FINAL REPORT ANNEXES FINAL EVALUATION OF VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) PROJECT, BURKINA FASO July 12, 2018 Contracted under ACDI/VOCA WORK ORDER NO: J0679-06 Prepared by: Dr. Lauren Persha, NORC at the University of Chicago Dr. Shanto Sadhu, NORC at the University of Chicago Dr. Audra Grant, NORC at the University of Chicago Dr. Eric Weiss, Consultant Phocas Ntahorugiye, Consultant Qualitative and quantitative research support provided by: Sarah Lord, NORC at the University of Chicago Letitia Onyango, NORC at the University of Chicago Samantha Downey, NORC at the University of Chicago Ilse Paniagua, NORC at the University of Chicago Alexander Rigaux, NORC at the University of Chicago Stacy Pancratz, NORC at the University of Chicago Submitted by: NORC at the University of Chicago July 12, 2018 This report was produced for review by ACDI/VOCA and the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by NORC at the University of Chicago. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 2 Table of Contents I. SUPPORTING PBS METHODOLOGY, RESULTS TABLES, AND SUPPLEMENTAL STATISTICAL RESULTS..................................................................................................................4 II. INDICATOR DEFINITIONS................................................................................................29 III. BENEFICIARY STATUS DETERMINATION ...................................................................39 IV. INDICATOR FLOW CHARTS ...........................................................................................42 V. SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATION...........................................................................................46 VI. REGRESSION RESULTS TABLES........................................................................................49 VII. QUALITATIVE SURVEY INSTRUMENTS.........................................................................78 VIII. ANONYMIZED KII AND GD LIST ...................................................................................97 IX. QUANTITATIVE INSTRUMENT........................................................................................99 X. EVALUATION SOW.......................................................................................................... 175 XI. EVALUATION TEAM AND TIMELINE.......................................................................... 199 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 3 List of Tables Table 1: Baseline to Endline Indicator Comparison ..................................................................................................4 Table 2: Endline Detailed Indicators .............................................................................................................................9 Table 3: Endline Indicators Disaggregated by Gender............................................................................................14 Table 4: Baseline to Endline Indicator Comparison by Gender...........................................................................16 Table 5: Endline Indicators Disaggregated by Beneficiary Status..........................................................................20 Table 6: Sub-indicator Breakdown ..............................................................................................................................25 Table 7: Indicator Definitions.......................................................................................................................................29 Table 8: Household Level Variables Beneficiary Status Determination..............................................................39 Table 9: Household Level Variables Beneficiary Status Determination..............................................................40 Table 10.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in increasing and diversifying agricultural production......49 Table 11.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in increasing Household Incomes.........................................51 Table 12.1: Role of ViM in increasing Household Incomes: Farmers..................................................................53 Table 13.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in increasing Household Incomes.........................................55 Table 14.1: Variable Descriptions: Effect of Training on the Adoption of GAP and Livestock Practices..57 Table 15.1: Variable Descriptions: Adoption of Improved Agricultural Practices on Yield ..........................59 Table 16.1: Variable Descriptions: Adoption of Livestock Practices on Livestock Revenue ........................61 Table 17.1 Variable Descriptions: Effect of ViM Interventions on Malnutrition: WDDS...............................63 Table 18.1: Variable Descriptions: Effect of ViM Interventions on Malnutrition: Stunting and Underweight ..............................................................................................................................................................................................65 Table 19.1: Variable Descriptions Role of ViM Interventions on Improving Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD)............................................................................................................67 Table 20.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM Interventions on Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Postnatal Check ...............................................................................................................................................................70 Table 21.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM Interventions on Improving Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Vaccination of Children...............................................................................................................................72 Table 22.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in Influencing Hygiene Practices: Knowledge of Critical moments of Handwash and Presence of handwashing agents. .............................................................................74 Table 23.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in improving Women empowerment..................................76 Table 24: Anonymized List of KIIs...............................................................................................................................97 Table 25: Anonymized List of GDs.............................................................................................................................98 Table 26: Project Performance Measures............................................................................................................... 185 Table 27: Evaluation Team.......................................................................................................................................... 199 Table 28: Evaluation Timeline.................................................................................................................................... 202 List of Figures Figure 1: Strategic Objective 1 .....................................................................................................................................42 Figure 2: Strategic Objective 2 .....................................................................................................................................43 Figure 3: Strategic Objective 3 .....................................................................................................................................44 Figure 4: Crosscutting.....................................................................................................................................................45 Figure 5: Targeted beneficiary groups and geographic coverage of the project ........................................... 178 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 4 I. SUPPORTING PBS METHODOLOGY, RESULTS TABLES, AND SUPPLEMENTAL STATISTICAL RESULTS Table 1: Baseline to Endline Indicator Comparison Average or % Difference (EL-BL) Significance Level Number of observations Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Strategic Objective 1: Increased and diversified agricultural production IM1 Average number of different types of agricultural products produced per farmer 4.36 4.32 -0.03 ns 1,916 3,923 IM2 Average yield of [crop] per farmer (kg/ha) Sorghum 6831 515 -168 *** 978 1,884 Cowpeas 2172 462 245 *** 905 2,961 IR. 1.1: Improved Agricultural Practices Adopted OC1 Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture (crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season 75.9% 74.5% -1.4% ns 1,891 3,940 OC2 Percentage of farmers using intercropping Sorghum 23.7% 22.2% -1.5% ns 1,308 2,137 Cowpeas 36.2% 21.5% -14.7% *** 1,317 2,998 1 The ViM project did not accept this baseline value, and instead used 718.7 kg/ha as the baseline value for this indicator, obtained from Agristat data, from 2006 to 2010; per ViM’s approved 2017 IPTT. 2 The ViM project did not accept this baseline value, and instead used 851 kg/ha as the baseline value for this indicator, obtained from Agristat data, from 2006 to 2010; per ViM’s approved 2017 IPTT. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 5 Average or % Difference (EL-BL) Significance Level Number of observations Baseline Endline Baseline Endline OC3 Percentage of farmers using thinning for sorghum 34.0% 33.3% -0.7% ns 1,308 2,137 OC4 Percentage of farmers who used an improved storage technique in the most recent season for cowpeas 48.1% 74.3% 26.2% *** 924 2,221 IR 1.2: Smallholder access to agricultural inputs improved OC6 Percentage of farmers using improved agricultural inputs 73.8%3 70.7% -3.1% ** 1,839 3,822 IR 1.3: Improved livestock practices adopted OC7 Percentage of farmers using at least veterinary care, complementary feeding and habitat construction at the same time 10.2% 3.5% -6.6% *** 1,389 2,786 OC8 Percentage of farmers accessing government or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations 35.9% 35.8% -0.2% ns 1,389 2,786 Strategic Objective 2: Increased household incomes IM3 Average Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) 4.019 3.942 -0.077 ns 1,002 2,153 IM4_0 Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger 43.2% 3.6% -39.6% *** 1,057 2,235 IM4_1 Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger in July 43.2% 11.2% -32.0% *** 1,057 2,235 OC9_0 Average value of a set of assets (not including livestock) per household (CFA) 170,182 228,980 65,281 *** 1,076 2,206 IR 1.3: Improved livestock practices adopted OC10_0 Value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance 29,940 58,367 29,567 *** 833 2,910 3 The ViM project did not accept this baseline value, and instead used 10.0% as the baseline value, which was from the Ministry of Agriculture; per ViM’s approved 2017 IPTT. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 6 Average or % Difference (EL-BL) Significance Level Number of observations Baseline Endline Baseline Endline OC10_1 Percentage change in value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance N/A 48.7% N/A N/A N/A N/A OC11 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting more than THREE sources of revenue 1.1% 1.7% 0.6% * 1,916 3,990 OC12_0 Percentage of farmers who practiced the value chain activities promoted by the project in the most recent season (crops only) 37.4% 70.3% 32.8% *** 1,840 3,803 IR 2.2: Access to business development services improved OC13_0 Percentage of farmers who used financial services in the most recent season 28.6% 35.5% 6.9% *** 1,906 3,990 OC14 Percentage of farmers reporting access to up-to-date pricing information 50.2% 89.0% 38.7% *** 1,220 2,882 Strategic Objective 3: Reduced chronic malnutrition among children under five years of age and pregnant and lactating mothers IM5 Prevalence of stunted children under five years of age 31.2% 25.6% -5.6% *** 1,115 3,021 IM6 Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age 24.7% 19.7% -5.0% *** 1,130 3,051 OC15 Women’s Dietary Diversity: Mean number of food groups consumed by women of reproductive age 2.86 3.29 0.43 *** 1,458 3,400 IR 3.1: Improved MCHN practices OC16 Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding of children under six months of age 36.8% 60.3% 23.5% *** 155 325 OC17 Percentage of children born in the last 24 months who were put to the breast within one hour of birth 39.5% 68.0% 28.4% *** 612 1,243 OC18 Prevalence of children 6-23 months receiving a minimum acceptable diet (MAD) 4.9% 8.6% 3.7% ** 469 927 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 7 Average or % Difference (EL-BL) Significance Level Number of observations Baseline Endline Baseline Endline IR 3.2: Improved quality of health services OC19 Percentage of mothers with children age 0-23 months who had four or more antenatal visits when they were pregnant with their youngest child 42.3% 62.5% 20.2% *** 572 1,101 OC21 Percentage of children 6-23 months who received vitamin A supplementation within the past 6 months 64.6% 72.8% 8.2% *** 460 900 OC23 Percentage of women who received vitamin A supplementation post-partum 54.1% 79.2% 25.1% *** 764 1,100 OC24 Percentage of children 12-23 months of age children fully immunized 34.5% 50.5% 16.0% *** 290 774 OC25 Percentage of children 0-23 months who have a growth monitoring card showing at least one weighing in the last 2 months 59.2% 49.8% -9.3% ** 262 588 IR 3.3: Improved hygiene and sanitation practices OC27 Percentage of households with children aged 0-23 months that have water and soap or a locally available cleansing agent at a hand washing place 1.2% 20.4% 19.2% *** 591 1,094 OC27a Percentage of households with soap and water at a hand washing station commonly used by family members 1.0% 17.0% 16.0% *** 1,267 2,237 OC28 Percentage of households with access to an improved sanitation facility 0.6% 23.5% 22.8% *** 1,094 2,237 OC29 Percentage of respondents who know all critical moments for hand washing to prevent diarrheal disease 1.8% 40.7% 39.0% *** 617 1,252 Crosscutting: Gender FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 8 Average or % Difference (EL-BL) Significance Level Number of observations Baseline Endline Baseline Endline OC33 Percentage of currently married women age 15-49 reporting that she makes decisions either by herself or jointly with her spouse regarding seeking health services for her own health; seeking health services for her children's health; how to spend money she herself has earned 62.4% 72.4% 10.0% *** 1,337 2,923 OC34 Percentage of women who agree that it is justifiable for a man to hit his wife under one or more circumstances 91.0% 50.6% -40.3% *** 1,338 3,400 Crosscutting: Environment OC36 Percentage of beneficiaries adopting at least THREE environmentally sustainable technologies 84.7% 84.3% -0.4% ns 1,891 3,940 OC37 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting use of at least TWO environmental mitigation principals in diversified Income Generating Activities 53.0% 66.2% 13.3% *** 1,123 2,248 OC38 Percentage of smallholder farmers demonstrating knowledge of two sound pest management practices 31.6% 52.3% 20.6% *** 1,904 3,990 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 9 Table 2: Endline Detailed Indicators Average or % 95% Confidence Interval Number of observations Lower Upper Indicator Section Strategic Objective 1: Increased and diversified agricultural production IM1 Average number of different types of agricultural products produced per farmer 4.32 4.25 4.39 3,923 4,032 IM2 Average yield of [crop] per farmer (kg/ha) Sorghum 515 480 549 1,884 4,032 Cowpeas 462 396 529 2,961 4,032 IR. 1.1: Improved Agricultural Practices Adopted OC1 Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture (crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season 74.5% 73.1% 75.8% 3,940 4,032 OC2 Percentage of farmers using intercropping Sorghum 22.2% 20.5% 24.0% 95 4,032 Cowpeas 21.5% 20.1% 23.0% 95 4,032 OC3 Percentage of farmers using thinning for sorghum 33.3% 31.3% 35.3% 95 4,032 OC4 Percentage of farmers who used an improved storage technique in the most recent season for cowpeas 74.3% 72.5% 76.1% 2,221 4,032 IR 1.2: Smallholder access to agricultural