move toward achieving your dreams?  What information will be needed to make good plans for realizing your dreams?  Special activities for women, women’s groups  Special activities for disabled, vulnerable groups  Special activities for youth  How would you organize yourselves to gather the needed information and to realize, achieve your plans? DELIVERY – Immediate actions  What will you do during the coming weeks/month to get started?  Who will do what? When? o Each person make a personal commitment. DO IT NOW!  What can we do together right now to begin? What can we do in the next 15 minutes? REFLECTION ON BAGH ACTIVITY  Advice for Bagh?  What can Bagh do ‘even better’ during the remaining year?  What are your top priorities for Bagh activities, implementation? USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 82 ANNEX IV EVALUATION ITINERARY, MEETINGS, AND FIELD SCHEDULE BAGH Mid-Term Evaluation Itinerary - Oct 22 - Nov 22, 2016 Date & Day Task/Deliverables (as per LOE) Deadline/SOW (see details below the table) LOE days Saturday, October 22 Team meeting (Consultants, COP, and EC) Sunday, October 23 Team meeting with USAID, Team planning meeting at ACME Monday, October 24 Team meeting with IP 02 days Tuesday, October 25 Development of Evaluation Work Plan Wednesday, October 26 Development of Evaluation Work Plan No later than 5th day evaluation team arrives in BD 02 days Thursday, October 27 Development of data collection instruments Finalize & share with USAID before field work starts 02 days Friday, October 28 WEEKEND Saturday, October 29 Information and data collection. Includes interviews with key informants (stakeholders and USAID staff) and site visits. Sunday, October 30 Includes interviews with key informants (stakeholders and USAID staff) and site visits. Monday, October 31 Information and data collection. Includes interviews with key informants (stakeholders and USAID staff) and site visits. Tuesday, November 01 Field visit (Khulna) Fly to the field by US-Bangla Wednesday, November 02 Field visit (Khulna) Thursday, November 03 Field visit (Satkhira) Friday, November 04 WEEKEND Saturday, November 05 Field visit (Khulna) Sunday, November 06 Field visit (Khulna) Monday, November 07 Field visit (Khulna) Tuesday, November 08 Field visit (Khulna) Wednesday, November 09 Field visit (Khulna) Thursday, November 10 Field visit (Khulna) Friday, November 11 WEEKEND (Prepare 1st Draft Report) Saturday, November 12 Field visit (all 09 working upazilas to be covered from Khulna) USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 83 Sunday, November 13 Field visit (all 09 working upazilas to be covered from Khulna) Back from the field by sea plane 14 days Monday, November 14 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and Preliminary Draft Report Team will submit Draft report to ACME COP & HO five working days before the Mission debriefing. Within three working days after receipt, USAID and ACME staff will provide preliminary comments prior to the Mission debriefing. Tuesday, November 15 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and Preliminary Draft Report to COP Wednesday, November 16 Discussion, analysis, and preparation of preliminary draft evaluation report in country including discussion with USAID Thursday, November 17 Discussion, analysis, and preparation of preliminary draft evaluation report in country including suggested follow-up meeting with USAID 05 days Friday, November 18 WEEKEND (Send Draft Report to USAID) Saturday, November 19 Discussion, analysis, and preparation of preliminary draft evaluation report in country, including discussion with USAID Sunday, November 20 Debrief meetings with USAID and revise draft report Before the team’s departure from BD 01 day Monday, November 21 Debrief meetings with key stakeholders/WildTeam/BCAS/Fo rest Dept. and revise draft report Prior to the team’s departure from BD 01 day Tuesday, November 22 Team Leader meets with Technical Specialists and USAID to synthesize findings, discussion Prior to the team’s departure from BD 01 day Notes 1. The work plan will be submitted to the ACME COR and Bagh activity manager at USAID/Bangladesh for approval no later than the fifth day after the Evaluation team arrives in Bangladesh. 2. The matrix should be finalized and shared with USAID/Bangladesh before evaluation field work starts. 3. The Evaluation Team Leader will brief the ACME COR, ACME COP, and the Bagh activity manager on progress with the evaluation on at least a weekly basis, in person or by electronic communication. 4. The Contractor will submit a Preliminary Draft Evaluation Report to the ACME COR, Bagh activity manager, and ACME COP five working days before the Mission debriefing. Within three working days after receipt, USAID and ACME staff are requested to provide preliminary comments prior to the Mission debriefing. 5. The Contractor will present the major evaluation findings to USAID/Bangladesh through a PowerPoint presentation before the team’s departure from country. 6. The team will present the major findings from the evaluation to key stakeholders (as appropriate and as defined by USAID) through a PowerPoint presentation prior to the team’s departure from the country. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 84 7. A draft report on the findings and recommendations should be submitted to USAID/Bangladesh and ACME 10 working days after departure of international team members from Bangladesh. 8. USAID will provide comments on the draft report within 10 working days of submission. 9. The Contractor will submit two versions of the Final Evaluation Report (one for “public” that is uploaded into the DEC and the other one specific for USAID that may include sensitive information such as response that will be used for new design or procurement or sensitive to the host government) that incorporate Mission comments and suggestions no later than five working days after USAID/Bangladesh provides written comments on the Draft Evaluation Report. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 85 List of Confirmed Meetings – as of October 19, Wednesday # Meeting with Day & Date Date & Time Place 1 COP & Evaluation Coordinator, ACME October 22, Saturday 9.30 am – 11.30 am ACME office 2 USAID/Bangladesh October 23, Sunday 11 am – 12 pm USAID/BD 3 Technical staff of ACME October 23, Sunday 2 pm – 4 pm ACME office 4 Project staff of BAGH October 24, Monday 2 pm – 5 pm BAGH office 5 Institute of Water Modelling (IWM) October 25, Tuesday 3 pm – 4 pm IWM office 6 Chief Conservator of Forest (CCF) October 30, Sunday 3 pm – 4 pm CCF’s office USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 86 Day/Date Time Activity Place Transport Tuesday, 1- 11-2016 2 – 3 pm Meeting with LPIN & BRAC Sonadanga, Khulna Car xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx 7:30 – 9:30 pm Bxxxxxn (WCS) and Txxxxxy (ATBC) Hotel City Inn Not Applicable Wednesday, 1-11-2016 9 – 11 am Meeting-CF, DFO, range officers CF office Car 12 – 1 pm Meeting with Sushilan xxxxxxxS office Car 2 – 3 pm Save the Sundarbans/ CREL/GIZ CREL/GIZ office Car Thursday, 3- 11-2016 7:30am – 11:00am Travel to Shyamnagar Microbus 11:00am – 1:00pm Meeting with Upazila Chairman Upazila Porishad 1:00pm – 1:30pm Travel to Munshigonj Microbus 1:30pm – 2:30pm Lunch & Prayer Break 3:00pm – 4:00pm Meeting with CMC Chairman Shushilon 4:00pm – 5:00pm Meeting with FTRT Shushilon Friday, 4-11- 2016 9:30am – 11:30am Meeting with VTRT/BaghBondhu Purbo Kalinagor Motorcycle 11:30am – 12:00pm Travel back to Munshigonj Tiger Point Motorcycle 12:00pm – 2:00pm Jumma Prayer & Lunch break 3:30pm – 4:30pm AIGA Participants Mirgang/Gabura 4:30pm – 5:30pm Back to Tiger Point Saturday, 5- 11-2016 8:00am – 11:00am Travel to Koyra Kashirhat Ghat Microbus, engine-boat, motorcycle 11:00am – 11:30am Travel to Kashiabad Motorcycle 11:30am – 1:00pm Meeting with VTRT Team Kashiabad Bazar 1:00pm – 2:00pm Lunch & Prayer Break Noor Bhai’s Hotel (Koyra Sadar) 2:30pm – 6:00pm Travel to Khulna Sunday, 6-11- 2016 8:30am – 9:30am Travel to Bagherhat DFO Office Microbus 9:30am – 10:00am Meeting with DFO East 10:00am – 12:30pm Travel to Sharonkhola Range Office Microbus USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 87 12:30pm – 1:00pm Meeting with the UNO and UP & CMC President Upazila Porishad 1:00pm – 2:00pm Lunch and Prayer Break 2:00pm – 3:00pm Meeting with VTRT & BaghBondhu Rasulpur 3:00pm – 6:30pm Travel to Khulna Monday, 7- 11-2016 9:00am – 9:15am Travel to Khulna University Khulna University Microbus 9:30am – 10:30am Meeting at Khulna University 10:30am – 10:45am Travel to Rupantar Office Microbus 11:00am – 12:30pm Meeting with Rupantar 12:30pm – 12:45pm Back to City INN Microbus 1:00pm – 2:00pm Lunch and Prayer Break Wednesday, 8-11-2016 8:30am – 9:30am Travel to Mongla Chandpai Range Microbus 9:30am – 9:45am To cross the river & go to Range office Engine￾boat/Easy bike 10:00am – 10:30am Travel to Joymoni Easy bike 10:30am – 11:00am Meeting with CMC CMC Office 11:00am – 12:00pm FGD with VTRT 12:00pm – 12:30pm Back to Range Office Motorcycle 12:30pm – 1:30pm Lunch and Prayer Break 1:30pm - 2:00pm Travel to Eco￾Tourism Spot Gol