inputs improved OC6 Percentage of farmers using improved agricultural inputs 70.7% 69.3% 72.2% 3,822 4,032 IR 1.3: Improved livestock practices adopted OC7 Percentage of farmers using at least veterinary care, complementary feeding and habitat construction at the same time 3.5% 2.8% 4.2% 2,786 4,032 OC8 Percentage of farmers accessing government or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations 35.8% 34.0% 37.5% 2,786 4,032 Strategic Objective 2: Increased household incomes IM3 Average Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) 3.94 3.87 4.01 2,153 2,258 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 10 Average or % 95% Confidence Interval Number of observations Lower Upper Indicator Section IM4_0 Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger 3.6% 2.8% 4.4% 2,235 2,258 IM4_1 Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger in July 11.2% 9.9% 12.5% 2,235 2,258 OC9_0 Average value of a set of assets (not including livestock) per household (CFA) 228,980 218,891 239,068 2,206 2,295 OC9_1 Average value of a set of assets (including livestock) per household (CFA) 448,893 430,024 467,762 2,213 2,295 IR 2.1: Market linkages improved OC9_2 Gross margin sales of crops per farmer Sorghum 25,565 17,903 33,228 119 4,032 Cowpeas 32,243 29,921 34,565 2,265 4,032 OC10_0 Value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance 58,367 53,124 63,610 2,910 4,032 OC10_1 Percentage change in value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance 48.7% OC11 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting more than THREE sources of revenue 1.7% 1.3% 2.1% 3,990 4,032 OC12_0 Percentage of farmers who practiced the value chain activities promoted by the project in the most recent season (crops only) 70.3% 68.8% 71.7% 3,803 4,032 OC12_1 Percentage of farmers who practiced the value chain activities promoted by the project in the most recent season (livestock included) 75.3% 73.9% 76.6% 3,868 4,032 IR 2.2: Access to business development services improved OC13_0 Percentage of farmers who used financial services in the most recent season 35.5% 34.1% 37.0% 3,990 4,032 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 11 Average or % 95% Confidence Interval Number of observations Lower Upper Indicator Section OC13_1 Percentage of farmers who used formal financial services in the most recent season 39.0% 37.5% 40.6% 3,990 4,032 OC14 Percentage of farmers reporting access to up-to-date pricing information 89.0% 87.8% 90.1% 2,882 4,032 Strategic Objective 3: Reduced chronic malnutrition among children under five years of age and pregnant and lactating mothers IM5 Prevalence of stunted children under five years of age 25.6% 24.0% 27.1% 3,021 3,308 IM6 Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age 19.7% 18.3% 21.1% 3,051 3,308 OC15 Women’s Dietary Diversity: Mean number of food groups consumed by women of reproductive age 3.29 3.24 3.34 3,400 3,400 IR 3.1: Improved MCHN practices OC16 Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding of children under six months of age 60.3% 55.0% 65.7% 325 1,229 OC17 Percentage of children born in the last 24 months who were put to the breast within one hour of birth 68.0% 65.4% 70.6% 1,243 1,229 OC18 Prevalence of children 6-23 months receiving a minimum acceptable diet (MAD) 8.6% 6.8% 10.4% 927 1,229 IR 3.2: Improved quality of health services OC19 Percentage of mothers with children age 0-23 months who had four or more antenatal visits when they were pregnant with their youngest child 62.5% 59.6% 65.4% 1,101 1,102 OC20 Percentage of newborns receiving postnatal health check within two days of birth 51.9% 49.1% 54.7% 1,225 1,229 OC21 Percentage of children 6-23 months who received vitamin A supplementation within the past 6 months 72.8% 69.9% 75.7% 900 1,229 OC22 Percentage of pregnant and lactating women who received iron and folic acid supplementation Last pregnancy 93.6% 92.2% 95.1% 1,098 1,102 Last seven days 48.1% 45.1% 51.0% 1,096 1,102 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 12 Average or % 95% Confidence Interval Number of observations Lower Upper Indicator Section OC23 Percentage of women who received vitamin A supplementation post-partum 79.2% 76.8% 81.6% 1,100 1,102 OC24 Percentage of children 12-23 months of age children fully immunized 50.5% 47.0% 54.0% 774 1,229 OC25 Percentage of children 0-23 months who have a growth monitoring card showing at least one weighing in the last 2 months 49.8% 45.8% 53.9% 588 1,229 IR 3.3: Improved hygiene and sanitation practices OC27 Percentage of households with children aged 0-23 months that have water and soap or a locally available cleansing agent at a hand washing place 20.4% 18.0% 22.8% 1,094 2,303 OC27a Percentage of households with soap and water at a hand washing station commonly used by family members 17.0% 15.4% 18.5% 2,237 2,303 OC28 Percentage of households with access to an improved sanitation facility 23.5% 21.7% 25.2% 2,237 2,303 OC29 Percentage of respondents who know all critical moments for hand washing to prevent diarrheal disease 40.7% 38.0% 43.5% 1,252 1,229 Crosscutting: Gender OC33 Percentage of currently married women age 15-49 reporting that she makes decisions either by herself or jointly with her spouse regarding seeking health services for her own health; seeking health services for her children's health; how to spend money she herself has earned 72.4% 70.7% 74.0% 2,923 2,929 OC34 Percentage of women who agree that it is justifiable for a man to hit his wife under one or more circumstances 50.6% 48.9% 52.3% 3,400 2,929 OC35 Percentage of Mother Leader Animatrices who indicate that they are more respected after participating in the program. Respected by... 91.4% 88.8% 94.1% 432 3,400 Spouse 81.0% 77.3% 84.7% 432 3,400 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 13 Average or % 95% Confidence Interval Number of observations Lower Upper Indicator Section Women in the household 75.9% 71.9% 80.0% 432 3,400 Men in the household 56.7% 52.0% 61.4% 432 3,400 Women outside the household 67.8% 63.4% 72.2% 432 3,400 Men outside the household 56.3% 51.6% 60.9% 432 3,400 Someone else 0.9% 0.0% 1.8% 432 3,400 Crosscutting: Environment OC36 Percentage of beneficiaries adopting at least THREE environmentally sustainable technologies 84.3% 83.2% 85.5% 3,940 4,032 OC37 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting use of at least TWO environmental mitigation principals in diversified Income Generating Activities 66.2% 64.3% 68.2% 2,248 4,032 OC38 Percentage of smallholder farmers demonstrating knowledge of two sound pest management practices 52.3% 50.7% 53.8% 3,990 4,032 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 14 Table 3: Endline Indicators Disaggregated by Gender Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Male Female Male Female Strategic Objective 1: Increased and diversified agricultural production IM1 Average number of different types of agricultural products produced per farmer 5.36 3.26 2.10 *** 1,989 1,933 IM2 Average yield of [crop] per farmer (kg/ha) Sorghum 558 437 121 *** 1,215 668 Cowpeas 529 388 141 ** 1,551 1,409 IR. 1.1: Improved Agricultural Practices Adopted OC1 Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture (crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season 83.9% 64.8% 0.191 *** 1,993 1,946 OC2 Percentage of farmers using intercropping Sorghum 21.4% 23.9% -0.025 ns 1,394 742 Cowpeas 23.0% 20.0% 0.031 ** 1,569 1,428 OC3 Percentage of farmers using thinning for sorghum 33.6% 32.6% 0.010 ns 1,394 742 OC4 Percentage of farmers who used an improved storage technique in the most recent season for cowpeas 77.9% 70.0% 0.079 *** 1,204 1,017 IR 1.2: Smallholder access to agricultural inputs improved OC6 Percentage of farmers using improved agricultural inputs 78.1% 63.1% 15.0% *** 1,939 1,882 IR 1.3: Improved livestock practices adopted OC7 Percentage of farmers using at least veterinary care, complementary feeding and habitat construction at the same time 4.8% 1.5% 3.3% *** 1,705 1,080 OC8 Percentage of farmers accessing government or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations 42.1% 25.7% 16.4% *** 1,705 1,080 Strategic Objective 2: Increased household incomes IR 2.1: Market linkages improved OC9_2 Gross margin sales of crops per farmer Sorghum 37,867 13,869 23,998 *** 58 61 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 15 Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Male Female Male Female Cowpea 42,992 21,195 21,796 *** 1,148 1,117 OC10_0 Value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance 81,932 37,054 44,878 *** 1,382 1,528 OC11 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting more than THREE sources of revenue 2.0% 1.4% 1% ns 2,005 1,984 OC12_1 Percentage of farmers who practiced the value chain activities promoted by the project in the most recent season (livestock included) 77.2% 73.3% 3.9% *** 1,970 1,897 IR 2.2: Access to business development services improved OC13_1 Percentage of farmers who used formal financial services in the most recent season 38.9% 39.3% -0.4% ns 2,005 1,984 OC14 Percentage of farmers reporting access to up-to-date pricing information 87.1% 90.9% -3.9% *** 1,460 1,422 Strategic Objective 3: Reduced chronic malnutrition among children under five years of age and pregnant and lactating mothers IM5 Prevalence of stunted children under five years of age 28.3% 22.9% 5.4% *** 1,502 1,519 IM6 Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age 21.9% 17.5% 4.4% *** 1,517 1,534 IR 3.2: Improved quality of health services OC24 Percentage of children 12-23 months of age children fully immunized 48.1% 52.7% -5.2% ns 368 406 Crosscutting: Environment OC36 Percentage of beneficiaries adopting at least THREE environmentally sustainable technologies 90.4% 78.2% 12.2% *** 1,993 1,946 OC37 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting use of at least TWO environmental mitigation principals in diversified Income Generating Activities 71.7% 58.4% 13.3% *** 1,331 916 OC38 Percentage of smallholder farmers demonstrating knowledge of two sound pest management practices 58.3% 46.1% 12.2% *** 2,005 1,984 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 16 Table 4: Baseline to Endline Indicator Comparison by Gender Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Strategic Objective 1: Increased and diversified agricultural production IM1 Average number of different types of agricultural products produced per farmer 4.36 4.32 -0.03 ns 1,916 3,923 Male 5.65 5.36 -0.29 *** 895 1,989 Female 3.14 3.26 0.11 * 915 1,933 IM2 Average yield of [crop] per farmer (kg/ha) Sorghum 683 515 -168 *** 978 1,884 Male 701 558 -143 *** 621 1,215 Female 659 437 -222 *** 311 668 Cowpeas 217 462 245 *** 905 2,961 Male 243 529 287 *** 508 1,551 Female 168 388 221 *** 359 1,409 IR. 1.1: Improved Agricultural Practices Adopted OC1 Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture (crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season 75.9% 74.5% -1.4% ns 1,891 3,940 Male 90.4% 83.9% -6.5% *** 884 1,993 Female 62.3% 64.8% 2.5% ns 903 1,946 OC2 Percentage of farmers using intercropping Sorghum 23.7% 22.2% -1.5% ns 1,308 2,137 Male 26.5% 21.4% -5.1% *** 762 1,394 Female 19.8% 23.9% 4.0% * 479 742 Cowpeas 36.2% 21.5% -14.7% *** 1,317 2,998 Male 41.2% 23.0% -18.2% *** 680 1,569 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 17 Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Female 31.5% 20.0% -11.5% *** 575 1,428 OC3 Percentage of farmers using thinning for sorghum 34.0% 33.3% -0.7% ns 1,308 2,137 Male 36.6% 33.6% -3.0% ns 762 1,394 Female 30.9% 32.6% 1.7% ns 479 742 OC4 Percentage of farmers who used an improved storage technique in the most recent season for cowpeas 48.1% 74.3% 26.2% *** 924 2,221 Male 56.5% 77.9% 21.4% *** 503 1,204 Female 35.3% 70.0% 34.7% *** 374 1,017 IR 1.2: Smallholder access to agricultural inputs improved OC6 Percentage of farmers using improved agricultural inputs 73.8% 70.7% -3.1% ** 1,839 3,822 Male 85.0% 78.1% -7.0% *** 862 1,939 Female 62.3% 63.1% 0.8% ns 879 1,882 IR 1.3: Improved livestock practices adopted OC7 Percentage of farmers using at least veterinary care, complementary feeding and habitat construction at the same time 10.2% 3.5% -6.6% *** 1,389 2,786 Male 13.8% 4.8% -9.0% *** 784 1,705 Female 5.7% 1.5% -4.2% *** 525 1,080 OC8 Percentage of farmers accessing government or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations 35.9% 35.8% -0.2% ns 1,389 2,786 Male 44.4% 42.1% -2.3% ns 784 1,705 Female 25.0% 25.7% 0.8% ns 525 1,080 Strategic Objective 2: Increased household incomes IR 2.1: Market linkages improved OC10_0 Value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance 29,940 58,367 29,567 *** 833 2,910 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 18 Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Male 43,356 81,932 38,576 *** 368 1,382 Female 16,441 37,054 20,613 *** 419 1,528 OC11 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting more than THREE sources of revenue 1.1% 1.7% 0.6% * 1,916 3,990 Male 1.8% 2.0% 0.3% ns 895 2,005 Female 0.3% 1.4% 1.1% *** 915 1,984 OC12_0 Percentage of farmers who practiced the value chain activities promoted by the project in the most recent season (crops only) 37.4% 70.3% 32.8% *** 1,840 3,803 Male 35.7% 69.9% 34.2% *** 862 1,935 Female 39.1% 70.7% 31.6% *** 879 1,867 IR 2.2: Access to business development services improved OC13_0 Percentage of farmers who used financial services in the most recent season 28.6% 35.5% 6.9% *** 1,906 3,990 Male 34.8% 35.0% 0.2% ns 891 2,005 Female 23.0% 36.1% 13.2% *** 910 1,984 OC14 Percentage of farmers reporting access to up-to￾date pricing information 50.2% 89.0% 38.7% *** 1,220 2,882 Male 52.8% 87.1% 34.3% *** 646 1,460 Female 46.9% 90.9% 44.1% *** 512 1,422 Strategic Objective 3: Reduced chronic malnutrition among children under five years of age and pregnant and lactating mothers IM5 Prevalence of stunted children under five years of age 31.2% 25.6% -5.6% *** 1,115 3,021 Male 33.0% 28.3% -4.7% ** 561 1,502 Female 29.4% 22.9% -6.5% *** 554 1,519 IM6 Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age 24.7% 19.7% -5.0% *** 1,130 3,051 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 19 Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Male 25.4% 21.9% -3.5% * 567 1,517 Female 24.0% 17.5% -6.4% *** 563 1,534 IR 3.2: Improved quality of health services OC24 Percentage of children 12-23 months of age children fully immunized 34.5% 50.5% 16.0% *** 290 774 Male 38.2% 48.1% 9.9% ** 152 368 Female 30.4% 52.7% 22.3% *** 138 406 Crosscutting: Environment OC36 Percentage of beneficiaries adopting at least THREE environmentally sustainable technologies 84.7% 84.3% -0.4% ns 1,891 3,940 Male 95.0% 90.4% -4.7% *** 884 1,993 Female 75.4% 78.2% 2.7% ns 903 1,946 OC37 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting use of at least TWO environmental mitigation principals in diversified Income Generating Activities 53.0% 66.2% 13.3% *** 1,123 2,248 Male 62.2% 71.7% 9.4% *** 625 1,331 Female 39.5% 58.4% 18.9% *** 438 916 OC38 Percentage of smallholder farmers demonstrating knowledge of two sound pest management practices 31.6% 52.3% 20.6% *** 1,904 3,990 Male 41.8% 58.3% 16.6% *** 891 2,005 Female 21.1% 46.1% 25.0% *** 909 1,984 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 20 Table 5: Endline Indicators Disaggregated by Beneficiary Status Beneficiary Level Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary Strategic Objective 1: Increased and diversified agricultural production IM1 Average number of different types of agricultural products produced per farmer Ind 4.80 3.97 0.83 *** 1,659 2,264 IM2 Average yield of [crop] per farmer (kg/ha) Sorghum Ind 576 461 114 *** 881 1,003 Cowpeas Ind 519 415 103 ns 1,334 1,627 IR. 1.1: Improved Agricultural Practices Adopted OC1 Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture (crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season Ind 82.3% 68.4% 13.9% *** 1,726 2,214 OC2 Percentage of farmers using intercropping Sorghum Ind 21.6% 22.8% -1.2% ns 997 1,140 Cowpeas Ind 19.3% 23.4% -4.1% *** 1,343 1,655 OC3 Percentage of farmers using thinning for sorghum Ind 37.8% 29.4% 8.4% *** 997 1,140 OC4 Percentage of farmers who used an improved storage technique in the most recent season for cowpeas Ind 84.3% 66.2% 