Kanon - RI Engine-boat 2:00pm – 3:30pm Visit Eco-Tourism spot 3:30pm – 4:00pm Back to Mongla Ghat Engine-boat 4:00pm – 5:30pm Back to Khulna Microbus Tuesday, 9- 11-2016 8:00am – 9:00am Travel to Digraj Microbus/Boat￾2 hrs 9:00am – 10:00am Range office/Forest Gurad Engine-boat, motorcycle 10:00am – 10:45am Travel to Loudobe (Koiloshgonj) Motorcycle 11:00am – 1:30pm BaghBondhu, FGD with VTRT Primary High School 1:30pm – 2:30pm Lunch and Prayer Break USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 88 2:30pm – 3:30pm Village forum & Eco￾tourism spot Koilashgonj & Karamjol 3:30pm – 5:30pm Return to Khulna Easy bike/ boat/Car Thursday, 10- 11-2016 9:00am – 9:15am Travel to CF Office CF Office, Boyra Microbus 9:30am – onward Follow-up meeting CF Office, Boyra Friday, 11- 11-2016 Weekend/Report Writing Saturday, 12- 11-2016 8:30am – 9:30am Travel to Bagherhat DFO Office Microbus 9:30am – 10:00am DFO west/Forest guards 10:00am – 12:30pm Travel to Sharonkhola Range Office Microbus 12:30pm – 1:00pm UNO and UP & CMC President Upazila Porishad 1:00pm – 2:00pm Lunch and Prayer Break 2:00pm – 3:00pm VTRT & BaghBondhu Rasulpur 3:00pm – 6:30pm Travel to Khulna USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 89 ANNEX V LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED Meeting With Date Person(s) Met Meeting Type Location USAID 20 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Disclosure Meeting USAID Office, Baridhara USAID 23 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Update/ Discussion USAID Office, Baridhara BAGH Officials 24 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Update/ Discussion BAGH office, Gulshan BAGH Team 14 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Update/ Discussion BAGH Office, Gulshan CREL 25 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII CREL Office, Gulshan IWM 25 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII IWM Office, Mohakhali DOHS UNDP 25 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII IDB Bhaban Save the Sundarban 27 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Banani BAGH Component Leaders 27 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Update/ Discussion BAGH Office, Gulshan Smithsonian Team 30 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Update/ Discussion ACME Office European Union 30 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII EU Office, Gulshan Forest Department 30 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Ban Bhaban, Agargaon JICA 31 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII JICA Office, Gulshan World Vision 31 Oct 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII World Vision Office, Banani ACDI/VOCA 01 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII BRAC Office, Khulna WildTeam-BAGH Team 01 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Update/ Discussion WildTeam Office, Khulna WCS Representative 01 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII City Inn, Khulna Forest Department 02 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Ban Bhaban, Boyra, Khulna GIZ-Sundarban Project 02 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Update/ Discussion GIZ Office, Boyra, Khulna CREL 02 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII CREL Office, Nirala, Khulna Forest Department 02 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Sundarban (West) Forest Office, Khulna Local Government, Satkhira 03 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII UZ Office, Shyamnagar, Satkhira Local Government, Burigoalini 03 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Union Parishad Office, Burigoalini VTRT meeting 04 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD East Kalinagar Women IGA Group 04 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD Jatindranagar, Satkhira Bangladesh Environment Development Society (BEDS) 06 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Nirala, Khulna USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 90 Meeting With Date Person(s) Met Meeting Type Location CISS/Forestry Department, Khulna University 06 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Khulna University UTTARAN - NGO 06 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII City Inn, Khulna SUSHILAN - NGO 06 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Sushilan Office, Boyra, Khulna VTRT meeting 07 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD Khasiabad, Koyra BaghBondhu 07 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD Khasiabad, Koyra Forest Department 08 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Beat Office, Joymoni, Chandpai VTRT meeting 08 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD Joymoni, Chandpai Relief International 08 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Gol Kanon, Dacope BaghBondhu 09 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD Joymoni, Chandpai VTRT meeting 09 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD Kailashgang, Laudube BaghBondhu 09 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD Kailashgang, Laudube Forest Department 12 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Dasher Barani Beat Office, Sarankhola Range Upazila Parishad, Sarankhola 12 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII UZ Parishad Office, Sarankhola VTRT 12 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD VTRT office, Rasulpur, Sarankhola BaghBondhu 12 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FGD VTRT office, Rasulpur, Sarankhola CREL 13 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Sea Plane Ghat, Khulna IUCN-Bangladesh 14 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII IUCN Office, Banani BAGH 14 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Update/ Discussion BAGH Office Gulshan Relief International 14 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII DOHS, Baridhara Arannayk Foundation 15 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII Arannayk Foundation Office, DOHS, Banani GIZ 15 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KII GIZ Office, Gulshan WildTeam 17 Nov 2016 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Update/ Discussion WildTeam Office, Maghbazaar, Dhaka USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 91 Annex VI List of Documents Reviewed # Name of Documents Received from Date of receipt 1 The agreement for BAGH activity BAGH Project October 03, 2016 2 M&E plan of Bagh project BAGH Project October 03, 2016 3 Project quarterly and annual reports, work plans, and management reviews developed as part of routine monitoring BAGH Project October 03, 2016 4 Training reports BAGH Project October 03, 2016 5 USAID/Bangladesh Country Development Cooperation Strategy FY2011- FY2016 (Public version) ACME October 03, 2016 6 Bangladesh Tiger Action Plan BAGH Project October 03, 2016 7 Tiger Tuesday weekly updates BAGH Project October 03, 2016 8 Training modules BAGH Project October 03, 2016 9 Performance Indicator Tracking Table (PITT) BAGH Project October 03, 2016 10 M&E tools BAGH Project October 03, 2016 11 Research/Study report – if any BAGH Project October 03, 2016 12 GIS map – if any ACME October 03, 2016 13 Training & Beneficiary database BAGH Project October 03, 2016 14 Case/success story – if any BAGH Project October 03, 2016 15 Component-wise project expenditure BAGH Project October 03, 2016 16 One pager/brochure/pamphlet – if available BAGH Project October 03, 2016 17 Any other relevant report/documents BAGH Project October 03, 2016 18 Information on BAGH Activity in BD, including working areas BAGH Project October 19, 2016 19 VTRT information BAGH Project October 24, 2016 20 List of BAGH Bondhu BAGH Project October 24, 2016 21 Revised M&E plan BAGH Project October 24, 2016 22 Revised BD Tiger Action Plan BAGH Project October 24, 2016 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 92 Annotated Bibliography and Notes on Preliminary Meetings and Consultations for Background Information Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary SOW Background 30 Sept 16 USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (referred to hereafter as the “Bagh Activity” or the “project”) focuses on tiger conservation in the Sundarbans, home to the Bengal tiger. Under the leadership of the Bangladesh Forest Department, USAID’s Bagh Activity is implemented by WildTeam, an organization working for biodiversity conservation in Bangladesh since 2003. The Bagh Activity receives technical support from the Smithsonian Institution (SI) and the Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies (BCAS). The project period is four years, from 15 January 2014 to 14 January 2018. The project is one of the key activities under “Development Objective 4 (DO4): Responsiveness to Climate Change” of USAID Bangladesh’s Country Development Cooperative Strategy (CDCS). The Bagh Activity has completed approximately 2.5 years; therefore, USAID wishes to evaluate the performance of the project at the midpoint of its four￾year program. Consistent with USAID’s 2011 Evaluation Policy, the primary goal of this mid-term evaluation is to provide evidence so that