18.1% *** 989 1,232 IR 1.2: Smallholder access to agricultural inputs improved OC6 Percentage of farmers using improved agricultural inputs Ind 77.6% 65.8% 11.8% *** 1,600 2,222 IR 1.3: Improved livestock practices adopted FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 21 Beneficiary Level Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary OC7 Percentage of farmers using at least veterinary care, complementary feeding and habitat construction at the same time Ind 8.8% 2.5% 6.4% *** 465 2,321 OC8 Percentage of farmers accessing government or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations Ind 50.3% 32.8% 17.5% *** 465 2,321 Strategic Objective 2: Increased household incomes IM3 Average Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) HH 4.03 3.72 0.31 *** 1,566 587 IM4_1 Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger in July HH 11.4% 10.7% 0.7% ns 1,617 618 OC9_1 Average value of a set of assets (including livestock) per household (CFA) HH 588,208 415,003 173,204 *** 433 1,780 IR 2.1: Market linkages improved OC9_2 Gross margin sales of crops per farmer Sorghum Ind 29,376 21,132 8,244 ns 64 55 Cowpeas Ind 39,253 25,589 13,664 *** 1,103 1,162 OC10_0 Value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance Ind 75,681 43,894 31,787 *** 1,325 1,585 OC11 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting more than THREE sources of revenue Ind 5.6% 1.4% 4.3% *** 337 3,653 OC12_1 Percentage of farmers who practiced the value chain activities promoted by the project in the most recent season (livestock included) Ind 85.6% 67.4% 18.3% *** 1,671 2,197 IR 2.2: Access to business development services improved OC13_1 Percentage of farmers who used formal financial services in the most recent season Ind 66.2% 36.5% 29.6% *** 337 3,653 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 22 Beneficiary Level Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary OC14 Percentage of farmers reporting access to up-to-date pricing information Ind 95.5% 88.2% 7.3% *** 289 2,593 Strategic Objective 3: Reduced chronic malnutrition among children under five years of age and pregnant and lactating mothers IM5 Prevalence of stunted children under five years of age Ind 27.4% 24.0% 3.4% ** 1,395 1,624 IM6 Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age Ind 17.5% 21.6% -4.1% *** 1,407 1,642 OC15 Women’s Dietary Diversity: Mean number of food groups consumed by women of reproductive age Ind 3.33 3.22 0.11 ** 2,150 1,250 IR 3.1: Improved MCHN practices OC16 Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding of children under six months of age Ind 48.6% 61.7% -13.2% ns 35 290 OC17 Percentage of children born in the last 24 months who were put to the breast within one hour of birth Ind 72.0% 67.3% 4.7% ns 182 1,061 OC18 Prevalence of children 6-23 months receiving a minimum acceptable diet (MAD) Ind 9.3% 8.5% 0.8% ns 150 777 IR 3.2: Improved quality of health services OC19 Percentage of mothers with children age 0-23 months who had four or more antenatal visits when they were pregnant with their youngest child Ind 64.4% 60.8% 3.6% ns 525 576 OC20 Percentage of newborns receiving postnatal health check within two days of birth Ind 52.8% 51.8% 1.1% ns 176 1,049 OC21 Percentage of children 6-23 months who received vitamin A supplementation within the past 6 months Ind 79.4% 71.5% 7.9% * 141 759 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 23 Beneficiary Level Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary OC22 Percentage of pregnant and lactating women who received iron and folic acid supplementation Last pregnancy Ind 97.0% 90.6% 6.4% *** 525 573 Last seven days Ind 51.8% 44.7% 7.1% ** 523 573 OC23 Percentage of women who received vitamin A supplementation post-partum Ind 84.8% 74.1% 10.7% *** 525 575 OC24 Percentage of children 12-23 months of age children fully immunized Ind 36.6% 54.8% -18.2% *** 183 591 OC25 Percentage of children 0-23 months who have a growth monitoring card showing at least one weighing in the last 2 months Ind 48.8% 50.0% -1.2% ns 86 502 IR 3.3: Improved hygiene and sanitation practices OC27 Percentage of households with children aged 0-23 months that have water and soap or a locally available cleansing agent at a hand washing place HH 24.0% 14.8% 9.2% *** 667 427 OC27a Percentage of households with soap and water at a hand washing station commonly used by family members HH 21.8% 10.8% 11.0% *** 1,262 975 OC28 Percentage of households with access to an improved sanitation facility HH 27.6% 18.2% 9.4% *** 1,262 975 OC29 Percentage of respondents who know all critical moments for hand washing to prevent diarrheal disease HH 44.4% 31.2% 13.2% *** 903 349 Crosscutting: Gender FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 24 Beneficiary Level Average or % Difference Significance Number of observations Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary Beneficiary Non￾Beneficiary OC33 Percentage of currently married women age 15-49 reporting that she makes decisions either by herself or jointly with her spouse regarding seeking health services for her own health; seeking health services for her children's health; how to spend money she herself has earned Ind 75.5% 69.9% 5.6% *** 1,293 1,630 OC34 Percentage of women who agree that it is justifiable for a man to hit his wife under one or more circumstances Ind 60.0% 44.6% 15.4% *** 1,324 2,076 Crosscutting: Environment OC36 Percentage of beneficiaries adopting at least THREE environmentally sustainable technologies Ind 89.9% 80.0% 9.8% *** 1,726 2,214 OC37 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting use of at least TWO environmental mitigation principals in diversified Income Generating Activities Ind 71.4% 61.5% 9.9% *** 1,077 1,171 OC38 Percentage of smallholder farmers demonstrating knowledge of two sound pest management practices Ind 63.0% 44.0% 19.0% *** 1,736 2,254 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 25 Table 6: Sub-indicator Breakdown Baseline Endline Difference (EL-BL) IM1: Average number of different types of agricultural products produced per farmer 1. Type of crops grown by farmers and average number of crops grown Sorghum 71.1% 56.1% -15.0% Millet 48.7% 44.5% -4.2% Maize 15.5% 14.6% -0.9% Rice 1.6% 2.3% 0.7% Cowpeas 71.6% 78.7% 7.1% Onion 2.3% 1.4% -0.9% Tomatoes 1.2% 0.9% -0.3% Sesame 12.5% 24.0% 11.5% Peanuts 51.0% 52.5% 1.5% Total crops 2.755 2.83 0.07 2. Livestock ownership by farmers: % own any livestock and number owned Own any livestock 71.4% 69.1% -2.3% Number of livestock owned 10.25 11.51 1.27 IM2: Average yield of [crop] per farmer (kg/ha) 1. Area under cultivation: Total land area (ha) cultivated by farmers Sorghum 1.61 1.30 -0.31 Cowpeas 0.71 0.67 -0.04 Onion 0.07 0.40 0.33 Tomatoes 0.08 0.36 0.28 OC1: Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture (crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season 1. % of farmers adopting different agricultural practices/technologies Ploughing 68.1% 86.5% 18.4% Line planting 63.7% 67.8% 4.1% Sarclage/binage 58.4% 33.8% -24.6% Le buttage 3.5% 14.4% 10.9% Chemical fertilization 28.1% 36.6% 8.5% Organic fertilization 63.6% 58.0% -5.6% Crop rotation 1.4% 10.4% 8.9% Improved seeds 4.5% 22.5% 18.1% Plant treatment 4.9% 14.6% 9.7% Seed treatment 18.2% 19.7% 1.6% Intercropping 34.8% 23.8% -11.0% Thinning 30.6% 31.4% 0.8% Zai 29.3% 41.3% 12.0% Pepiniere 2.4% 0.0% -2.4% 2. % of farmers adopting different NRM technologies Anti erosion bund 6.3% 10.3% 4.0% Bund filter 4.9% 13.6% 8.6% Stony cordons 70.6% 74.0% 3.4% Revegetation of bund 10.7% 4.0% -6.7% Soil stabilization using grass 14.2% 14.2% 0.0% FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 26 Live brush mats 2.0% 12.1% 10.1% Zai system 54.6% 69.3% 14.7% Demi-lunes 0.2% 5.2% 5.0% V stone technique 0.8% 7.8% 7.0% Gully treatment 0.9% 2.9% 2.0% Agroforestry 0.2% 2.6% 2.4% Assisted Natural Regeneration 0.1% 4.5% 4.4% OC4: Percentage of farmers who used an improved storage technique in the most recent season for cowpeas 1. Storage techniques adopted by farmers for 4 main crops Sorghum Greniers en paille pour epis 67.0% 70.9% 4.0% Greniers en banco pour grains 5.6% 8.4% 2.8% Jarres en banco pour grains 0.5% 0.7% 0.1% Sac pour grains 27.0% 20.0% -6.9% Cowpeas Triple deeping bag 55.8% 79.2% 23.4% Plastic barrel/can 3.8% 11.2% 7.5% Attic/garret 1.8% 1.6% -0.1% Jar 35.3% 5.1% -30.2% Plastic bottle 3.5% 2.9% -0.6% Onion On a grid in a warehouse 34.6% 22.2% -12.4% In a granary 34.6% 11.1% -23.5% On sand in a warehouse 23.1% 51.9% 28.8% On cool area in warehouse 7.7% 14.8% 7.1% Tomatoes Drying 100% 80.0% -20.0% Making paste 0% 20.0% 20.0% IM3: Average Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) 1. Food groups consumed in the 24 hours preceding the survey Cereals 98.8% 98.9% 0.1% Root and tubers 1.4% 2.4% 1.0% Vegetables 91.7% 76.5% -15.2% Fruits 22.9% 5.8% -17.1% Meat, poultry, offal 9.1% 8.3% -0.8% Eggs 1.7% 0.6% -1.1% Fish and seafood 55.4% 51.5% -3.9% Pulses/legumes/nuts 24.5% 35.7% 11.1% Milk and milk products 6.0% 9.6% 3.6% Oil/fats 23.4% 32.7% 9.3% Sugar/honey 24.8% 41.1% 16.2% Miscellaneous 43.0% 31.3% -11.7% IM4: Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger 1. Household hunger scale (HHS) 0 50.3% 91.8% 41.4% 1 6.4% 4.6% -1.8% 2 11.2% 2.1% -9.1% 3 24.8% 1.5% -23.3% 4 3.2% 0.1% -3.1% 5 1.8% 0.0% -1.8% 6 2.3% 0.0% -2.3% OC9: Average value of a set of assets (CFA) FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 27 1. % of farmers owning different household assets Sleeping mats 23.2% 30.9% 7.7% Beds 31.5% 19.2% -12.3% Mosquito nets 94.1% 96.7% 2.7% Stove 6.5% 12.7% 6.3% Watches 16.5% 4.3% -12.2% Radio 56.4% 43.4% -13.0% Television 3.7% 9.7% 6.0% Chairs 63.0% 60.3% -2.7% Mobile phone 70.9% 1.3% -69.6% Laptop/desk computer 0.0% 0.4% 0.4% Solar plates n/a 43.7% n/a Gas or electric cooker n/a 0.9% n/a Refrigerator n/a 0.3% n/a 2. % of farmers owning different productive assets Hoe 0.0% 92.2% 92.2% Charrue/Sarcleur/Butteur 33.3% 60.3% 27.0% Tractor 91.4% 0.1% -91.3% Shovel 27.6% 47.6% 20.0% Wheelbarrow 55.5% 12.3% -43.2% Pickaxe 0.1% 50.9% 50.8% "shiner" 44.1% 5.1% -39.0% Watering can 9.4% 3.7% -5.7% Carts 46.9% 51.6% 4.7% Motorized pump 8.5% 1.1% -7.3% Manual pump 6.5% 8.9% 2.4% Pulverizer 47.3% 9.4% -37.9% Scythe 2.0% 67.8% 65.8% Straw cutter 1.9% 1.9% 0.0% Bundling machine 3.0% 0.5% -2.5% Drinking trough 25.1% 10.7% -14.4% Food trough 8.9% 7.3% -1.6% Traction- cattle 0.0% 21.8% 21.8% Traction- donkey 3.7% 45.9% 42.2% Traction- horse 3.6% 0.0% -3.6% Traction- camel n/a 0.0% n/a Hatchery n/a 0.1% n/a Brooder n/a 0.9% n/a Multi-purpose shredder n/a 0.2% n/a Metallic box n/a 0.1% n/a Wire mesh n/a 3.9% n/a Slopped triangle n/a 0.3% n/a Mold for boots n/a 1.7% n/a Cage for transporting poultry n/a 3.2% n/a OC10: Value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance 1. % of farmers who sold different crops and value of crop sales Sorghum 4% 6% 2% Millet 3% 4% 2% Maize 1% 2% 1% Rice 33% 29% -4% Cowpeas 40% 76% 36% Onion 60% 96% 37% FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 28 Tomatoes 95% 97% 2% Sesame 41% 80% 39% Peanuts 44% 80% 36% 2. % of farmers who sold livestock and number & value of livestock sales Farmers who sold livestock 50.8% 44.7% -6.2% Number of livestock sold 3.06 7.48 4.42 Livestock sales n/a 73,868 n/a OC11: Percentage of rural smallholders reporting more than THREE sources of revenue 1. Sources of livelihood for farmers Crop sales 99.6% 72.9% -26.7% Livestock sales 75.6% 45.1% -30.5% Agricultural day labor 4.5% 2.6% -1.9% Non-agricultural day labor 0.4% 1.5% 1.1% Petty trade 0.4% 0.4% 0.1% Small business 24.3% 21.6% -2.7% Salaried employment 0.9% 1.0% 0.0% Wage labor 1.0% 1.6% 0.5% Sale of crafts 11.3% 9.1% -2.2% Gold mining 28.1% 9.6% -18.5% Other 6.4% 1.5% -4.9% OC19: Percentage of mothers with children age 0-23 months who had four or more antenatal visits when they were pregnant with their youngest child 1. % of women of 15-49 age reported live birth in the past 2 years and sources of receiving antenatal visit Live birth in past 2 years 52.7% 32.4% -20.3% Source of antenatal care Doctor 0.3% 4.5% 4.2% Nurse/midwife 61.9% 80.4% 18.5% Auxiliary midwife 44.9% 30.0% -14.9% Traditional birth attendant 0.4% 0.5% 0.1% Community/village health worker 2.0% 0.3% -1.7% FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 29 II. INDICATOR DEFINITIONS Table 7: Indicator Definitions No. Indicator Definition Endline Survey Questions Comments IM1 Average number of different types of agricultural products produced per farmer 1. Sorghum 2. Millet 3. Maize 4. Rice 5. Cowpea 6. Onion 7. Tomatoes 8. Sesame 9. Peanuts 10. Other crop 11. Cattle 12. Donkeys 13. Horses 14. Sheep and goats 15. Pigs 16. Poultry 17. Other livestock Total number of crops planted and livestock owned / Total number of farmers surveyed To be categorized as a “farmer”, the respondent had to hold decision-making responsibilities over agricultural fields and/or livestock E16, E117 Only farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked crop questions (E16). Only those farmers who have livestock (E4) were asked livestock questions (E117). IM2 Average yield of crops per farmer (sorghum, cowpea, onion, tomatoes) For [crop]: (Total number of [local units] harvested * number of KG per [local unit]) / (Total number of hectares planted for [crop]) Average across all farmers reporting production and land size for [crop] E19-E21, E64-E66, E75-E77, E86-E88 Only those farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked these questions. OC1 Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture (crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season 1. Ploughing 2. Line planting 3. Sarclage/binage 4. Le buttage 5. Chemical fertilization 6. Organic fertilization 7. Crop rotation 8. Improved seeds E17, E28, E39, E50, E62, E73, E84, E95, E106, E121 Only those farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked crop questions. Only those farmers who have livestock (E4) were asked livestock questions (E14). FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 30 9. Plant treatment 10. Traitement des sémences 11. Intercropping 12. Thinning 13. Zai-Anti erosion Bund 14. Bund filter 15. Stony cordons 16. Revegetation of bund 17. Soil stabilization using grass 18. Live brush mats 19. Nursery / subculturing (rice) 20. Zai system 21. Demi-Lunes 22. V stone technique 23. Gully treatment 24. Agroforestry 25. Assisted Natural Regeneration 26. Food complementation 27. Veterinary care 28. Habitat Construction 29. Maintaining sex ratio 30. Control/regulation of production 31. Genetic amelioration Total number of farmers who used at least 4 of practices/techniques / Total number of farmers surveyed X 100 To be categorized as a “farmer”, the respondent had to hold decision-making responsibilities over agricultural fields and/or livestock OC2 Percentage of farmers using intercropping (sorghum, cowpeas, onions, tomatoes) For [crop]: Total number farmers who used intercropping techniques for [crop] production / Total number of farmers who planted [crop] in most recent agricultural season X 100 E17k, E62k, E73k, E84k Only those farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked these questions. OC3 Percentage of farmers using thinning for sorghum Total number of farmers who used thinning for sorghum production / Total number of farmers who planted sorghum in most recent agricultural season X 100 E17l Only those farmers who grow sorghum (E16) were asked these questions. OC4 Percentage of farmers who used an improved storage technique in the most recent season for cowpeas Total number of farmers who used a triple deeping bag for cowpea storage in the last agricultural season / Total number of farmers who stored cowpeas in last agricultural season X 100 E71-E72 Only those farmers who grew cowpeas in the last agricultural season (E16) were asked these questions. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 31 OC6 Percentage of farmers using improved agricultural inputs 1. Chemical fertilization 2. Organic fertilization 3. Improved seeds 4. Seed treatment Total number of farmers using at least one of the above improved agricultural inputs on at least one crop / Total number of farmers who planted last agricultural season X 100 E17, E28, E39, E50, E62, E73, E84, E95, E106 Only those farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked these questions. OC7 Percentage of farmers using at least veterinary care, complementary feeding and habitat construction at the same time Total number of farmers adopting at least at least veterinary care, complementary feeding and habitat construction at the same time / Total number of farmers surveyed with livestock X 100 E121 Only those farmers who have livestock (E4) were asked these questions. OC8 Percentage of farmers accessing government or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations Total number of farmers obtaining veterinary care or vaccinations from ministry of animal resources, other government agency, or private clinic / Total number of farmers surveyed X 100 E125-E128 Only those farmers who have livestock (E4) were asked these questions. IM3 Average Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) 1. Cereals 2. Root and tubers 3. Vegetables 4. Fruits 5. Meat, poultry, offal 6. Eggs 7. Fish and seafood 8. Pulses/legumes/nuts 9. Milk and milk products 10. Oil/fats 11. Sugar/honey 12. Miscellaneous (tea, coffee, condiments, etc.) Total number of above food groups were eaten in the past 24 hours in the household / Total number of households who did not have a special day the day before (exclude those with missing data) X 100 F4-F15 IM4 Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger 1. No food at all in the house 2. Went to bed hungry 3. Went all day and night without eating Hunger score calculated by summing the total across the three indicators using never = 0, rarely/sometimes = 1, and often = 2 for each indicator. Little to no hunger: 0-1 Moderate hunger: 2-3 Severe hunger: 4-6 F16-F21 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 32 For moderate and severe hunger: Total number of households with [hunger level] / Total number of households (exclude those with missing data) X 100 OC9 Average value of a set of assets (including savings, livestock, etc.) per household (CFA) For domestic, transportation, and productive items: Assets value = number of assets owned*estimated value if sold today Livestock value = number of livestock owned * average amount livestock in that commune sold for Average over all households (exclude those with missing data) D3a-D5q, E117 OC9_2 Gross margin (sales, production, sales per hectare, and production per hectare) of crops per farmer (sorghum, cowpea, onion, tomatoes) Gross margin sales [crop] = (total income from selling [crop] – ((total kgs sold [crop]/ total kgs produced [crop])*total cost of inputs [crop]) Gross margin production [crop] = (total kgs produced [crop]*average price sold for in commune [crop]) -total cost of inputs[crop] Gross margin sales per hectare [crop] = gross margin sales [crop]/total number of hectares planted [crop] Gross margin production per hectare [crop] = gross margin production [crop]/total number of hectares planted [crop] E19.3, E21a, E25, E64.3, E66a, E70, E75.3, E77a, E81, E86.3, E88a, E92 Only those farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked these questions. OC10 Percentage change in value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance Total value of crops sold. Change in the value of agricultural commodities trade by smallholders between baseline and endline. Average over all farmers who grew crops in last agricultural season E25, E36, E47, E59, E70, E81, E92, E103, E114 Only those farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked these questions. OC11 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting more than THREE sources of revenue 1. Crop sales 2. Livestock sales 3. Agricultural day labor 4. Non-agricultural day labor 5. Petty trade 6. Small business 7. Salaried employment 8. Wage labor 9. Sale of crafts 10. Gold mining 11. Other Number of farmers with 3+ revenue sources / Number of surveyed farmers (exclude those with missing data) E11 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 33 OC12 Percentage of farmers who practiced the value chain activities promoted by the project in the most recent season 1. Joint purchase of input 2. Bulk sale through farmer’s group 3. Bulk transport through farmer’s group 4. Sorting/grading 5. Processing 6. Record keeping 7. Marketing skills 8. Delayed sales 9. Other activity Number of farmers practicing at least one value chain activity / Number of farmers surveyed (exclude those with missing data) E18, E29, E40, E51, E63, E74, E85, E96, E107, E120.3 Only those farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked these crops questions. Only those farmers who have livestock (E4) were asked livestock questions (E120.3). OC13 Percentage of farmers who used financial services in the most recent season 1. Agricultural credit 2. Savings 3. Warrant crops Number of farmers who used at least one financial service / Number of farmers (exclude those with missing data) E6, E7, E7.1, E7.2 OC14 Percentage of farmers reporting access to up-to-date pricing information 1. Cell phone update 2. Radio broadcast 3. Government information system 4. Other producers 5. Collectors (i.e. middlemen) Number of farmers with access to up-to-date pricing information / Number of farmers who sold crop or livestock (exclude those with missing data) X 100 E9 Only farmers who sold crops or livestock (E8) were asked this question. IM5 Prevalence of stunted children under five years of age This indicator measures the percent of children 0-59 months who are stunted, as defined by a height for age Z score < -2. The survey-weighted number of children 0-59 months with a height for age Z score < -2 / the survey-weighted number of children 0-59 months with available height for age Z score X 100 K7, K12 Only asked about children 0-59 months (K7). IM6 Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age Underweight is a reflection of acute and/or chronic undernutrition and is measured using weight-for-age. This indicator measures the percentage of children aged 0–59 months who are underweight, as defined by weight-for-age z-score (WAZ) < −2. the survey-weighted number of children 0–59 months with WAZ < −2 / the survey-weighted number of children 0–59 months with available WAZ data K11-K12 Only asked about children 0-59 months (K7). FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 34 OC15 Women’s Dietary Diversity: Mean number of food groups consumed by women of reproductive age 1. Grains, roots, and tubers 2. Legumes and nuts 3. Dairy products (milk, yogurt, cheese) 4. Organ meat 5. Eggs 6. Flesh foods and other misc. small animal protein 7. Vitamin A dark green leafy vegetables 8. Other vitamin A rich vegetables and fruits 9. Other fruits and vegetables Total number of above food groups eaten by women aged 15-49 years in the past 24 hours / Total number of women aged 15-49 years (exclude those with missing data) X 100 G7-G18 Only women (B3.1) aged 15-49 (B4.1) were asked this question. OC16 Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding of children under six months of age Total number of children 0-5 months who only received breast milk (ORS, vitamins, minerals, and/or medicines do not count) in the day preceding the survey / Total number of surveyed children 0-5 months X 100 L5-L35 Only asked about children 0-5 months (K7). OC17 Percentage of children born in the last 24 months who were put to the breast within one hour of birth Total number of surveyed children born in the last 24 months who were put to the breast within one hour of birth / Total number of surveyed children born in the last 24 months X 100 L3 Only asked about children 0-24 months (K7). OC18 Prevalence of children 6-23 months receiving a minimum acceptable diet (MAD) Total number breastfed children 6–23 months of age who had at least the minimum dietary diversity1 and the minimum meal frequency2 during the previous day + Total number of Non-breastfed children 6–23 months of age who received at least 2 milk feedings and had at least the minimum dietary diversity not including milk feeds3 and the minimum meal frequency4 during the previous day THEN divide by: Number of breastfed and Non-breastfed children 6–23 months of age 1 Minimum dietary diversity for breastfed children 6–23 months is defined as four or more food groups out of the following seven food groups: 1. Grains, roots, and tubers 2. Legumes and nuts 3. Dairy products (milk, yogurt, cheese) 4. Flesh foods (meat, fish, poultry, and liver/organ meats) 5. Eggs 6. Vitamin A-rich fruits and vegetables 7. Other fruits and vegetables 2 Minimum meal frequency for breastfed children is defined as two or more feedings of solid, semi-solid, or soft food for L5-6, L18-30, L37 Only asked about children 6-23 months (K7). FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 35 children 6–8 months and three or more feedings of solid, semi-solid, or soft food for children 9–23 months. 3 Minimum dietary diversity for non-breastfed children is defined as four or more food groups out of the following six food groups: 1. Grains, roots and tubers 2. Legumes and nuts 3. Flesh foods (meat, fish, poultry and liver/organ meats) 4. Eggs 5. Vitamin A-rich fruits and vegetables 6. Other fruits and vegetables 4 Minimum meal frequency for non-breastfed children is defined as four or more feedings of solid, semi-solid, soft food, or milk feeds for children 6–23 months, with at least two of these feedings being milk feeds. OC19 Percentage of mothers with children age 0-23 months who had four or more antenatal visits when they were pregnant with their youngest child Total number of surveyed mothers of children aged 0-23 months that saw a skilled provider four or more times during last pregnancy / Total number of surveyed mothers of children aged 0-23 months (exclude those with missing data) X 100 J6c Only asked about children 0-23 months (K7). OC20 Percentage of newborns receiving postnatal health check within two days of birth Total number of surveyed children born in the last 24 months who received a postnatal health check within two days of birth / Total number of surveyed children born in the last 24 months (exclude those with missing data) X 100 L54 Only asked about children 0-23 months (K7). OC21 Percentage of children 6-23 months who received vitamin A supplementation within the past 6 months Total number of surveyed children aged 6-23 months who received vitamin A supplementation within the past 6 months / Total number of surveyed children aged 6-23 months (exclude those with missing data) X 100 L38 Only asked about children 6-23 months (K7). OC22 Percentage of pregnant and lactating women who received iron and folic acid supplementation (disaggregated by last 7 days and last pregnancy) For 7 days and last pregnancy: Total number of surveyed women who gave birth in last 24 months who took iron or iron folate supplements in [time period] / Total number of women who gave birth in the last 24 months (exclude those with missing data) X 100 J9.1, J9.2 Only women who have given birth in the past 24 months (J3) were asked this question. OC23 Percentage of women who received vitamin A supplementation post￾partum Total number of women who gave birth in the last 24 months who received Vitamin A supplements within 2 months of delivery / Total number of surveyed women who gave birth in the last 24 months (exclude those with missing data) X 100 J8 Only women who have given birth in the past 24 months (J3) were asked this question. OC24 Percentage of children 12-23 months of age children fully immunized Total number of surveyed children between 12-23 months old who are fully immunized (received BCG, DPT3, polio3/OPV3, and measles/MMR) / Total number of surveyed children between 12-23 months old (exclude those with missing data) X 100 L46-L53 Only asked about children 12-23 months (K7). FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 36 OC25 Percentage of children 0-23 months who have a growth monitoring card showing at least one weighing in the last 2 months Total number of children 0-23 months who have a growth monitoring card showing at least one weighing in the last 2 month prior the survey / Total number of children 0-23 months who have a growth monitoring card X 100 L40 Only asked about children 0-23 months (K7) who have a growth monitoring card (L39). OC27 Percentage of households with children aged 0-23 months that have water and soap or a locally available cleansing agent at a hand washing place Total number of households with children 0-23 months where enumerator observes water and soap or locally available cleansing agent / Total number of households with children 0-23 months with observation X 100 C5, C7-C13 OC27a Percentage of households with soap and water at a hand washing station commonly used by family members Total number of households who have water and soap or a locally available cleansing agent at a hand washing place that was observed by the enumerator/ Total number of households surveyed with observation X 100 C7-C8, C10-C11 OC28 Percentage of households with access to an improved sanitation facility 1. Flush or pour/flush facilities connected to • piped sewer system • septic system • pit latrine 2. Pit latrines with a slab 3. Composting toilets 4. Ventilated improved pit latrines Total number of households with access to one of the improved sanitation facilities / Total number of households surveyed (exclude those with missing data) X 100 C3, C3a OC29 Percentage of respondents who know all critical moments for hand washing to prevent diarrheal disease 1. After defecation 2. After cleaning a child 3. Before preparing food 4. Before feeding a child 5. Before eating Number of caregivers with child 0-23 months who know all critical moments for hand washing to prevent diarrheal disease / Number of caregivers with child 0-23 months (exclude those with missing data) X 100 L41 Only caregivers of children 0-23 months (K7) were asked this question. OC33 Percentage of currently married women age 15-49 reporting that she makes decisions either by herself or jointly with her spouse regarding seeking health services for her own health; seeking health services for her children's health; how to spend money she herself has earned 1. Decisions on woman’s own health 2. Decisions on child’s health 3. Decisions on how to spend money she herself earned For [decision]: Total number of women who are aged 15-49 and currently married or living with a man who made [decision] mainly by themselves or jointly with their husbands / Total number of women who are aged 15-49 and currently married or living with a man (exclude those with missing data) X 100 I5, I6, I8 Only women (B3.1) aged 15-49 (B4.1) who are currently married or living with a man (I1) were asked this question. OC34 Percentage of women who agree that it is justifiable for a man to hit his wife under one or more circumstances 1. If she goes out to do something without telling him 2. If she neglects the children 3. If she argues with him I9 Only women (B3.1) aged 15-49 (B4.1) who are currently married FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 37 4. If she refuses to sleep with / have sex with him 5. If she burns the food 6. Any other reason Total number of women who are aged 15-49 and currently married or living with a man who answered said it is justifiable for a man to hit a woman under one or more of the above circumstances / Total number of women who are aged 15-49 and currently married or living with a man (exclude those with missing data) X 100 or living with a man (I1) were asked this question. OC35 Percentage of Mother Leader Animatrices who indicate that they are more respected after participating in the program [disaggregated by person named who respects them more] Total number of women who are aged 15-49, are members of the Care Group, and feel more respected after participating in the MLA group / Total number of women who are aged 15-49 and are members of the MLA group (exclude those with missing data) X 100 Disaggregated by person named who respects them more: 1. Spouse 2. Other women in household 3. Other men in household 4. Other women outside of household 5. Other men outside of household 6. Other persons outside of household 7. Other H3.1, H3.2 Only women (B3.1) aged 15-49 (B4.1) who are a member of the MLA group (H2) were asked this question. OC36 Percentage of beneficiaries adopting at least THREE environmentally sustainable technologies 1. Ploughing 2. Line planting 3. Sarclage/binage 4. Le buttage 5. Chemical fertilization 6. Organic fertilization 7. Crop rotation 8. Improved seeds 9. Plant treatment 10. Traitement des sémences 11. Intercropping 12. Thinning 13. Zai 14. Nursery / subculturing (rice) 15. Anti erosion Bund 16. Bund filter 17. Stony cordons 18. Revegetation of bund 19. Soil stabilization using grass 20. Live brush mats 21. Zai system 22. Demi-Lunes 23. V stone technique E17, E28, E39, E50, E62, E73, E84, E95, E106, E121 Only those farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked crop questions. Only those farmers who have livestock (E4) were asked livestock questions (E14). FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 38 24. Gully treatment 25. Agroforestry 26. Assisted Natural Regeneration Total number of farmers who used at least 3 of the technologies / Total number of farmers surveyed X 100 OC37 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting use of at least TWO environmental mitigation principals in diversified Income Generating Activities 1. Organic fertilization 2. Anti erosion Bund 3. Bund filter 4. Stony cordons 5. Revegetation of bund 6. Soil stabilization using grass 7. Zai system 8. V stone technique 9. Agroforestry 10. Assisted Natural Regeneration Total number of farmers who used at least 2 of the environmental mitigation principles / Total number of farmers surveyed X 100 E17, E28, E39, E50, E62, E73, E84, E95, E106, E121 Only those farmers who grow crops (E15) were asked crop questions. Only those farmers who have livestock (E4) were asked livestock questions (E14). OC38 Percentage of smallholder farmers demonstrating knowledge of two sound pest management practices 1. Physical treatment 2. Chemical treatment 3. Biological treatment 4. Integrated treatment 5. Organic treatment 6. Other Total number of farmers who demonstrate knowledge of at least two of sound pest management practices / Total number of farmers (exclude those with missing data) x 100 E12 Only those farmers who have a plot of land (E3,1) or livestock (E4) were asked these questions. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 39 III. BENEFICIARY STATUS DETERMINATION Table 8: Household Level Variables Beneficiary Status Determination Trainings Rations Ag Livestock Women HN Child HN WASH SILC Gender Nat Res Child PLW HH Strategic Objective 2: Increased household incomes IM3 Average Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) X X X X X IM4_0 Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger X X X X X IM4_1 Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger in July X X X X X OC9 Average value of a set of assets per household (CFA) X Strategic Objective 3: Reduced chronic malnutrition among children under five years of age and pregnant and lactating mothers IR 3.3: Improved hygiene and sanitation practices OC27 Percentage of households with children aged 0-23 months that have water and soap or a locally available cleansing agent at a hand washing place X OC27a Percentage of households with soap and water at a hand washing station commonly used by family members X OC28 Percentage of households with access to an improved sanitation facility X OC29 Percentage of respondents who know all critical moments for hand washing to prevent diarrheal disease X FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 40 Table 9: Household Level Variables Beneficiary Status Determination Agricultural inputs Extension services Crop equip Plot of land Crops Livestock Crops Livestock NRM Value Chain Financial Manage FaaB Strategic Objective 1: Increased and diversified agricultural production IM1 Average number of different types of agricultural products produced per farmer X X X X X X IM2 Average yield of [crop] per farmer (kg/ha) X X X X IR. 1.1: Improved Agricultural Practices Adopted OC1 Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture (crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season X X X X X X X OC2 Percentage of farmers using intercropping X X X X OC3 Percentage of farmers using thinning for sorghum X X X X OC4 Percentage of farmers who used an improved storage technique in the most recent season for cowpeas X X X X IR 1.2: Smallholder access to agricultural inputs improved OC6 Percentage of farmers using improved agricultural inputs X X X X IR 1.3: Improved livestock practices adopted OC7 Percentage of farmers using at least veterinary care, complementary feeding and habitat construction at the same time X X OC8 Percentage of farmers accessing government or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations X X FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 41 Agricultural inputs Extension services Crop equip Plot of land Crops Livestock Crops Livestock NRM Value Chain Financial Manage FaaB Strategic Objective 2: Increased household incomes IR 2.1: Market linkages improved OC9_2 Gross margin of crops per farmer X X X X OC10 Percentage change in value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a result of USG assistance X X X X OC11 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting more than THREE sources of revenue X X OC12 Percentage of farmers who practiced the value chain activities promoted by the project in the most recent season X X X X X X X IR 2.2: Access to business development services improved OC13 Percentage of farmers who used formal financial services in the most recent season X X OC14 Percentage of farmers reporting access to up-to-date pricing information X X Crosscutting: Environment OC36 Percentage of beneficiaries adopting at least THREE environmentally sustainable technologies X X X X X X X OC37 Percentage of rural smallholders reporting use of at least TWO environmental mitigation principals in diversified Income Generating Activities X X X X X X X OC38 Percentage of smallholder farmers demonstrating knowledge of two sound pest management practices X X X X X X X FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 42 IV. INDICATOR FLOW CHARTS Figure 1: Strategic Objective 1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 43 Figure 2: Strategic Objective 2 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 44 Figure 3: Strategic Objective 3 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 45 Figure 4: Crosscutting Gender OC33: Percentage of currently married women age 15-49 reporting that she makes decisions either by herself or jointly with her spouse regarding seeking health services for her own health; seeking health services for her children's health; how to spend money she herself has earned OC34: Percentage of women who agree that it is justifiable for a man to hit his wife under one or more circumstances OC35: Percentage of Mother Leader Animatrices who indicate that they are more respected after participating in the program. Crosscutting: Gender and Environment Environment OC36: Percentage of beneficiaries adopting at least THREE environmentally sustainable technologies OC37: Percentage of rural smallholders reporting use of at least TWO environmental mitigation principals in diversified Income Generating Activities OC38: Percentage of smallholder farmers demonstrating knowledge of two sound pest management practices FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 46 V. SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATION The baseline sample-size estimation for the population-based survey was done with a target of detecting a 6-percentage-point reduction in the stunting rate among children below 5 years of age between the baseline and endline. However, now for the endline, the evaluation team has been asked to calculate the endline sample size sufficient to detect a smaller 5-percentage-point reduction in the stunting rate between the baseline and endline. As a result, the sample size calculation needed to be updated and, given the need to identify the smaller effect size, the endline sample size was estimated taking into account the sample size achieved at baseline. This was done using a three-step process: 1. A statistical formula was utilized to express the required sample size of endline (number of children in the age group 0-59 months) as a function of the baseline sample size and other estimable parameters (such as the design effect, the estimate of proportion of stunted children at baseline, and corresponding implied proportion of stunted children at the endline etc.), and targeted effect size, 2. Given the baseline sample size achieved (children with non-missing anthropometric data), estimated value of stunting rate from the baseline data, and targeted effect size, the endline sample size (number of children in the age group 0-59 months) required to detect the desired effect size (5-percentage-point reduction in the stunting rate between the baseline and endline) with a pre-determined error bound was calculated. To calculate total number of households required to achieve the target number of children (as found in the previous stage), a method proposed Stukel and Deitchler (2012) was used.4 The method prescribed describes a statistical correction factor to calculate the number of households required to achieve a given number of children based on a modification to a correction factor first proposed by Magnani (1999).5 Step 1: Derivation of Endline Sample Size To compute the requisite sample size in interval estimation to achieve a pre-determined error bound (i.e., half the confidence interval), we start with the standard formula Var(𝑥̅1 − 𝑥̅2 ) = Var(𝑥̅1 ) + Var(𝑥̅2 ) − 2Cov(𝑥̅1, 𝑥̅2 ) Since the two samples are independent, the covariance term is zero. We then note that for the ith mean Var(𝑥̅𝑖 ) = 𝐷𝑖 2𝜎𝑖 2 /𝑛𝑖 where Di ≡ 1 + (mi – 1) ICC 4 Stukel, Diana and Deitchler, Megan (2012) Addendum to FANTA Sampling Guide by Robert Magnani (1997): Correction to Section 3.3.1- Determining the Number of Households That Need to be Contacted. Washington, DC: FHI 360/ FANTA-2 Bridge). 5 Magnani, Robert. Sampling Guide. Arlington, Va.: Food Security and Nutrition Monitoring (IMPACT) Project, ISTI, Inc., for the U.S. Agency for International Development. January, 1999 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 47 is the design effect, with mi and ICC being the PSU size and intra-cluster correlation coefficient (which we assume invariant across the two sample rounds). Hence, the standard error, s(.) of the estimate of the difference in two (sample) means is 𝑠(𝑥̅1 − 𝑥̅2 ) = 𝐷1𝜎1/√𝑛1 + 𝐷2𝜎2/√𝑛2 Next, we use the following standard formula relating the minimum effect size to the standard error: MDE = 𝑠(𝑥̅1 − 𝑥̅2 )(𝑧1−𝛼 + 𝑧1−𝛽) and note that in the present case MDE = 𝑃2 − 𝑃1 (which has been targeted to achieve MDE = MDE ̃ = 5 percent). Plugging the previous expression for 𝑠(𝑥̅1 − 𝑥̅2 ) into the MDE formula, noting in the present case (i.e., for a proportion) that 𝜎𝑖 = √𝑃𝑖(1 − 𝑃𝑖)/√𝑛𝑖 , and rearranging terms, we arrive at the key expression: 𝑛2 = 𝑛1 𝐷2𝑃2(1−𝑃2) 𝑛1( MDE ̃ 𝑧1−𝛼+𝑧1−𝛽 ) 2 −𝐷1𝑃1(1−𝑃1) (1) Here all right-hand-side variables are known or set as targets – including 𝑃2, which ACDI/USAID FFP has requested be set to 𝑃1 − MDE ̃. Step2: Estimation of Endline Sample (number of children below 5 years of age): In the second stage, using the baseline data, and targeted minimum desired effect size we estimate the endline sample size from the formula given in Equation (1) above. The following section specifies the values of the parameter estimates of Equation (1): 𝑛1= Total number of children with non-missing anthropometric data in baseline =1,115 ICC= Intra-cluster correlation based on the baseline data (on stunting rate) was found to be very low (=0.003). Since other indicators of interest might be higher than the estimated ICC of stunting, for endline purposes we assume an ICC of 0.01 to ensure detection of even a smaller treatment effect on the other indicator variables.6 𝐷1= Design effect in baseline = 1.362 (derived based on baseline average sample size of children per village = 37 and ICC=0.01) 𝑃1= The estimated level of key outcome indicators of interest (prevalence rate of stunting at the age group of 0-59 months) at the baseline =0.312 𝐷2= Design effect in endline set to 𝐷1 to maintain consistency with the baseline assumptions. 𝑃2 = The expected level of the key outcome indicator of interest at the endline for the project area such that (P2 - P1) is the effect size (the magnitude of change)=0.261 Z1-α =1.645, deviate corresponding to one-sided error bound of 5 percent Z1-β= 0.84, deviate corresponding to 80-percent statistical power MDE = 0.05 6 Following defensive evaluation strategies, we believe it is better to use a more conservative estimate of ICC for the purpose of sample size calculation so that the sampling design will not suffer from lack of power. Moreover, the ICC for stunting rate is very low from the baseline data, it is conceivable that the ICC at endline might be higher. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 48 Substituting the above values in Equation (1), we find 𝑛2 , the number of children needed to be surveyed (with non-missing anthropometric data) at endline should be set to 1,843. Step3: Estimation of Endline Households Sample In the final step, we use Stukel and Deitchler (2012; 5) to calculate the number of endline households to survey to obtain the requisite number of endline children (1,843) derived in Step 2 to achieve the desired statistical precision. The parameter values required in their formula are: n = 1,843 (from Step2); 20% = The percentage of population in the age group of 0-59 months (baseline data); and 7.5 = Average household size in the project area (from the baseline survey) 20% = Overall household non-response rate (increased from 10% based on experience of low completion rate of children survey in the baseline) Substituting the above parameter values into the formula of Stukel and Deitchler (2012; 5) yields the target sample size for households in the endline of 2,217 from which 1,843 children in the age group of 0-59 months will be interviewed. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 49 VI. REGRESSION RESULTS TABLES Table 10.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in increasing and diversifying agricultural production Explanatory Variables Dependent Variables Table 10.2.1 Table 10.2.2 Table 10.3.1 Table 10.3.2 Table 10.4.1 Table 10.4.2 Num crop livestock Num crop livestock Cowpea yields (KG/Hectare) Cowpea yields (KG/Hectare) Sorghum yields (KG/Hectare) Sorghum yields (KG/Hectare) Training/ Intervention GAP livestock training X X GAP [crop] training X X X X Covariates Received loan from formal financial institution X X X Famer Characteristics Inputs expenditure for [crop] X X X X Number of plots X X X X X X Subsistence farmer X X X X X X Age X X X X X X Female X X X X X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle (Dummy) X X X X X X Index of productive assets X X X X X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES YES YES YES YES YES Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required YES YES YES YES NO NO FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 50 Table 10.2-10.4: Regression results: Role of ViM in increasing and diversifying agricultural production Table 10.2.1 Table 10.2.2 Table 10.3.1 Table 10.3.2 Table 10.4.1 Table 10.4.2 VARIABLES Num crop livestock Num crop livestock Cowpea yields Cowpea yields Sorghum yields Sorghum yields GAP livestock training 0.799*** 0.677*** (0.180) (0.175) GAP [crop] training 233.6*** 232.6*** 21.84 22.96 (60.45) (59.49) (14.38) (14.70) Received loan from formal financial institution 0.430*** 1.678 -18.23 (0.124) (19.00) (23.10) Subsistence farmer -0.983*** -0.983*** -46.26*** -46.25*** -2.305 -2.550 (0.105) (0.105) (15.38) (15.38) (15.76) (15.70) Inputs for [crop] 0.00194** 0.00194** 0.00173*** 0.00175*** (0.000960) (0.000961) (0.000554) (0.000566) Age 0.0234*** 0.0235*** -0.752** -0.751** 0.647* 0.636* (0.00293) (0.00296) (0.358) (0.359) (0.352) (0.351) Female -1.574*** -1.591*** 1.688 1.558 -38.34** -37.65** (0.0999) (0.0998) (11.60) (11.34) (15.22) (15.34) Number of plots 0.429*** 0.426*** 3.430 3.420 4.530 4.661 (0.0812) (0.0803) (3.532) (3.517) (4.231) (4.259) Own car/truck/motorcycle 0.0999 0.104* 28.88** 28.90** 1.670 1.153 (0.0636) (0.0627) (12.15) (12.10) (10.66) (10.60) PCA productive assets 0.0394 0.0427 -3.502 -3.456 9.740 9.942 (0.0489) (0.0489) (6.160) (6.140) (6.376) (6.348) Constant 3.168*** 3.191*** 313.5*** 313.8*** 342.3*** 343.3*** (0.325) (0.325) (33.72) (33.51) (33.18) (32.95) Observations 3,821 3,820 2,944 2,943 1,874 1,873 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 51 Table 11.