USAID/Bangladesh can determine whether the Bagh Activity has been able to achieve its desired results or not. Other goals of the evaluation are to inform what course corrections, if any, are needed, identifying specific project interventions that can be scaled up further, and to determine best ways to ensure sustainability of the activities, institutions, and capacities promoted by the project. Finally, this evaluation will provide strategic options for future USAID/Bangladesh engagement in combating wildlife trafficking and tiger poaching. Evaluation SOW Discussion Notes Long-term objective w/Bangladesh/Bagh? Prior work w/Bangladesh/Bagh? Sundarbans Region Results Framework: D04 – climate change IR4.1: NRM age IR4.2: Resilience Forest conservation/expansion? Community engagement Public-private partnerships: Any so far? Sustainable livelihoods Ecotourism? India? Nepal? Products? Nice market value chain RF for Bagh Wildlife conservation practices Threats to wildlife Sustainable livelihoods Evaluation Questions. • On track? • Capacity Building/efficiency • Effectiveness: complementary activities • Sustainability • Future strategy Compatibility with 3 QQ? Mixed methods—Text analysis software/support? ACME M&E Txoxxxxxxxxm since July USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 93 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary M&E coordinator BxxxxxxxxxBgxxxxld xxxxxxxxxxxxia/Nigeria – 8 yrs. M&E Other Project Eco-fish Renewable Energy More thru coming Fiscal Year WildTeam Background Wikipedia https://en.wikipe dia.org/wiki/Wild Team WildTeam is an international conservation organization that began in 2003 as The Wildlife Trust of Bangladesh (a registered Bangladesh nonprofit organization) and the Sundarbans tiger project. The Sundarbans Tiger project started out as a Bangladesh Forest Department and University of Minnesota research initiative focusing on the ecology and conservation of tigers in the Bangladesh Sundarbans. Between 2003 and 2008, the Wildlife Trust of Bangladesh carried out research and education work in relation to the Bengal tiger, the Hoolock gibbon, the Asian elephant, and the Asian black bear. In 2008, the Sundarbans Tiger Project merged with the Wildlife Trust of Bangladesh. In 2012 the name was changed to “WildTeam” and the flagship project to “TigerTeam.” WildTeam also registered as a charity in England and Wales in 2012, to support the Bangladesh work and to create a base to help save tigers and other wildlife internationally. In October 2013, WildTeam became a registered non-government organization in Bangladesh under the NGO Affairs Bureau.[1] WildTeam is made up predominantly of Bangladesh staff, many of whom are from the local areas next to the Sundarbans, and some of whom have lost family members to tiger attacks. In 2011, WildTeam received the Bangabandhu Award for Wildlife Conservation, and in 2013 one of WildTeam’s staff won the international Future for Nature Award.[2] WildTeam’s work is guided by the four core values of celebrating nature, believing in people, being grounded in reality, and acting fearlessly. Another core belief of WildTeam is to use positive/inclusive approaches to celebrate the wildlife we have now and to move towards an even brighter future. Evaluation SOW Discussion Notes Long-term objective w/Bangladesh/Bagh? Prior work w/Bangladesh/Bagh? Sundarbans Region Results Framework: D04 – climate change IR4.1: NRM age IR4.2: Resilience Forest conservation/expansion? Community engagement Public-private partnerships: Any so far? Sustainable livelihoods Ecotourism? India? Nepal? Products? Nice market value chain RF for Bagh Wildlife conservation practices Threats to wildlife Sustainable livelihoods Evaluation Questions. • On track? • Capacity Building/efficiency • Effectiveness, complementary activities • Sustainability • Future strategy Compatibility with 3 QQ? USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 94 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary Mixed methods – text analysis support? ACME M&E Tomxxxxxxx Carson CxxxOP sincxxe July Mxxxx&E coxxxxordinator xxxxx M&E Other Project Eco-fish Renewable Energy More thru coming Fiscal Year Bagh Performance Indicator tracking table No original project baseline?  440 wild tigers in 2004 … no new data? Evaluation Plan 5 Sept 16  ProxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxIslxxxxxam  Baseline only now underway DQA: ACME – IBTCI – Aug 2016  Data Quality Assessment underway through ACME  Update? M&E Tools File  Joint community patrolling group tracking sheet  Alternative income tracking sheet Tiger Tuesday Newsletter World Wildlife Day 2015  Community dialogue-awareness Human Centered Design HCD  “As you start with small successes and then build to bigger ones, you’ll see your creative confidence grow and before long you’ll find yourself in the mindset that you are a wildly creative person.” David Kelley, p. 19. Brxxxxisxxxxxto xxxxn Key Informant Interview #1 Washington DC 14 Oct 16 Former Director of Asian conservation programs, The Mountain Institute; co￾manager, Makalu Barun Conservation Project/National Park Three key research areas regarding Sundarbans tigers: 1. Species: population, trade/trafficking, genetic studies, scat, training of enforcement, poaching, rehabilitation 2. Habitat Conservation: ecosystems, tiger range, protected areas, and protected area management, buffer zones, alternative livelihoods, Integrated Conservation Development Projects like Makalu Barun 3. Corridors: Most challenging; outside legal protection status; following water courses, rivers; flyovers; bottlenecks; wildlife conflicts; unimpeded movement/migration; livestock depredation Suggested References:  xxxxxxexxxxxxry: The Man-eating Tigers of the Sundarbans; DC resident  BBC documentary on Tigers of Sundarbans  Roar – Bollywood movie 2014, pure fiction aurxxxxxxxxxxeenxxxxrsey, former PC Nepal; Colorado; study on Sundarbans; feasibility study for Bagh project, perhaps? Link with Cxxoxxxxmxxxxxixcxxxxaxxrd, livestock studies, ICIMOD -x- x0-x4- xxx5x6xx0xxx8 xexxmaixxlxx xixs  Joxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; w/Resolve, DC NGO; Smithsonian/National Zoo; expert on Sundarbans Tigers  xxxxxxxxxxxxxn, Snow Leopard Scientist: TMI, Sonoma California/Napa/San Francisco, married to xxxxxxxxxrd, Facebook xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxtro) USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 95 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary  Ldddddccccccccc0s; documentarxxxxxxxxxxxa Chogyxxxxxxxxxxal xxxxxxxxxxxxxt t Man-Eaters of Kumaon  https://www.amazon.com/dp/0195622553/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss _1?pf_rd_p=1944687542&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe￾1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0195627628&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0 DER&pf_rd_r=X6Q0B182GMFXDJJYCGH7 NPR Story 20 May 2016 In India's Sundarbans, People And Tigers Try To Coexist In A Shrinking Space May 20, 2016, Ari Shapiro http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/05/20/478387211/in-indias￾sundarbans-people-and-tigers-try-to-coexist-in-a-shrinking-space cccccccccccccra Key Informant Interview #2 International Advisor￾Humane Society International (HSI) 2xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxLane Vxixxexxnna, VxxxA 14 Oct 2016 16 Oct 2016 Email Author of The Bones of the Tiger and Soul of the Rhino – Nepal’s community￾based wildlife conservation model yielding almost no poaching losses in recent years. Tiger conservation is one of today’s most pressing environmental issues. From a world population of approximately 100,000 tigers in 1900, these majestic carnivores have dwindled to less than 3,500 in the wild today, much of this due to poaching and habitat destruction. The author tells the fascinating story of one man’s quest to save the man-eating tigers of Nepal. Unique in explaining the real story of atypical tiger behavior—behavior that ultimately leads to conflict with humans, sometimes resulting in death—this book also includes stunning photos by renowned Japanese photographer Mashahiro Iijima. A fairly quick but good read by a native of Nepal who has been protecting wildlife there for decades. It's interesting to hear the perspective from someone who is actually from a third-world country instead of an American or European conservationist. xxxxxxxxxxa shows protecting tigers from extinction is very complex and difficult. The book is a mixture of personal stories, history, biology, and the current state of tigers. 