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in increasing Household Incomes Explanatory Variables Dependent Variable Table 11.2.1 Table 11.2.2 Table 11.3 HDDS HDDS Value of a set of assets Training/Intervention GAP livestock training X X X Covariates Demographics Received loan from formal financial institution X Household size X X X Number of females X X X Number of farmers X X X Number of subsistence farmers X X X Household head age X X X Female household head X X X Number of educated adults X X X Area cultivated X X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle (Dummy) X X PCA productive assets X X Used Warranting of crops X Got market price information from formal sources X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES YES YES Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required NO NO YES FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 52 Table 11.2-11.3: Regression results: Role of ViM in increasing Household Incomes Table 11.2.1 Table 11.2.2 Table 11.3 VARIABLES HDDS HDDS Asset value GAP livestock training 0.418*** 0.439*** 189,052*** (0.107) (0.112) (52,310) Received loan from formal financial institution -0.131 (0.153) Number of subsistence farmers 0.00821 -0.00143 -51,596*** (0.0755) (0.0747) (9,030) Number of farmers 0.00580 0.0150 -9,627 (0.0542) (0.0549) (10,964) Household size -0.0309 -0.0319 31,360*** (0.0206) (0.0204) (4,155) Number of females 0.0203 0.0202 -14,295** (0.0314) (0.0312) (6,461) Household head age -0.00303 -0.00317 -606.5 (0.00246) (0.00248) (456.5) Female household head -0.438*** -0.434*** -175,105*** (0.129) (0.128) (19,602) Number of educated adults 0.153 0.149 23,904* (0.105) (0.105) (14,491) Area cultivated -0.0196 -0.0185 14,035*** (0.0211) (0.0208) (3,276) Own car/truck/motorcycle -0.0139 -0.0169 (0.0850) (0.0854) PCA productive assets 0.173*** 0.180*** (0.0521) (0.0527) Used Warranting of crops -0.186 (0.197) Got market price information from formal sources -0.00966 (0.125) Constant 3.922*** 3.939*** 176,867*** (0.160) (0.164) (27,841) Observations 2,016 2,016 2,081 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 53 Table 12.1: Role of ViM in increasing Household Incomes: Farmers Explanatory Variables Dependent Variable Table 12.2.1 Table 12.2.2 Table 12.3.1 Table 12.3.2 Cowpea Total Sales Revenue Cowpea Total Sales Revenue Cowpea Gross Margin Per Acre Cowpea Gross Margin Per Acre Training/Intervention GAP [crop] training X X X X Covariates Famer Characteristics Received loan from formal financial institution X X Inputs expenditure for [crop] X X Age X X X X Female X X X X Number of plots X X X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle (Dummy) X X X X Index of productive assets X X X X Used Warranting of crops X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES YES YES YES Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required YES YES YES YES FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 54 Table 12.2-3 Regression results: Role of ViM in increasing Household Incomes Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 VARIABLES Table 12.2.1 Table 12.2.2 Table 12.3.1 Table 12.3.2 Cowpea Total Sales Revenue Cowpea Total Sales Revenue Cowpea Gross Margin Per Acre Cowpea Gross Margin Per Acre GAP [crop] training 19,822*** 17,428*** 45,698*** 47,331*** (6,391) (6,385) (9,272) (8,431) Received loan from formal financial institution 6,800*** 1,500 (2,423) (3,749) Inputs expenditure for [crop] 0.525** 0.521** (0.229) (0.225) Age 174.5*** 173.8*** -141.9* -143.4* (57.23) (57.74) (78.56) (79.29) Female -17,410*** -17,715*** -2,458 -2,477 (1,415) (1,403) (2,058) (2,099) Number of plots 868.0* 778.0 463.6 458.6 (526.6) (539.8) (693.5) (662.8) Own car/truck/motorcycle 6,267*** 6,418*** 8,636*** 8,894*** (1,394) (1,400) (2,397) (2,453) Index of productive assets 1,263* 1,337* -559.2 -507.9 (767.0) (766.7) (989.7) (957.4) Used Warranting of crops 1,522 -5,023 (2,569) (3,994) Constant 24,974*** 25,572*** 49,439*** 49,194*** (3,887) (3,954) (6,464) (6,334) Observations 2,067 2,061 2,242 2,236 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 55 Table 13.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in increasing Household Incomes Explanatory Variables Dependent Variable Table 13.2 Table 13.3 Livestock Total Sales Revenue Livestock Gross Margin Sales Training/Intervention Livestock training X X Covariates Farmer Characteristics Inputs expenditure livestock X Number of plots X X Age X X Number of adults X X Female X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle (Dummy) X X Index of productive assets X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES YES Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required YES YES FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 56 Table 13.2-3 Regression results: Role of ViM in increasing Household Incomes VARIABLES Table 13.2 Table 13.3 Livestock Total Sales Revenue Livestock Gross Margin Sales Livestock training 124,345*** 112,457*** (6,623) (4,966) Age 555.2*** 427.3*** (110.6) (124.3) Female -51,021*** -42,566*** (5,279) (4,814) Number of plots 2,453* 823.8 (1,387) (1,120) Own car/truck/motorcycle 14,410*** 10,503*** (3,126) (3,581) Index of productive assets 3,070* 2,571 (1,648) (1,639) Number of adults -1,569** -804.2 (727.1) (824.0) Constant 20,316** 28,113*** (8,480) (9,709) Observations 3,894 2,665 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 57 Table 14.1: Variable Descriptions: Effect of Training on the Adoption of GAP and Livestock Practices Dependent Variable Table 14.2 Table 14.3 Table 14.4 Table 14.5 Explanatory Variables 4 sorghum practices 4 cowpea practices Improved livestock Gov vet vacc Training/Intervention GAP training X X X X Covariates Farmer Characteristics Subsistence farmer X X X X Age X X X X Female X X X X Education X X X X Land cultivated in acres X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle (Dummy) X X X X PCA productive assets X X X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Utilized NO NO NO NO FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 58 Table 14.2-5 Regression results: Effect of Training on Adoption of GAP and Livestock Practices Table 14.2 Table 14.3 Table 14.4 Table 14.5 VARIABLES 4 sorghum practices 4 cowpea practices Improved livestock Gov. vet vaccination GAP training 0.530*** 0.417*** 0.287*** 0.301*** (0.0963) (0.0674) (0.106) (0.0745) Subsistence farmer -0.124 -0.282*** -0.523*** -0.0509 (0.0974) (0.102) (0.181) (0.0750) Age -0.0119*** -0.00320* 0.00195 0.00465** (0.00274) (0.00169) (0.00320) (0.00206) Female -0.202** -0.222*** -0.462*** -0.442*** (0.0810) (0.0702) (0.128) (0.0643) Education 0.0887 -0.246** 0.268 0.0284 (0.215) (0.0980) (0.246) (0.163) Land cultivated in acres 0.148*** -0.00449 (0.0367) (0.0493) Own car/truck/motorcycle -0.0410 0.00432 0.0484 0.199** (0.0719) (0.0623) (0.130) (0.0832) PCA productive assets 0.0888* 0.118*** 0.180*** -0.00890 (0.0474) (0.0314) (0.0357) (0.0302) Constant 0.373* -0.0651 (0.106) (0.0745) (0.190) (0.127) -1.679*** -0.796*** Observations 2,120 2,962 2,775 2,775 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 59 Table 15.1: Variable Descriptions: Adoption of Improved Agricultural Practices on Yield Explanatory Variables Dependent Variable Table 15.2 Table 15.3 Sorghum yields Cowpea yields Training/Intervention Improved practices (adoption of at least 4 practices) X X Covariates Farmer Characteristics Inputs for [crop] X X Age X X Female X X Subsistence farmer X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle (Dummy) X X Index of productive assets X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES YES Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required NO YES FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 60 Table 15.2-3 Regression results: Adoption of Improved Agricultural Practices on Yield Table 15.2 Table 15.3 VARIABLES Sorghum yields Cowpea yields ViM training 124.9 227.9*** (77.92) (84.11) Inputs for [crop] 0.00164*** 0.00141** (0.000568) (0.000688) Age 1.168** -0.379 (0.463) (0.318) Female -24.45 -2.538 (19.62) (11.91) Subsistence farmer 1.726 -35.59* (18.72) (18.75) Own car/truck/motorcycle 1.509 22.00* (11.46) (12.37) PCA productive assets 7.065 1.492 (7.675) (6.819) Constant 313.1*** 294.2*** (60.93) (43.39) Observations 1,874 2,944 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 61 Table 16.1: Variable Descriptions: Adoption of Livestock Practices on Livestock Revenue Explanatory Variables Dependent Variable Table 16.2 Table 16.3 Livestock revenue Livestock revenue Training/Intervention Improved livestock practices: X Availing govt. or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations X Covariates Farmer Characteristics Age X X Female X X Number of adults X X Number of plots X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle (Dummy) X X Index of productive assets X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES YES Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required NO NO FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 62 Table 16.2-3 Regression results: Adoption of Livestock Practices on Livestock Revenue VARIABLES Table 16.2 Table 16.3 Livestock revenue Livestock revenue Improved livestock practices 17,245** (7,130) Availing govt. or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations 13,323*** (2,732) Age 370.4*** 365.6*** (82.24) (80.69) Female -36,402*** -35,929*** (3,452) (3,302) Number of adults -888.8 -959.8* (577.8) (560.2) Number of plots 945.2 955.2 (942.2) (978.4) Own car/truck/motorcycle 7,015*** 6,043** (2,321) (2,306) Index of productive assets 2,389* 2,902** (1,193) (1,172) Constant 26,131*** 22,063*** (7,003) (6,890) Observations 2,696 2,696 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 63 Table 17.1 Variable Descriptions: Effect of ViM Interventions on Malnutrition: WDDS Explanatory Variables Dependent Variable Table 17.2 WDDS Training/Intervention MCHN training X Covariates Household & Member Characteristics Household size X Number of women X Female household head X Household head education X Number of educated adults X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle X Index of productive assets X Total assets X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required NO FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 64 Table 17.2 Regression results: Effect of ViM Interventions on Malnutrition: WDDS Table 17.2 VARIABLES WDDS MCHN training 0.185** (0.0838) Household size -0.00659 (0.0160) Number of women -0.0187 (0.0246) Female household head -0.0901 (0.109) Household head education 0.0558 (0.113) Number of educated adults 0.0307 (0.0789) Own car/truck/motorcycle -0.0297 (0.0883) Index of productive assets 0.120** (0.0463) Total assets -1.54e-08 (8.24e-08) Constant 3.314*** (0.220) Observations 1,998 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 65 Table 18.1: Variable Descriptions: Effect of ViM Interventions on Malnutrition: Stunting and Underweight Explanatory Variables Dependent Variables Table 18.2 Table 18.3 Table 18.4 Table 18.5 Table 18.6 Table 18.7 Stunted Stunted Stunted Stunted Stunted Underweight Training/ViM intervention Child rations X X X X X X MCHN training X X MLA member X Neighborhood group member X WASH training X Covariates Household & Member Characteristics Household size X X X X X X Number of women X X X X X X Female household head X X X X X X Number of educated adults X X X X X X Age of children under 5 X X X X X X Hygiene/Facility Had soap X X X X X X Had local cleaning agent X X X X X X Had improved sanitation X X X X X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle X X X X X X Total assets X X X X X X Own radio X X X X X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked NO YES YES NO YES YES Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Utilized YES YES YES YES FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 66 Table 18.2-7 Regression results: Effect of ViM Interventions on Malnutrition: Stunting and Underweight Table 18.2 Table 18.3 Table 18.4 Table 18.5 Table 18.6 Table 18.7 VARIABLES Stunted Stunted Stunted Stunted Stunted Underweight Child rations -0.0600** -0.0647** -0.0573** -0.0540** -0.0585** -0.0118 (0.0259) (0.0254) (0.0261) (0.0254) (0.0259) (0.0193) MCHN training -0.459*** -0.459*** (0.0646) (0.0382) MLA member -0.163** (0.0735) Neighborhood group member -0.188** (0.0741) WASH training -0.450*** (0.0704) Household size 0.00546 0.0107** 0.00697 0.00817 0.00885* 0.0101*** (0.00506) (0.00525) (0.00516) (0.00544) (0.00533) (0.00373) Number of women -0.00762 -0.00999 -0.00788 -0.00835 -0.00840 -0.0105* (0.00758) (0.00735) (0.00760) (0.00771) (0.00761) (0.00605) Female household head -0.0302 -0.0372 -0.0366 -0.0395 -0.0294 -0.00614 (0.0421) (0.0485) (0.0399) (0.0421) (0.0447) (0.0459) Number of educated adults -0.00860 -0.0301 -0.00347 -0.0120 -0.0200 -0.0351* (0.0166) (0.0228) (0.0165) (0.0180) (0.0227) (0.0201) Number of children under 5 0.0508*** 0.0558*** 0.0516*** 0.0534*** 0.0549*** 0.00299 (0.00953) (0.00994) (0.00948) (0.00966) (0.00948) (0.00947) Had soap -0.0367* -0.0384* -0.0350* -0.0348* -0.0383* -0.0397** (0.0203) (0.0196) (0.0205) (0.0209) (0.0198) (0.0172) Had local cleaning agent 0.0363 0.0352 0.0338 0.0356 0.0342 0.0129 (0.0347) (0.0331) (0.0345) (0.0348) (0.0338) (0.0320) Had improved sanitation 0.00405 -0.00140 0.00485 0.00567 -0.00105 0.0111 (0.0182) (0.0178) (0.0182) (0.0182) (0.0175) (0.0176) Own car/truck/motorcycle -0.0348* -0.0189 -0.0236 -0.0288 -0.0203 -0.0435* (0.0184) (0.0228) (0.0210) (0.0192) (0.0232) (0.0240) Total assets -1.80e-08 -1.74e-08 -1.85e-08 -1.57e-08 -9.10e-09 -8.77e-10 (1.18e-08) (1.53e-08) (1.26e-08) (1.20e-08) (1.28e-08) (1.62e-08) Own radio -0.0251 0.00824 -0.0247 -0.0215 0.0253 0.0219 (0.0189) (0.0229) (0.0185) (0.0196) (0.0230) (0.0202) Constant 0.144*** 0.497*** 0.260*** 0.303*** 0.463*** 0.484*** (0.0519) (0.0572) (0.0312) (0.0378) (0.0564) (0.0449) Observations 1,621 1,621 1,621 1,621 1,621 1,631 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 67 Table 19.1: Variable Descriptions Role of ViM Interventions on Improving Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD) Dependent Variables Table 19.2 Table 19.3 Table 19.4 Table 19.4 Explanatory Variables MAD MAD MAD MAD Training/ViM intervention MCHN training X MLA member X Neighborhood group member X Child rations X Covariates Household & Member Characteristics Household size X X X X Number of women X X X X Female household head X X X X Number of educated adults X X X X Child under five age X X X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle X X X X Total assets X X X X Own radio X X X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked NO NO NO NO FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 68 Table 19.2-3 Regression results: Role of ViM Interventions on Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD) Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 Table 19.2 Table 19.3 Table 19.4 Table 19.5 VARIABLES MAD MAD MAD MAD MCHN training 0.0930*** (0.0201) MLA member 0.0274 (0.0306) Neighborhood group member 0.0416* (0.0216) Child rations 0.0451** (0.0219) Household size -0.00669 -0.00704 -0.00776* -0.00781* (0.00429) (0.00427) (0.00411) (0.00399) Number of women 0.00193 0.00365 0.00407 0.00384 (0.00656) (0.00642) (0.00637) (0.00624) Female household head -0.00592 -0.00785 -0.00823 -0.00929 (0.0418) (0.0416) (0.0408) (0.0416) Number of educated adults 0.00788 0.00348 0.00443 0.00740 (0.0294) (0.0306) (0.0303) (0.0310) Number of children under 5 -0.00386 0.00300 0.00158 -0.00204 (0.0139) (0.0145) (0.0146) (0.0143) Own car/truck/motorcycle 0.0120 0.0123 0.0132 0.0123 (0.0229) (0.0232) (0.0230) (0.0238) Total assets 3.42e-08** 3.39e-08** 3.38e-08** 3.52e-08** (1.52e-08) (1.64e-08) (1.58e-08) (1.67e-08) Own radio -0.00669 0.00189 0.00140 -0.000470 (0.0211) (0.0218) (0.0218) (0.0219) Constant 0.106*** 0.135*** 0.124*** 0.130*** (0.0381) (0.0346) (0.0341) (0.0302) Observations 771 771 771 771 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 69 Table 19.6 Regression results: Effect of Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD) on Stunting Table 19.5 VARIABLES Stunted Proportion of Children receiving MAD 0.389 (0.284) Child rations -0.0623** (0.0259) Household size 0.00195 (0.00585) Number of women 0.00620 (0.00955) Female household head -0.0280 (0.0674) Number of educated adults -0.0375* (0.0202) Number of of children under 5 0.0603*** (0.0124) Had soap -0.0118 (0.0299) Had local cleaning agent 0.0188 (0.0376) Had improved sanitation 0.0172 (0.0236) Own car/truck/motorcycle -0.0575** (0.0254) Total assets -2.43e-08 (1.79e-08) Own radio -0.0213 (0.0267) Constant 0.153*** (0.0399) Observations 765 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 70 Table 20.