2010 was the Year of the Tiger and this was an excellent contribution. I applaud xxxxxxxa for his dedication and work. He also led me to an obscure book, Tiger for Breakfast, which I hope to read soon. Response to questions posed on Knowledge about BAGH program and Nepal lessons for Bangladesh What do you know about Bengal Tiger programs in Bangladesh? Most of my knowledge of Bangladesh stems from my taking the lead helping the Bangladeshis to prepare their Bangladesh National Tiger Initiative report in 2010 for the Global Tiger Initiative, which culminated with the Tiger Summit in St. Petersburg in Russia. Thus, I do not know the details about USAID Bagh Project, particularly its mission and objective. However, I see you have contacted xxxxxxxxxxxxa at Smithsonian National Zoo. xxxxxxxxa has been working in Bangladesh recently. He is well versed with issues and also knows the key players including in the field. In addition, I suggest you contact (1)xxx xIxxshtxxxiaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx g USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 96 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary What lessons from Nepal? I could write a whole thesis on this. Nevertheless, the first point is the tiger habitat in Bangladesh is very much different from Nepal. Thus, you may want review some of the works done in the Sundarbans on the India (West Bengal side) and the best practices they have adopted and how well they worked. However, Nepal's tiger conservation program has been comparatively more successful than Bangladesh and India for the following reasons. 1. Largely because of the Smithsonian Nepal Tiger Ecology Project, which started in 1973, efforts to save the tiger go back to more than four decades and management practices are mostly science and empirical data based. 2. Community participation and community management in conservation specifically in the buffer area and benefit sharing from conservation (i.e., tourism $$$), particularly in Chitwan has been an integral part of Nepal's efforts to save tigers (and other wildlife) in Nepal. Thus, the local communities living around the tiger sanctuaries are the eyes and ears of the park. 3. Like in early days at Yellowstone National Park, a contingent of Nepal army has been deployed since the 1970s to combat poaching and habitat destruction. 4. Nepal's national park and wildlife conservation department as works close with the Nepal Police's intelligence bureau on wildlife crime, as they go hand￾in-hand with other crime. From my experience in most tiger range countries, the key challenges are three-pronged. 1. How can we make a live tiger worth more than a dead tiger to the local people that live in the tiger-habitat neighborhood? 2. How can we mitigate Tiger-Human Conflict (or any wildlife-human conflict)? 3. How can we stop poaching and cross-border trafficking of tiger bones, tiger skins, and other tiger body parts? I do not know if these elements are key components of the USAID Bagh Project and if there are some baselines for you to compare and evaluate. Who’s who at WWF here in DC that may know more? I am not sure who is dealing with tigers in WWF-USA. You may want to contact Suxxxxbash xxxxxx Latest publications of relevance? Since Mxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxrxxxa coordinated the tiger-wallahs e-network, he may have more updated answer than me. I am here in Virginia and will not be travelling until December (India and Nepal). Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any other information. Loxxxcxxxxxatio n: xxxxx30xxx0 1 Co2xxxxxx02- 6xxxx3 3 - 1237 14 Oct 16 Email I believe the USAID-funded tiger project that you are conducting the mid￾term evaluation would be “Bagh.” Let me know if it is otherwise. As you might be aware of by now, the Smithsonian is one of the implementing partners of this project. We are a sub-awardee to the WildTeam, the prime and a local NGO. Thanks for sharing the phone number and I will call you before you leave for Dhaka. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 97 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary 22 Oct 16 Dhaka I will also be in Dhaka next week to attend the next year’s Annual Work Plan Partner’s meeting of the project and also to help the research team in their field preparation and facilitation with the Forest Department. I hope I will have an opportunity to meet with you in Dhaka. I will be in Bangladesh for almost 3 weeks this time. I look forward to talking to you and seeing you in Dhaka. Where are you staying in Dhaka? I stay at Lakeshore Hotel at Gulshan. I can introduce you to Joxxxhxxxxxxxxxxxxn. John retired from the Smithsonian earlier this year. Not sure how responsive he would be. Discussion of Nepal’s Program and Progress in Protecting Tiger/Wildlife  xxxxxxxxxxxxa conducted his original research for MS/Wisconsin on Black Bears in Makalu Barun National Park and Conservation Area; unable to trap and collar bears, shifted his PhD research for a successful research mission with tigers in Nepal’s Terai.  Nepal lost all its tigers, and almost all rhinos, during Maoist rebellion, parks effectively closed, no government presence in Terai, so the Forest User Groups took charge and served effectively as local government, organized, skilled, trained.  With war over, Parks Dept. returned with military and police to curb trafficking, control poaching, but were largely ineffective.  Communities once again filled the vacuum and, since they were earning almost no revenues from park fees, divided 50/50 with government, the communities took over, locked the Park staff (and Police?) out of their offices and vowed not to let them return until they got organized and were able to bring in tourists and generate fees to be shared.  Military, taking the cue from Police and Park Staff lockout, mobilized conservation protection program to enforce controls, stop poachers, and arrest traffickers; one senior military officer took special interests and trained his staff, oversaw enforcement.  Along this time global tiger conservation movement started, capped by big Tiger Summit in Russia, sponsored by Putin, to which Smithsonian and other key wildlife conservation organizations got countries to send Prime Ministers, top officials; PM and Minister for Forest and Parks attended and Nepal, just coming out of Maoist rebellion and dirt poor, with no constitution, pledged $5 million a year for next 10 years from their own money to support conservation programs, and has honored that pledge until today, despite earthquake.  Between communities, Park staff, police and military, tourism has been flourishing, communities are earning good revenues, and tiger numbers have doubled. Still a very few tigers have been poached, but poaching of rhinos completely eliminated.  Nepal program a model for BAGH and xxaxxx hopes to build an exchange program bringing BAGH and other Bangladesh leaders to Nepal to learn from that experience, particularly around community ownership and management of wildlife resources, parks, and forest reserves. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 98 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary Bangladesh Tiger Action Plan 2009-2017 Bangladesh Forest Dept., Ministry of Environment & Forestry, 2009 23xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx  Tiger as umbrella, flagship species; top of food chain  Tiger Conservation Areas in Bangladesh and adjoining countries  Tiger population: 300-500 in Sundarbans; 4,000 worldwide  Wildlife Sanctuaries  Tiger-human conflict  Legislation, conventions: Forest Act 1927, amended 2000; BD Wildlife Order 1973; BD Envt. Conservation Act 1995; Integrated Forest Mgt. Plan for Sundarbans 1998; Natl Biodiversity Strategy & Action Plan 2004; BD Capacity Devt Action Plan for sustainability 2007; BD Climate Change Strategy & Action Plan 2008  International collaboration: CITES; Convention on Biological Diversity; Ramsar Convention; UNESCO World Heritage Site; Kyoto Protocol 2001  Monitoring changes, tigers, prey, habitat  Sundarbans, India & Bangladesh, largest mangrove forest in world  Bangladesh Sundarbans can support 300-500 tigers overall  Rampant poaching between India and Myanmar  Total BD poaching numbers unknown  Human-killing: 20-30 per yr.  Retaliatory killing: up to 3 per year  Livestock-killing: ca. 80/yr.  