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM Interventions on Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Postnatal Check Dependent Variables Table 20.2 Table 20.3 Table 20.4 Explanatory Variables Postnatal check Postnatal check Postnatal check Training/ViM intervention MCHN training X Neighborhood group X MLA member X Child rations X X X PLW ration X X X Covariates Household & Member Characteristics Household size X X X Number of women X X X Female household head X X X Number of educated adults X X X Child under five age X X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle X X X Total assets X X X Own radio X X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES NO NO Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required NO FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 71 Table 20.2-20.4: Regression results: Role of ViM Interventions on Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Postnatal Check Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 VARIABLES Table 20.2 Table 20.3 Table 20.4 Postnatal check Postnatal check Postnatal check MCHN training 0.147* (0.0798) Neighborhood group 0.281*** (0.0778) MLA member 0.152* (0.0909) Child rations -0.130 -0.130 -0.0974 (0.107) (0.106) (0.106) PLW rations 0.183** 0.169** 0.186** (0.0840) (0.0818) (0.0851) Household size 0.0423** 0.0382** 0.0405** (0.0187) (0.0194) (0.0192) Number of women 0.00201 0.00498 0.00436 (0.0324) (0.0330) (0.0327) Female household head 0.110 0.123 0.112 (0.167) (0.164) (0.166) Number of educated adults -0.0958 -0.0986 -0.106* (0.0622) (0.0630) (0.0624) Child under five age -0.633*** -0.638*** -0.630*** (0.0364) (0.0365) (0.0368) Own car/truck/motorcycle 0.0621 0.0589 0.0556 (0.0697) (0.0690) (0.0673) Total assets 1.07e-08 9.96e-09 1.10e-08 (5.44e-08) (5.36e-08) (5.51e-08) Own radio -0.0923 -0.0861 -0.0835 (0.0721) (0.0720) (0.0721) Constant 0.0886 0.0981 0.141 (0.142) (0.145) (0.141) Observations 1,642 1,642 1,642 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 72 Table 21.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM Interventions on Improving Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Vaccination of Children Dependent Variables Table 21.2 Table 21.3 Table 21.4 Explanatory Variables Fully vaccinated Fully vaccinated Fully vaccinated Training/ViM intervention MCHN training X Neighborhood group X MLA member X Child rations X X X PLW ration X X X Covariates Household & Member Characteristics Household size X X X Number of women X X X Female household head X X X Number of educated adults X X X Child under five age X X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle X X X Total assets X X X Own radio X X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES NO NO Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required NO FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 73 Table 21.2-4 Regression results: Role of ViM Interventions on Improving Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Vaccination of Children Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 Table 21.2 Table 21.3 Table 21.4 VARIABLES Fully vaccinated Fully vaccinated Fully vaccinated MCHN training 0.218** (0.0951) Neighborhood group 0.160** (0.0814) MLA member 0.225*** (0.0804) Child rations -0.0580 -0.0182 -0.00712 (0.110) (0.110) (0.106) PLW rations 0.118 0.122 0.120 (0.0799) (0.0797) (0.0793) Household size 0.0144 0.0121 0.0113 (0.0163) (0.0165) (0.0165) Number of women 0.0349 0.0382 0.0388 (0.0251) (0.0252) (0.0247) Female household head -0.0350 -0.0253 -0.0271 (0.167) (0.167) (0.165) Number of educated adults 0.0445 0.0401 0.0306 (0.0653) (0.0671) (0.0660) Child under five age -0.285*** -0.285*** -0.283*** (0.0317) (0.0318) (0.0321) Own car/truck/motorcycle 0.0865 0.0877 0.0758 (0.0735) (0.0731) (0.0749) Total assets 3.41e-08 3.34e-08 3.65e-08 (6.04e-08) (6.01e-08) (6.20e-08) Own radio -0.142 -0.134 -0.128 (0.0875) (0.0867) (0.0866) Constant -0.766*** -0.714*** -0.684*** (0.155) (0.152) (0.148) Observations 1,642 1,642 1,642 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 74 Table 22.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in Influencing Hygiene Practices: Knowledge of Critical moments of Handwash and Presence of handwashing agents. Explanatory Variables Dependent Variables Table 22.2 Table 22.3 Table 22.4 Table 22.5 Table 22.6 Table 22.7 Handwash Handwash Handwash Improved Hygiene Improved Hygiene Improved Hygiene Training/ViM intervention WASH training X X X X X X Neighborhood member X X MLA member X X Covariates Household & Member Characteristics Household size X X X X X X Number of women X X X X X X Female household head X X X X X X Number of educated adults X X X X X X Economic Status Own car/truck/motorcycle X X X X X X Total assets X X X X X X Improved sanitation X X X X X X Own radio X X X X X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES YES YES YES YES YES Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required NO NO NO NO NO NO FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 75 Table 22.2-7 Regression results: Role of ViM in Influencing Hygiene Practices: Knowledge of Critical moments of Handwash and Presence of handwashing agents. Table 22.2 Table 22.3 Table 22.4 Table 22.5 Table 22.6 Table 22.7 VARIABLES Handwash Handwash Handwash Improved Hygiene Improved Hygiene Improved Hygiene WASH training 0.294*** 0.325*** 0.295*** 0.259** 0.250** 0.251** (0.106) (0.104) (0.105) (0.124) (0.127) (0.122) Neighborhood member -0.111 0.0336 (0.0950) (0.0881) MLA member -0.00514 0.0736 (0.106) (0.132) Improved sanitation 0.130 0.134 0.130 0.181* 0.180* 0.180* (0.126) (0.126) (0.126) (0.102) (0.102) (0.102) Household size 0.0250 0.0266 0.0251 -0.00434 -0.00457 -0.00534 (0.0227) (0.0230) (0.0224) (0.0245) (0.0247) (0.0247) Household head age -0.00657* -0.00630* -0.00656* -0.00289 -0.00297 -0.00294 (0.00338) (0.00336) (0.00338) (0.00300) (0.00301) (0.00299) Number of women -0.0221 -0.0223 -0.0222 0.00272 0.00252 0.00301 (0.0336) (0.0339) (0.0335) (0.0319) (0.0319) (0.0320) Female household head -0.342* -0.348** -0.342* 0.0399 0.0432 0.0423 (0.178) (0.177) (0.177) (0.230) (0.230) (0.231) Number of educated adults 0.0443 0.0433 0.0445 0.0849 0.0852 0.0830 (0.0748) (0.0741) (0.0751) (0.0807) (0.0805) (0.0818) Own car/truck/motorcycle 0.162* 0.166** 0.162* 0.279*** 0.278*** 0.275*** (0.0840) (0.0823) (0.0845) (0.0964) (0.0958) (0.0960) Total assets -3.21e-08 -3.35e-08 -3.21e-08 -8.36e-08 -8.33e-08 -8.26e-08 (5.36e-08) (5.42e-08) (5.35e-08) (7.28e-08) (7.27e-08) (7.26e-08) Own radio -0.0402 -0.0426 -0.0405 -0.0588 -0.0583 -0.0561 (0.0667) (0.0668) (0.0676) (0.104) (0.104) (0.105) Constant -0.200 -0.195 -0.201 -0.773*** -0.776*** -0.769*** (0.183) (0.184) (0.182) (0.188) (0.188) (0.186) Observations 997 997 997 1,049 1,049 1,049 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 76 Effect of ViM Interventions on Women Empowerment Table 23.1: Variable Descriptions: Role of ViM in improving Women empowerment Explanatory Variables Dependent Variables Table 23.2 Table 23.3 Women decision￾making Women decision￾making Training/ViM intervention Gender training X Neighborhood Group/MLA Member X Covariates Household & Member Characteristics Area cultivated by women X X Female age X X Women education X X Number of adults X X Number of women X X Household head age X X Female household head X X Number of educated adults X X Economic Status High asset (Dummy) X X Self-selection/Endogeneity Checked YES NO Self-selection/Endogeneity Correction Required YES FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 77 Table 23.2-3 Regression results: Role of ViM in improving Women empowerment Table 23.2 Table 23.3 VARIABLES Women decision￾making Women decision￾making Gender training 2.279*** (0.121) Neighborhood Group 0.0483 (0.0916) Area cultivated by women -0.0359 0.0998* (0.0377) (0.0576) Female age 0.00335 0.000810 (0.00277) (0.00435) Women with primary education 0.125 0.0423 (0.174) (0.235) Number of adults 0.00196 0.00903 (0.0252) (0.0278) Number of women -0.0226 -0.00492 (0.0156) (0.0170) Household head age 0.000516 -0.00141 (0.00245) (0.00229) Female household head 0.402*** 0.311* (0.125) (0.179) Number of educated adults -0.0261 0.137* (0.0668) (0.0729) Household with High assets -0.216*** 0.0143 (0.0686) (0.0795) Constant -0.113 0.681*** (0.200) (0.200) Observations 2,877 2,918 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 78 VII. QUALITATIVE SURVEY INSTRUMENTS EVALUATION FINALE DU PROJET ViM: OUTILS DE L’ENQUETE QUALITATIVE INTRODUCTION ET CONSENTEMENT [POUR COMMENCER, LE MODERATEUR DOIT LIRE LE DOCUMENT DE CONSENTEMENT QUI SUIT]: Bonjour et merci d’avoir accepté de me parler. Je m’appelle (nom d’intervieweur/intervieweuse) ____ et voici mon collègue ___ qui prendra des notes pendant la conversation et _____ qui lui servira d’interprète. Nous travaillons pour CRDA, en collaboration avec NORC à l’Université de Chicago, basé aux Etats Unis. Nous sommes chargés de mener une étude pour évaluer les impacts du projet ViM. Dans le cadre de cette étude, nous voudrions parler avec vous sur vos expériences sur ce projet et ses activités dans votre communauté. La discussion dura au maximum 2 heures. L’objectif de cette discussion est de vous écouter et de capturer vos expériences des activités liées du projet ViM dans votre communauté, ainsi que de votre perception des changements qui en ont découlés. Notez qu’il n’y a pas de bonnes ou mauvaises réponses. Sentez-vous libre de partager vos expériences et réactions, positives ou négatives, et d’être précis. Si c’est possible, donnez des exemples pour illustrer ce que vous dites. Notre rôle ici est de poser des questions et d’écouter vos avis et expériences. Nous allons enregistrer cette discussion afin de noter fidèlement le contenu de la conversation, et de ne rien oublier de tout ce qui a été dit. Vos identités ne seront pas divulguées. Les informations qui vont être collectées à travers cette discussion seront conserver en sécurité et sont considérées comme confidentielles, elles ne seront partagées avec USAID que de façon anonyme. Votre participation est entièrement libre et vous pouvez choisir de ne pas répondre à une question ou d’interrompre votre participation à tout moment si vous trouvez les discussions gênantes ou vous vous sentez mal à l’aise. Néanmoins, votre contribution est très importante pour aider l’USAID à rendre leurs programmes de nutrition et sécurité alimentaire plus efficace et mieux adapté aux besoins de la population de Burkina Faso. Si vous avez des questions sur l’étude, vous pouvez nous les poser maintenant, ou contacter Mr. Karim Pare par téléphone: [numero de téléphone]. Etes-vous d’accord de participer à la discussion d’aujourd’hui que nous allons enregistrer? OUI :__/ NON :____/ [SI LES INTERVIEWÉS DISENT OUI, CONTINUEZ LA DISCUSSION. SI NON], REMERCIEZ LA PERSONNE ET ARRETER L’INTERVIEW Parfait, dans ce cas, commençons ! [DEMARRER L’ENREGISTEUR] FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 79 Catégorie du groupe focalisé répondant:  Bénéficiaires masculins  Bénéficiaires féminins Facilitateur: ___________________ Enregistreur: ___________________ Début: ___ :___ AM/PM (Encerclez) Fin: ___ :___ AM/PM (Encerclez) Numéro de l’enregistrement :________________________________ Evaluation finale du projet ViM Date: Jour_____Mois : Janvier Année: 2018 Département:___________________________________ Commune : _________________________________ Village: _________________________________ Partici pant Occupation principale (e.g., Fermier, Bétail, Eleveur bovin, Autre (Veuillez préciser)) Genre (M/F) Age Etat civil (Marié, Veuve, Célibataire, Divorcé) Niveau d’études Ethnie Participation dans des activités du projet ViM (Listez) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Commentaires sur l’aspect du Groupe de discussion (GD) (niveau de discussion, ex : très active, non engagé, consensus général, continu, personne(s) dominante(s), etc.) : FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 80 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 81 GUIDE DU GROUPE DE DISCUSSION- Evaluation finale du projet ViM: Protocole No 1 (Activités d’agriculture et de moyens de subsistance) Version du 12 janvier 2018 THÈMES / SUJETS D'ENQUÊTE: • IMPACTS / RÉALISATIONS DU PROGRAMME ET BIEN-ÊTRE DES MÉNAGES • EFFICACITÉ • CIBLAGE ET DISTRIBUTION DES AVANTAGES • DURABILITÉ DES RÉSULTATS 1. Connaissez-vous ce projet? Explorer: De quel nom appelez-vous le projet dans votre village? Question: Pouvez-vous décrire brièvement votre participation au projet ViM? MODÉRATEUR: OBTIENT LES ACTIVITES PRINCIPES SANS ENTRER DANS TROP DE DÉTAILS. Laissez-nous maintenant discuter en détail les activités du projet et comment ces activités ont affecté vos conditions de vie et quelles sont les impressions générales du projet. Pour ce faire, nous allons maintenant attirer l'attention sur les activités détaillées du projet et comment elles ont affecté votre vie et vos impressions générales sur tous les aspects du projet. 2. Dans quelles activités agricoles et autres activités de moyens de subsistance avez-vous participé? [Si nécessaire, des exemples d'activités agricoles proposées par les programmes peuvent être fournis aux personnes interrogées]: 2.1 Y a-t-il eu des pratiques promues que la communauté ne voulait pas pratiquer? Lesquelles? Pourquoi était-ce ainsi? 2.2 Y a-t-il eu des pratiques promues que la communauté voulait pratiquer mais qui était incapable de le faire? Lesquelles? Quelles étaient les raisons de cela? 2.3 Y avait-il des cultures sur lesquelles la communauté voulait être formée et qui n'étaient pas couvertes par les activités du projet? Si oui, lesquelles? 2a. Culture, Production et commercialisation des cultures maraîchères: • Formation à la restauration de parcelles improductives et à la gestion de la fertilité des sols • Promotion des cultures potagères par les femmes. • Test et introduction de nouvelles variétés de cultures et de nouvelles approches de lutte antiparasitaire • Fourniture de semences et de plants à transplanter (par distribution directe, tickets-tickets et / ou programme de multiplication de semences au niveau communautaire) et / ou d'engrais. • Accès à de nouvelles sources d'eau (nouveaux puits ou puits réhabilités) et méthodes d'irrigation des cultures • Formation sur le maraîchage (utilisation d'engrais, irrigation), la transformation ou la commercialisation de produits (exemples: sélection de variétés, gestion de la fertilité des sols, promotion de l'agro-industrie, champs￾écoles , lutte contre les ravageurs. • Fourniture de sacs de stockage des récoltes (p.ex. PICS) et d'installations de stockage (greniers, silos) pour se protéger contre les nuisibles, ou reporter la vente lorsque les prix sont bas. Fourniture de sacs de stockage des récoltes (p.ex. PICS) et d'installations de stockage (greniers, silos) pour se protéger contre les ravageurs des cultures ou retarder la vente lorsque les prix sont bas. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 82 2a.1 Est-ce que l'une ou l'autre des pratiques culturales promues est en conflit avec vos pratiques culturales précédentes? Si oui, lesquelles? Quels étaient ces conflits? 2a.2 Avez-vous eu un conflit entre la priorisation des cultures commerciales et des cultures vivrières pour le travail domestique et / ou les intrants? Si oui, comment avez-vous résolu ces conflits? 2a.3 Avez-vous constaté des rendements plus élevés (kg / ha) ou des revenus de cultures de rente à la suite de l'adoption de l'une ou l'autre des pratiques culturales promues? Quelles cultures qui ont bénéficié des nouvelles pratiques? 