Tiger Response Teams & Village-based Response Teams  Key prey: Spotted Deer; often poached by forest users  Sundarbans half the size it was 200 yrs. ago but boundaries maintained now  Villagers harvest timber, fibres, NTFs, fish, honey  Forest Dept: Social Forestry 30 yr. history; USAID Nishorgo project FD-community forest mgt: 5 protected areas  Transboundary cooperation – India, Myanmar Tiger Action Plan 2009-2017 2009 Axxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxh This comprehensive and action-focused Plan, covering an eight-year period (2009-2017), recognizes both the ecological and sociological significance of wild tigers throughout their range and that the mangrove forests of the Bangladesh Sundarbans support one of the largest populations of tigers in the world, estimated at that time (2009) to be between 300 and 500 tigers. It also recognizes that tigers are threatened by poaching, prey depletion, and habitat loss/degradation, as well as retribution killing by local communities in retaliation for killing humans and livestock. The BTAP is a strategic policy￾level document that provides a vision, goals, and objectives to guide an integrated and focused tiger conservation program – a call to action – but does not provide a detailed implementation plan. The Plan also provides for prioritizing strategic actions as well as Monitoring & Evaluation. Tiger Action Plan 2009-2017 Revised October 2016 TBD NOTE: REVISED ACTION PLAN JUST COMPLETED BUT NOT YET AVAILABLE Who cares about Sundarbans? The Daily Star 25 Oct 16 Sxxxxxxxxx xn Over the years, since its first survey in British India, the Sundarbans has shrunk to about one-fourth of its first recorded size to encroachers. At the beginning of the British rule, the forest was spread over 43,252 square kilometres. When the British left India, it had shrunk to 37,813 square kilometres. Today, because of human encroachment, the one and only such place on the planet has shrunk to a mere 10,000 square kilometres – 6,000 square kilometres in Bangladesh and 4,000 square kilometres in India. With USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 99 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary the industries making inroads, further encroachment and loss of area to human pressure is a very real danger. An IUCN report has expressed the same apprehension. Data Quality Assessment of the USAID’s Bengal Conservation Activity (Bagh) ACME August 2016 3 Standard indicators reported to USAID/W  F 4.8.2-29: No. of person-hours of training completed – validation needed; lock up hard copies for potential audit  F4.8.2-28: No. of laws, policies, strategies, plans, or regulations – instrument to be revised  No DQA on any other of the 16 indicators Recommendations for improvement – “Bagh may be audited” Monitoring & Evaluation Plan – Revised: USAID’s Bagh Activity WildTeam 5 Sept 2016 See review notes by Joxxxxxxxan BaghTracks Orientation – Summary Report April 2016 Report of 1-day orientation for Bagh Activity staff for online database system: “BaghTracks” Participants recommend:  Update maps section  Update spelling/formatting  Final review of BaghTracks by all workstream leaders  Create link for BaghTracks on WildTeam website  Update participant list  Introduce mobile apps for database management; alert for unexpected data  Delete option at entry level, autofill option for beneficiary; check cost sharing form for livelihoods Project Information Sheet Source? Date? Excel Spreadsheet All project components, including:  activities  locations  targets  achievements  accessibility in the field Maps  Sundarbans boundaries, Range HQs, Reserves, Sanctuaries  Wildlife Sanctuaries in the Sundarbans  Political divisions, towns USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (Bagh) Fact Sheet 2 pages USAID’s Bagh Activity Working Area Excel Spreadsheet Divisions Districts Upazilas Unions USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (Bagh) Year 2 Quarter 1 Summary of Progress 30 Apr 15 Outreach/communications included BaghBondhu (Tiger Friends’) campaign and Sundarbans Say 14 Feb. Activities largely on target but BAGH requires additional staff. Above 30 July 15 Success story on SMART patrolling USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 100 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary Year 2, Q: 2 Gender activities emphasized Above Year 2, Q: 3 29 Oct 15 Tiger Tuesdays completed Above Year 3, Q: 1 3 May 16 Bagh Activity Performance Progress (Jan-Mar16)—disaggregated data by standard and custom indicators; Target vs. Results summary Above Year 3, Q: 2 3 August 16 COP replacement and salary problems Performance progress by disaggregated indicator data (Apr-Jun16) Success stories, Women, pirates, livelihoods, BaghTracks Tiger Tuesday Issue 655-67; incl. Tiger Caravan achievements USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (Bagh) Annual Report 2014-Year 1 30 Mar 15 This first annual report of the Bagh Project summarizes its progress (including accomplishments and challenges) for the period Jan. 15, 2014, to Jan. 14, 2015. WildTeam’s Coop Agreement with USAID included several Special Award Conditions that they were required to comply with to address capacity deficiencies in key areas such as Financial, Procurement, HR, Project, and USAID Grants Management, to which WildTeam responded to more than 90%. Project start-up during the first quarter was beset with obstacles, notably the resignation of the COP and the withdrawal of necessary approval to obtain foreign assistance funds, the latter of which resulted in a delay in bringing on board the Smithsonian Wildlife Specialist until the following year. Coordination was initiated with the FD and several law enforcement agencies to deal with illegal wildlife trafficking, including development of a training needs assessment, the use of which was shifted to Year 2. A number of other activities were also shifted to Year 2, including minimizing Human-Wildlife Conflict, enhanced communication/outreach, and improving livelihoods. Many of these were the result of delays in being able to hire key staff/personnel. USAID’s Bengal Tiger Conservation Activity (Bagh) Annual Report 2015-Year 2 18 Apr 16 This second annual report of the Bagh Project reported significant progress in implementing its technical work in the field, its partnership strategy and sustainability plan for WildTeam, finalizing its M&E Plan, improving its livelihood strategy, and strengthening its relationship with the Forest Department (FD). A finalized research agenda was developed with the help of the Smithsonian Institute (SI) and discussions begun on such topics as geographic information system (GIS) training, setting up a Wildlife Forensics Lab, disease monitoring, and mangrove ecology research. Most importantly, three field research teams were deployed to conduct a two-month survey to conduct research activities, including surveying and monitoring tiger, prey, and habitats in order to establish a baseline for subsequent surveys. SMART patrolling training was initiated and support was provided to Village and Forest Tiger Response Teams (VTRTs and FTRTs). The Alternative Livelihood component evolved the most during this period, with the project focusing on private partnerships and creating high-value products through AIG. The One and Only Sundarbans.xxxx xxxxxxxxx, Current View 27 Sept 2016 It is only two years since we experienced the devastating oil spills in the Shela River in the Sundarbans. A development project of such extent is likely to also attract other projects in the area, and thereby large movements of humans, increased illegal forest activities, and forest clearance for settlement, fuelwood collection, etc. It is quite obvious that modern-day technology can reduce emissions of harmful smoke, small particles, and heavy metals from this kind of plant. However, this facility cannot guarantee us that anything unexpected will not happen near the Sundarbans in the future. The effect of it will be irreversible on the Sundarbans unique ecosystem, and it is our responsibility to save this unique ecosystem for the sake of future generations. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 101 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary Who is killing the tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) and why? SAMxxxxxx xxIA xxxxSAIF H. xxxxxxxxM Abstract We investigated the range of people involved in killing tigers (Panthera tigris tigris) in the Bangladesh Sundarbans, their motives and methods, and their links to the commercial trade. Using snowball sampling we conducted 141 qualitative interviews with local people. We identified five categories (village residents, poachers, shikaris, trappers, and pirates), each with different motives, methods, and networks. Village residents kill tigers predominantly for safety, whereas others kill in the forest professionally or opportunistically. Poachers kill tigers for money, but for others the motives are more complex. The motives of local hunters are multifaceted, encompassing excitement, profit, and esteem and status arising from providing tiger parts for local medicine. Pirates kill tigers for profit and safety but also as a protection service to the community. The emerging international trade in tiger bones, introduced to the area by non-local Bangladeshi traders, provides opportunities to sell tiger parts in the commercial trade and is a motive for tiger killing across all groups. National Dialogue for the Protection of Tigers in the Sundarbans BAGH Activity, 1-9 March 2016 USAID’s Bagh Activity facilitated the “National Dialogue for the Protection of Tigers in the Sundarbans.” The National Dialogue included a workshop in Dhaka on 1 March and a high-level dialogue in the Sundarbans on 8 and 9 March 2016. The goal was to convene high-level decision makers from relevant ministries, departments, and stakeholder groups to strengthen the efforts for protecting tigers and the Sundarbans. Initially, Bagh Activity expected the National Dialogue to produce an action plan amongst the relevant stakeholders to improve the protection of the Bengal tiger. This protection would range from the tiger’s habitat in the mangrove forests to the law courts where poachers would be held to account. Discussions in the National Dialogue focused primarily on the following issues:  Expedited trials of for those accused of wildlife crimes through mobiles courts and specialized tribunals  Hotspot those smuggling and poaching tigers and tiger parts  Combat wildlife crimes in all forms without regard to the species  More effective law enforcement with a focus on tiger protection  Increased institutional capacity for sustainable conservation efforts;  Community engagement for protecting tigers  Robust inter-agency coordination to intensify conservation efforts Tiger Status Report 2015 BD Forest Dept; Dexxxy, , Quxxxxxxx xxxxxreshi First scientific tiger monitoring in Bangladesh Sundarbans since 2004, which provided unreliable estimate of 440 tigers; current study used more robust camera trapping methods during the 2014-2015 season, with 7,500 staff man days with density of tigers per 100 sq. km as well as measures of prey and habitat condition. Using double-sampling approach and using best modern technical tools, including remote camera traps, GPS, and laser range finder. 8,787 trap nights yielded 1,495 photos yielding estimated population of 83- 130 tigers with midpoint of 106 tigers. This estimate is lower than previously believed but forms one of the top five largest tiger populations in the world, meriting enhanced global conservation investments to ensure long-term survival of this unique mangrove adapted tiger ecotype. Sundarbans area appears to be below carrying capacity; poaching is a major concern. Recommendations: strengthen coordinated law enforcement, FD logistics and staff support; technology aided patrols; and transboundary ecological monitoring. Report to be considered a baseline for future monitoring and conservation efforts. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 102 Document/ Key Informant Date/ Location Notes/Summary Ecotourism in the Sundarbans Relief International , undated The Sundarbans Mangrove Forest, tucked among rivers that spill into the Bay of Bengal, is one of the world’s largest mangrove forests. Honored as a UNESCO World Heritage Site for its ecological importance and cultural value to South Asia, the Sundarbans represent the vivid tapestry of Bangladeshi culture. Traditional Resource Users (TRU) such as fisherman, honey collectors, and woodsmen, have worked the land for years and carry with them abundant generational knowledge of the forest. This knowledge, however, has remained inaccessible to the thousands of ecological tourists and cultural artists who visit the forest each year. This project, supported by the European Union, works to build respect for the significance of the Sundarbans through development of cultural tourism and entrepreneurship. Key objectives include: 1. Ecotourism development training for government officials, local NGO representatives, and private tour guides from the local community 2. Skills training for 200 community members who would educate tourists about local culture and the importance of mangrove conservation 3. Building respect for cultural groups and the critical Sundarbans environment A Holistic Awareness for Tiger Conservation for Sustainable Future BAGH PPT 6 Sept. 2016 USAID’s Bagh Activity is planning to carry out a national-level awareness￾raising campaign promoting the importance of conserving the tiger and the rich biodiversity of the Sundarbans and bring positive changes in people’s attitude and behaviors. Bagh likes to market the noble cause across and explore the potential partnership opportunities. The objective of the campaign is to build consensus for protecting the majestic tigers and their habitat, the Sundarbans, among the national-level audiences and encourage them to support tiger conservation issues in Bangladesh. USAID Interview with former AOR Suxxxmaixx xxya xxxFirxxxxo xxxze Preceded nxxxxxxxxxxxxxxee as AOR during early rocky start-up days with many admin. mgt problems, rotating COPs, staffing issues; saw program finally get started with some early activities, concerned particularly about community and livelihood components and anticipates sustainability problems. She has reviewed the Draft Methodology/Work plan and thinks it’s OK. Worries that staff might be too defensive around things not accomplished. Suggests we contact CNRS and ask Axxxxxxta for list of other potential NGOs and local and national organizations that might be potential partners, esp. for community and livelihood objectives. She will send a short list of other NGOs, etc. today and then fill and return our USAID QQr by next Tuesday. She’s on a study leave from USAID for degree in conservation management. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 103 ANNEX VII QUANTITATIVE DATA SUMMARY – SURVEY RESPONSES Familiarity with Bagh Project: Impact of Bagh Project on Community: 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 HOW FAMILIAR ARE YOU WITH THE BAGH PROJECT 2 105 49 98 58 156 Not at all Familar Reasonably Familar Very Familar Man Woman Total Question Not at all Familiar Reasonably Familiar Very Familiar Man Woman Total How familiar are you with the Bagh Project? 2 105 49 98 58 156 Question Not at all Beneficial Reasonably Beneficial Very Beneficial Man Woman Total Of the several components of the Bagh Project that directly involve your community – minimizing human-tiger conflict, enhanced communication/outreach/gender engagement, and improved livelihoods for conservation – which one(s) do you feel the Bagh Project has contributed or helped most to your community and to what extent? 0 110 46 98 58 156 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 104 Table 5. Bagh Components Ranked Most Important to Communities/Respondents Name of the Components Total Responses Men’s Responses Women’s Responses Reducing human-tiger conflict 56 30 26 Increasing community engagement 20 15 05 Increasing gender engagement, women’s involvement 15 05 10 Improved livelihoods 65 35 30 Total 156 85 71 0 110 46 98 58 156 Not at all Benificial Reasonably Benificial Very Benificial Man Woman Total 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Reducing human-tiger conflict Increasing community engagement Increasing gender engagement, women’s involvement Improved livelihoods Total 56 20 15 65 156 30 15 5 35 85 26 5 10 30 71 Total Response Men Response Women Response USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 105 The Tiger’s Sundarbans Habitat: Survival of the Tiger: 90 0 0 66 98 58 156 THE TIGER'S SUNDARBANS HABITAT Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial No Comments Man Woman Total Question Not at all Beneficial Reasonably Beneficial Very Beneficial No Comments Man Woman Total The Tiger’s Sundarbans habitat? 90 0 0 66 98 58 156 Question Not at all Beneficial Reasonably Beneficial Very Beneficial No Comment s Man Woman Total Survival of the Tiger? 115 0 0 41 98 58 156 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 106 Quality of Life for Your Community/Family: 115 0 0 41 98 58 156 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 S U R V I V A L O F T H E T I G E R Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial No Comments Man Woman Total Question Not at all Beneficial Reasonably Beneficial Very Beneficial No Comments Man Woman Total Quality of life for your community/ family? 80 16 0 60 98 58 156 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 107 Local Culture, Customs, and Traditional Relationships with Sundarbans and Its Tigers: 80 16 0 60 98 58 156 Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial No Comments Man Woman Total Question Not at all Beneficial Reasonably Beneficial Very Beneficial No Comments Man Woman Total Local culture, customs, and traditional relationships with Sundarbans and its tigers? 75 20 5 56 98 58 156 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 108 Personal/Community Livelihood: 75 20 5 56 98 58 156 LOCAL CULTURE, CUSTOMS, TRADITIONAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH SUNDARBANS AND ITS TIGERS? Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial No Comments 50 35 5 66 98 58 156 Not at all beneficial Reasonably beneficial Very beneficial No Comments Man Woman Total Question Not at all Beneficial Reasonably Beneficial Very Beneficial No Comments Man Woman Total Personal/Community livelihood 50 35 5 66 98 58 156 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 109 Summary of Key Informants Number of Meetings by Category: KII 29 Bagh Partner 2 VTRT 5 BaghBondhu 4 NGO/INGO/Private Enterprise/ Journalist 11 Women’s Group 2 Bagh Collaborators 3 Men in Street 35 University 2 Int’l Donor Organizations 3 Forest Department 4 Total 99 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 110 ANNEX VIII BAGH DATA SHEETS/THUMBNAILS USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 111 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 112 ANNEX IX BAGH DATA TABLE ON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS SPS reference (f)/custom # Title Unit Baseline Achievement (Jan’15- Sep’16) Target (Jan’15- Sep’16) LoP Target Out year target Custom 1 Relative abundance of tigers in target habitat Tiger track set/km (Khal survey) 0.36* 0 0 0.36 0.36 Number of tiger/100 square km (Camera trap) 2.17** 0 0 2.17 2.17 Custom 2 Relative abundance of tiger prey species in target habitat Proportion of surveyed segments occupied by tiger prey (Khal survey) 80%* 0 0 80% 80% Index of tiger prey pictures obtained by Camera-traps at a sampling grid. NA 0 0 - - Standards & F4.8.2-28 Number of laws, policies, strategies, plans, or regulations addressing climate change (mitigation or adaptation) and/or biodiversity conservation officially proposed, adopted, or implemented as a result of USG assistance Number 0 2 4 6 4 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 113 SPS reference (f)/custom # Title Unit Baseline Achievement (Jan’15- Sep’16) Target (Jan’15- Sep’16) LoP Target Out year target Custom 3 Percentage of individuals with adequate knowledge in community groups on wildlife conservation Percentage 31.6% 51.7% 36.60 % 61.6% 9.9% Custom 4 Percentage of individuals with positive attitude in community groups on wildlife conservation Percentage 28.3% 50.2% 33.30 % 58.3% 8.1% Custom 5 Number of individual activities conducted by community groups (VTRTs, Baghbondhu) for wildlife conservation Number 1,300 2,294 2400 4,200 1906 Standards & F4.8.1- 29 Number of person hours of training in natural resources management and/or biodiversity conservation supported by USG assistance Number 0 33,093 41560 55,560 22467 Custom 6 Number of priority research studies conducted for better understanding of Sundarbans ecosystem Number 0 6 5 10 5 Custom 7 Number of hectares of biological significance and/or natural resources under improved natural resource management Hectres 0 69,137 71500 71,500 2363 Custom 8 Number of joint community patrolling groups functioning Number 0 0 2 6 6 Custom 9 Number of SMART patrols conducted inside forest Number 0 18 16 30 12 SPS reference (f)/custom # Title Unit Baseline Achievement (Jan’15- Sep’16) Target (Jan’15- Sep’16) LoP Target Out year target Custom 10 Number of forest resource collectors applying safety measures Number 0 614 550 1,000 386 Custom 11 Percentage of human-wildlife conflict incidences effectively managed Percentage 60% 84.31 % 70% 80% Trend on track Standar ds & F4.8.1-6 Number of people with increased economic benefits derived from sustainable natural resource management and conservation as a result of USG assistance Number 0 385 1000 2,400 2015 Custom 12 Number of people in a target group (e.g. forest resource collectors) who have adopted eco-friendly AIG schemes Number 0 81 400 600 519 Custom 13 Amount of investment in eco￾friendly AIG schemes through PPPs under Bagh USD 0 9,315 50,000 70,000 60,685 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 114 ANNEX X TIGER STORIES AND TALES FROM THE SUNDARBANS SURVIVING A TIGER ATTACK WITH QUICK THINKING Before the Bagh Activity and Bangladesh’s successful program of voluntary Village Tiger Response Teams, both people and tigers were being killed – by each other – with disturbing frequency. The situation before tiger conservation became a national movement and VTRTs became active was one of ongoing conflict – and death. The chief scientist on the Evaluation Team recalls his own experience when just a young boy visiting his father’s medical clinic where a man, seriously mauled and near death from a tiger attack, was being treated. Curious, the young boy asked the survivor, now healing well but with massive wounds on his legs and arms, “How did you manage to survive? Why didn’t the tiger eat you?” The man’s story was spellbinding. “I was surprised and ferociously attacked by a tiger while in the Sundarbans and was being dragged into the forest by the tiger who had every intention of making me his dinner. I was already near death and in a coma, being dragged by my leg along the rough terrain. “Somehow I regained just enough consciousness to realize my desperate situation. But what could I do? The tiger was king and I was meat. “Out of my foggy state, my eyes began to clear and I looked up. There not far above my face were the tiger’s most private parts. Summoning up the last of my body’s reserves, I reach up and grabbed them with all the force I could muster. “With a terrible howl, the tiger dropped me and fled into the jungle. Somehow, and I don’t even know how, I was rescued by friends and taken to this clinic for treatment. “I’m going to be scarred for life, but I’m alive. And the tiger is nursing his pain.” This is how things were before the WildTeam and programs like the Bagh Activity began to turn the tables where today, tiger attacks are becoming quite rare, encroaching tigers are being driven back to the forest, and people are both living safely and engaged in active conservation of Sundarbans and their majestic tigers. SAVING A TIGER – AND COMMUNITY – IN SATKHIRA RANGE Satkhira Range has the highest numbers of recorded human-tiger conflict incidents in the Sundarbans. Four tigers have been driven back to the forest since 2011. Here is just one of the stories from Satkhira, narrated by one of the Village Tiger Response Team members of the East Kalinagar VTRT. The VTRT member was returning home about 7:30 pm one evening on a motorbike along with two others, one of which was a Forest Guard on the same bike on 19 February 2011. As they reached near Harintana they saw a tiger on the road about 10m away that had just crossed the river. By the time the motorbike stopped, the tiger was only 3m away, crouched on the road, and it had started growling. They put the headlights on the tiger’s face and blew their horn. The tiger made some aggressive behavior as if it was going to pounce on them. Every time the tiger did this they increased the accelerator of the motorbike, blew the horn and shouted. They then saw three men walking at least 15m in front of them not knowing that the tiger was behind them. One of the men on the bike, terrified, jumped off the bike and ran away, leaving the VTRT member and Forest Guard on the bike. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 115 Nearby there was a Hindu puja going on and the devotees thought that the men on the bike were disturbing their puja ritual. In the meantime, the Forest Department staff and other VTRT members were informed over their mobile phones and the local people also came to know about the tiger. The Forest Department’s Emergency Tiger Response Team responded and within an hour the FD staff had reached the spot with a tranquillizer gun. The tiger was quickly tranquillized and put on a boat that was arranged locally and taken to the other side of the river, given an antidote shot, and released into the Sundarbans. This was definitely a close call for two brave men and the local community. A tiger was saved and no one was hurt – a true success story and testimony to Bangladesh’s voluntary program of Village Tiger Response Teams. VTRTS SHARE THEIR TIGER STORIES During the Team’s many meetings with local VTRTs, people shared numerous stories with us about their encounters with tigers and efforts to protect both local people and their prized tigers. Here are a few excerpts from their stories, their activities, and their visions for the future: Our VTRT team has been protecting and reducing conflict between humans and wildlife, especially humans and tigers, through the BAGH project. We are working this project as volunteers. We feel proud because we are saving the tiger as well as the community people. But when the BAGH project ends, we will do the same thing as part time volunteers because we believe Sundarbans is our mother and we are responsible to protect Sundarbans and its wildlife. Sundarbans is “Our mother" and Sundarbans is also our pride. When a tiger came into our village we were getting ready to drive the tiger back into the forest. At first we announced that a tiger came into the village and alerted the villagers, then we and the villagers enclosed the tigers on 3 sides and opened one way out. Then we created noises by using bamboo sticks and pots and pans. When we did this, the tiger slowly went back to the forest from the open way which we had made. Together we drew a picture of our successes, the things we are proud of and want our children and grandchildren to know about. Our picture, which we called “Our Community’s Pride: Our Success Map,” included: • Love the Sundarbans: “Our mother” • Our Sundarbans protects us from natural disasters, typhoons, storms • We are also proud of our Mosque, school, homes, agriculture, and our village water filter/pump • We will reduce our dependence on Sundarbans, choose alternate livelihoods • Alternative livelihoods: Fish farming Eco-tourism Teashop Patrons showing their enthusiasm for Tigers and Sundarbans. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 116 • If no Sundarbans, no trees, no oxygen, no life • If we have problems, we go to WildTeam for advice We are also arranging a social meeting where we discuss about tiger safety and increase awareness of the community people. Besides social meetings we are also arranging a team meeting for working purposes. Sundarbans social/team meetings help us to increase awareness. We arrange cultural programs, celebrating Sundarbans Day and Tiger Day. LOCAL WOMEN INITIATE THEIR OWN CULTURAL PROGRAM, “POT SONG” DRAMA AND ECO-TOURISM PROGRAM On 9 November, the Evaluation Team had an unexpected experience in the Dacope village in Loudube, where they had come to interview the local VTRT. After that meeting the Team was invited to an elegant lunch served by a local women’s group. To their surprise, having visited several eco-tourism sites started by local entrepreneurs and Relief International, they found themselves introduced to an extraordinary, talented, creative group of about 40 women who, after lunch, not only put on very professional “pot￾song” program of ballads, music, drumming, dancing, and rolling display showing their love of the Sundarbans and their commitment to its future, but also outlined an ecotourism strategy and action plan. They clearly demonstrated that they are fully proficient to provide training, and even training of trainers, to other communities across the Sundarbans. This indigenous, locally owned initiative provides a “ready-made” foundation for the broad community-based ecotourism system that can help ensure the survival of the Sundarbans ecosystem and its tigers. In our follow-up discussions with the village women they outlined their vision for future: Community-based Ecotourism – organized by themselves. And then they outlined their own Action Plan for future:  Start our own ecotourism program  Provide accommodations in our homes for tourists  Make sure we all have clean toilets – as we had found in their local High School  Good food – as served to us as guests  Boat rides, guided tours into Sundarbans Area  Educate the children to work as tourist guides  Organize and perform women’s cultural programs, like ours  Display and market women’s indigenous handicrafts as displayed and sold to the visiting Team In terms of what they were ready to do right now:  Perform our Anandamoye Shangishkrity Shangathon cultural show with song, dance, and roller banner telling the story of our community, our relationship with Sundarbans, and how we will work together to protect and preserve our Sundarbans and beloved Tiger for future generations USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 117 ANNEX XI SIGNED DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST FORMS USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 118 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 119 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 120 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 121 USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 122 ANNEX XII SUMMARY INFORMATION ABOUT EVALUATION TEAM MEMBERS Dr. Malcolm Odell, Team Leader, has over 30 years of international experience and 12 years of experience leading evaluations teams, primarily for natural resource management (NRM) and wildlife conservation projects. He has worked as a Monitoring, Evaluation, and Community Development Consultant for a variety of international organizations since 1998, where he has modeled participatory planning, monitoring, external evaluation, reporting, and training-of-trainers for USAID and other donors in Asia and Africa. Dr. Odell has published more than 30 analytical reports and academic texts, including multiple highly reviewed evaluations for USAID funded projects. The most widely noted evaluation reports include the following for USAID: Pakistan Legacy Study – a 50-year ex-post assessment of education partnerships, Pakistan COE assessment for planning/design of new program for Centers of Advance Study, Afghanistan Land Reform evaluation, and a Higher Education Development series of about 60 ex-post partnership evaluations. Dr. Odell is familiar with USAID M&E, reporting, and gender regulations and systems, and has worked frequently with USAID for the past two decades. Since 2013, he has regularly taught Project Design and Management (PDM) courses in 10 countries for USAID national, host country, and regional staff that include performance monitoring, project management, budgeting, financial analysis and reporting, as well as special sessions on monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and USAID gender policies with case studies. He has managed many program areas simultaneously, including combinations of biodiversity, NRM, environmental conservation, community mobilization for conservation, eco-tourism, and agriculture and livelihoods. Dr. Odell has 13 years of residential experience working in Nepal, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, and is conversant in several Asian languages. He has also previously held assignment with CARE in Bangladesh. He holds a PhD in Development Sociology and a Master of Science degree in Natural Resource & Agricultural Management from Cornell University. Mr. Joseph Dowhan, Senior Wildlife Conservation/NRM Specialist, has over 40 years of experience spanning endangered species conservation (including population viability analysis), protected areas conservation and management, biosphere reserves, international trade in endangered species, coastal ecology (including sea-level rise), international wetlands conservation, Community￾Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM), and law enforcement. He has served as an Ecological Consultant since 2005 and has worked on many international projects during this time. He is experienced with program and project evaluation and analysis in South and Southeast Asia. He most recently served on an ICCF project focused on NRM issues such as rangeland improvement, invasive species, human-elephant conflicts/poaching, and water availability in the Naibunga Conservancy, Kenya. He served as Technical Advisor to Bangladesh Forestry Department, promoting climate change resiliency of forest resources through improved management of protected areas and sustainable ecotourism development. Additionally, he served as Protected Areas/CITES Specialist and Deputy Team Leader for a mid-term evaluation of the USAID-funded ARREST Program in Southeast Asia. He also served as Project Advisor for the Point Calimere Wildlife Sanctuary Ecological Study in India and led an advanced team of monitoring experts to plan a training program for conducting basic biological assessments and monitoring in five selected Wildlife Management Areas in Tanzania. He has served as a technical advisor to CITES authorities in several ASEAN countries. Mr. Dowhan has worked on many USAID-funded projects throughout his illustrious career and has liaised with USAID officers on several NRM projects and evaluations. He holds an MS in Ecology from the University of Connecticut. Dr. Sheikh Mohammad Abdur Rashid, National Consultant, has worked with wildlife research and the implementation of various projects related to wildlife species and natural resources management for almost three decades. He planned portions of USAID’s NISHORGO project and spearheaded the implementation of the wetland biodiversity management program supported by GEF/UNDP/DOE for the four Ecologically Critical Areas in Bangladesh. He also contributed to the preparation of the wildlife management plan for the Sundarbans rainforest, prepared the Tanguar Haor Management Plan, and contributed to the elephant management plan for the Cox's Bazaar South Forest Division. Dr. Rashid has served as Principal Investigator and Project Coordinator for the USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report USAID/Bangladesh ACME Bagh Evaluation 123 Centre for Advanced Research in Natural Resources & Management since 2009 and has supervised the implementation of many projects, including conducting surveys on at-risk species and regions, and enhancing biodiversity. Dr. Rashid has extensive experience with evaluations of natural resource management projects as well as tiger conservation and the Sundarbans ecosystem. He has strong knowledge of research methodologies on tigers and conducted scouting for the BBC documentary Land of the Tigers. Dr. Rashid served as Principal Investigator for the Population Assessment, Protection & Conservation of saltwater crocodiles in the Sundarbans Reserve Forest in Bangladesh and evaluated project progress regularly. There, he worked in the Sundarbans ecosystem to ascertain the status of the crocodile population in the wild, including the identification of ecologically important habitats and nesting sites. He also serviced the protection of natural test sites, regional cooperation through establishing a forum, preparing a management and action plan for at-risk species population recovery, and the improvement of captive breeding husbandry and facilities. As Natural Resource Management Specialist for the Asian Development Bank he critically reviewed existing country level studies relevant to natural resources and assessed and documented possible vulnerability and risks in natural resource sectors. Dr. Rashid graduated with a PhD in Ecology/Zoology from Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. He also holds a Master of Science in Ecology from University of Kent at Canterbury and a Master of Science in Wildlife Biology/Zoology from University of Dhaka. USAID/Bangladesh ACME BAGH Evaluation Final Report International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI) 1 International Business and Technical Consultants, Inc. 8618 Westwood Center Drive Suite 400 Vienna VA 22182 (703)749-0100 U.S. Agency for International Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20523