2b. Bétail et animaux à la ferme: • Écoles d'élevage • Fourniture de petits ruminants à une population vulnérable (principalement des femmes vulnérables) • Facilitation et développement des pratiques d'engraissement des moutons • Formation sur le traitement des résidus de culture • Promotion de la production et de la conservation des cultures fourragères • Formation des agents communautaires sur la santé animale • Promotion de la vaccination des animaux 2b.1 À la suite de l'adoption de l'une ou l'autre des pratiques liées à l'élevage, y a-t-il des types de bétail ou d'autres animaux de ferme qui sont plus sains ou qui produisent plus de descendants? Quel (s) type (s) d'animaux a-t-il bénéficié, comment en ont-ils bénéficié et quelles pratiques spécifiques encouragées pensez-vous en être la cause? 2b.2 Y a-t-il eu des problèmes d'élevage / d'animaux que la communauté voulait approfondir et qui n'ont pas été traités par le projet? Si oui, lesquels? 2c Activités de moyens de subsistance: • Activités non agricoles et activités de développement (activités non agricoles) o Cours d'alphabétisation pour adultes (alphabétisation non liée à l'agriculture) o Activités commerciales liées à l'économie de travail des femmes sur les technologies liées à l'énergie (par exemple les cuisinières) o Formation professionnelle des filles dans des activités génératrices de revenus (par exemple, couture, cosmétique, encens, transformation des aliments) et entrepreneuriat o Formation en gestion financière et commerciale (pour les activités commerciales non agricoles) 2c.1 Pour chacune des activités spécifiques ci-dessus qui vous ont aidé, vous ou votre ménage ? Quels ont été les bénéfices observés? Considérez-vous que les avantages pour chaque activité dont bénéficient les ménages ne soient petits, pas petits, grands ou importants? Nous allons maintenant discuter de différentes questions du projet. Pour chaque sujet, nous aimerions avoir votre avis sur les activités du projet qui vous ont aidé de plus, qui ont aidées de plus votre ménage, et pour quelles raisons. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 83 Efficacité - Impact du programme sur le bien-être du ménage 3. Pour chacun des thèmes suivants, quelles activités du projet vous ont aidé le plus individuellement, ou vos ménages? Quelles sont les raisons? Sonder: Produire des cultures ou des légumes Sonder: Obtenir, nourrir et prendre soin du bétail et d'autres animaux de ferme (p. Ex., Poulets) Sonder: Préserver et conserver en toute sécurité les cultures Sonder: Commercialiser des produits agricoles (légumes, bétail, œufs et lait, etc.) Explorer: Accès au crédit pour l'agriculture et l'élevage Explorer: Améliorer la production agricole et l'accès des ménages aux marchés 3.1 Pour chacune des activités spécifiques ci-dessus qui vous ont aidé, vous ou votre ménage ? Quels ont été les avantages observés? Considérez-vous que les avantages pour chaque activité dont bénéficient les ménages petits, pas petits, grands ou importants? 4. Certains ménages ont-ils bénéficié plus que d'autres? Pourquoi? Explorer: Quels ménages ont bénéficié moins des activités agricoles et de moyens de subsistance dans votre communauté? Explorer: Pourquoi ces ménages ont-ils moins bénéficié? Explorer: Quelles suggestions avez-vous pour que ces ménages en profitent davantage? 5. Pour chacun de ces éléments, y a-t-il des activités qui n'ont vraiment pas aidé le ménage? Lesquelles? Quelles sont les raisons? Donnez-nous des exemples spécifiques. 5.1 Y a-t-il eu des activités que vous et / ou votre ménage vouliez pratiquer mais qui n'ont pas pu le faire en raison des coûts financiers? Quelles activités spécifiques étaient trop chères pour que votre ménage ne puisse pratiquer? 5.2 Y avait-il un de ces articles que vous et / ou votre ménage vouliez pratiquer mais que vous étiez incapables de le faire pour des raisons autres que le coût? Pour quels objets et pourquoi avez-vous été incapables de les pratiquer? Les défis auxquels sont confrontés les bénéficiaires Maintenant, nous aimerions discuter des défis liés à ces problèmes dans ce village. 6. En termes de culture ou de production végétale, quels sont les défis auxquels vous avez dû faire face au début du projet? Explorer: Ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels sont les autres défis qui devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autres auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 7. En termes d'obtention, d'alimentation et de soins pour le bétail et d'autres animaux de ferme (par exemple les poulets), quels défis avez-vous rencontrés au début du projet? Explorer: Ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autres auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 84 8. En termes de stockage et de sauvegarde des cultures en toute sécurité, quels défis avez-vous rencontrés au début du projet? Explorer: Ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autres auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 9. En termes de commercialisation des produits agricoles (légumes, bétail, œufs et lait, etc.), quels défis avez￾vous rencontrés au début du projet? Explorer: Ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autre auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 10. En termes d'accès au crédit pour l'agriculture et l'élevage, quels défis avez-vous rencontrés au début du projet? Explorer: Ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autres auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 11. En termes d'amélioration de la production agricole et d'accès aux marchés des ménages, quels défis avez￾vous rencontrés au début du projet? Explorer: Ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autres auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? Qualité de service 12. Quoi d'autre le projet aurait-il pu faire de mieux pour travailler avec les membres de la communauté en vue d’aider à améliorer les activités agricoles et de moyens de subsistance? Durabilité 13. Y a-t-il des changements dans votre communauté concernant les attitudes des maris et au niveau de soutien pour la grossesse, l'alimentation, la nutrition et la planification familiale? Explorer: De quelle manière, et pourquoi? Sont-ils positifs ou négatifs? Explorer: Quelles sont les activités qui ont eu plus d'effet sur le changement d'attitude des hommes pour soutenir les femmes dans leurs activités agricoles ou autres activités de moyens de subsistance et pourquoi? Explorer: Y a-t-il d'autres contraintes auxquelles les femmes sont confrontées qui les empêchent d'avoir plus de soutien des hommes dans cette communauté? Pourriez-vous donner quelques exemples? 13.1 Que pourriez-vous faire pour augmenter le niveau de soutien de vos maris pour la grossesse, l'alimentation, la nutrition et la planification familiale? Qu'est-ce qui pourrait être fait par d'autres pour augmenter ce soutien? Quelles autres personnes? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 85 Qualité de service 14. Qu'est-ce que le projet aurait pu faire d'autre pour mieux travailler avec les membres de la communauté pour aider à améliorer la santé, la nutrition, l'hygiène et l'assainissement? 14.1 Qu’est ce que le projet a fait dans sa promotion de l'amélioration de la santé, de la nutrition, de l'hygiène et de l'assainissement qui va à l'encontre des croyances ou des pratiques culturelles de votre communauté? Quelles sont les activités spécifiques du projet à cet égard? Comment ces problèmes ont-ils pu être évités tout en permettant au projet de promouvoir des améliorations en matière de santé, de nutrition, d'hygiène et d'assainissement? Durabilité: Santé et nutrition 15. Les membres de la communauté pratiquent-ils encore des méthodes de santé et nutrition de la mère et de l’enfant qu'ils reçoivent des formations du projet? [LISTE DES LIEUX] Explorer: Qu'est-ce qui encouragerait les membres de la communauté à continuer à utiliser ces méthodes dans l'avenir? Question: Pensez-vous que d'autres membres de la communauté, ceux qui n'ont pas bénéficié directement de ces activités de projet, ont également appris à utiliser ces méthodes? Comment l'ont-ils appris? Certaines de ces méthodes étaient-elles déjà mises en pratique par les membres de vos communautés avant que le projet ne commence à les promouvoir? Lesquelles? Dans quelle mesure étaient-elles déjà pratiquées? Explorer: Ces méthodes se sont-elles répandues dans d'autres communautés en dehors de la zone du projet? Sonder: [SI OUI] Comment est-ce arrivé? 16. Avez-vous payé quelque chose pour les produits ou services de nutrition ou de santé fournis par le projet? Sonder: [Si OUI] Lesquels? Question: Pourquoi avez-vous décidé de payer pour ces services ou produits? Explorer: Continuerez-vous à payer pour ces services ou produits à l'avenir? Sonder: [SI NON] Pourquoi pas? [VOIR LES EXEMPLES CORRECTES] Explorer: Seriez-vous prêt à payer un peu plus pour certains de ces produits / services? [Si oui, lesquels?) Explorer: Y a-t-il autre chose qui vous ferait payer pour l'un de ces produits et / ou services? Si oui, laquelle ? Durabilité: WASH 17. Les membres de la communauté pratiquent-ils encore les méthodes d'assainissement qu'ils reçoivent des formations du projet? [LISTE DES LIEUX] Explorer: Qu'est-ce qui encouragerait les membres de la communauté à continuer à utiliser ces méthodes à l'avenir? Question: Pensez-vous que d'autres personnes non bifocales dans la communauté ont également appris à utiliser ces méthodes? Comment l'ont-ils appris? Explorer: Ces méthodes se sont-elles répandues dans d'autres communautés en dehors de la zone du projet? Sonder: [SI OUI] Comment est-ce arrivé? 18. Avez-vous payé pour les produits ou services d'assainissement fournis par le projet? Sonder: [Si OUI] Lesquels? Question: Pourquoi avez-vous décidé de payer pour ces services ou produits? Explorer: Continuerez-vous à payer pour ces services ou produits dans l'avenir? Sonder: [SI NON] Pourquoi pas? [VOIR LES EXEMPLES CORRECTS] FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 86 Explorer: Seriez-vous prêt à payer un peu plus pour certains de ces produits / services? [Si oui, lesquels?) Explorer: Y a-t-il autre chose qui vous ferait payer pour l'un de ces produits et / ou services? Questions basées sur les résultats préliminaires de l’enquête quantitative Soins d'élevage: Le pourcentage d'agriculteurs qui ont eu accès aux soins vétérinaires du gouvernement ou du secteur privé et aux vaccinations n'a pas changé au cours de la vie du projet. 19. Qu'est-ce que ViM a fait pour améliorer l'accès aux soins vétérinaires ? 20. Quels étaient les défis auxquels les agriculteurs étaient confrontés pour accéder à ces services? Question de clôture Y a-t-il quelque chose que vous aimeriez dire à propos du projet ViM dont nous n'avons pas déjà parlé? Je vous remercie. Avez-vous des questions pour moi? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 87 GUIDE DE DISCUSSION DE GROUPE - Évaluation finale du projet ViM: Protocole n ° 2 (Activités de santé, nutrition et WASH) Version du: 12 janvier 2018 THÈMES / SUJETS D'ENQUÊTE: • IMPACTS / RÉALISATIONS DU PROGRAMME ET BIEN-ÊTRE DES MÉNAGES • EFFICACITÉ • CIBLAGE ET DISTRIBUTION DES AVANTAGES DANS LE GROUPE • DURABILITÉ DES RÉSULTATS 1. Connaissez-vous ce projet? Explorer: Par quel nom appelez-vous le projet dans votre village? Question: Pouvez-vous décrire brièvement votre participation au projet ViM? MODÉRATEUR: OBTIENT LES ACTIVITES PRINCIPLES SANS ENTRER DANS TROP DE DETAILS Laissez-nous maintenant discuter en détail les activités du projet et comment ces activités ont affecté vos conditions de vie et quelles sont les impressions générales du projet. Pour ce faire, nous allons maintenant attirer l'attention sur les activités détaillées du projet et comment elles ont affecté votre vie et vos impressions générales sur tous les aspects du projet. 2. Dans quelles activités de santé et de nutrition avez-vous participé, en particulier celles pour les femmes et les jeunes enfants? Et qu'en est-il des activités liées à WASH et à l'assainissement? 2.1 Y a-t-il eu des pratiques promues que la communauté ne voulait pas pratiquer? Lesquelles? Pourquoi était-ce ainsi? 2.2 Y a-t-il eu des pratiques promues que la communauté voulait pratiquer mais qu’il était incapable de le faire? Lesquelles? Quelles étaient les raisons de cela? [Modérateur: Les activités peuvent inclure les éléments ci-dessous. S'il vous plaît demander ces éléments si nécessaire]: • Organisation de groupes d'apprentissage masculins pour sensibiliser et promouvoir les pratiques clés grâce à l'éducation par les pairs • Organisation de groupes d'apprentissage féminins pour sensibiliser et promouvoir les pratiques clés grâce à l'éducation par les pairs • Organisation de groupes de soins de premier plan et de mères pour promouvoir les pratiques clés en matière de nutrition et de planification familiale à travers l'éducation par les pairs et les visites à domicile. Fait également partie du système actif de dépistage et de référence pour la malnutrition au niveau communautaire • Démonstrations culinaires • Diffusion de messages ou de discussions à la radio, fourniture de croquis, de films et de clubs d'écoute sur le régime alimentaire des femmes enceintes et des enfants, de bonnes pratiques d'hygiène ou de surveillance de la santé des enfants • Les radios ont également été distribuées au début du projet. • Fourniture de rations alimentaires • Formation du personnel de santé, des promoteurs de la santé, des bénévoles de la santé et des membres de la communauté sur l'approche de 1 000 jours • Surveillance, promotion de la croissance et référence vers les centres de santé selon les besoins Aperçu général: • Concours sur WASH et sur la nutrition dans et à travers les villages FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 88 • Écoles des conjoints sur l'équité entre les sexes • Centres de développement de la petite enfance pour faciliter l'apprentissage, fournir de la nourriture quotidienne • Formation des enseignants sur les bonnes pratiques WASH et nutritionnelles pour les enfants, suivie d'une éducation à l'hygiène et à la nutrition dans les écoles • Désignation amicale des écoles et fourniture du matériel de nettoyage en WASH Lavage / Propreté • Installation de latrines à ciment (par exemple autour des écoles) • Construction de latrines à ciment et élaboration d'un plan de maintenance • Formation des maçons à la construction de latrines • Puits , puits neufs et rénovés et installation de pompes • Formation communautaire sur la réparation et la fourniture de boîtes à images • Analyse chimique de l'eau • Installation des outils de lavage des mains. Maintenant, nous allons discuter de différentes questions du projet. Pour chaque sujet, nous aimerions avoir votre avis sur les activités du projet qui vous ont aidées le plus et qui ont aidé de plus votre ménage, et pour quelles raisons. Efficacité - Impact du programme sur le bien-être du ménage 3. Pour chacun des thèmes suivants, quelles activités du projet qui vous ont aidé de plus ou qui ont aidé beaucoup votre ménage? Quelles sont les raisons? • Provision de ration alimentaire Combien de mois de nourriture pour l'ensemble de votre ménage qu’il a produit chaque année ? (C’est-à-dire, à quel pourcentage des besoins alimentaires annuels du ménage couvert par les récoltes propres du ménage?) • Gestion de l'eau • Préparation culinaire • Acquérir plus de connaissances sur la santé de vos enfants et prendre les mesures appropriées en cas de besoin • Obtenir plus de connaissances sur les méthodes de planification familiale et comment les utiliser • Changer l'accès des enfants et des femmes enceintes aux services de santé • Changer la qualité de la prestation des services de santé • Changements dans l'accès des ménages aux sources améliorées d'eau potable Avant le début du projet, votre ménage avait-il habituellement assez d'eau potable pour répondre à tous les besoins d'eau potable du ménage? Et maintenant? Y-a-t-il assez d'eau pour les animaux et les cultures / légumes? • Accès des ménages à une infrastructure sanitaire améliorée • Accès des ménages aux différents types d'aliments consommés par les ménages Votre ménage a-t-il amélioré l'accès à différents aliments par rapport à ce qu'il était avant le début du projet? Efficacité - Impact du programme sur le bien-être du ménage 4. Pour chacun des thèmes suivants, quelles activités du projet qui vous ont aidé de plus ou qui ont aidé de plus votre ménage? Quelles sont les raisons? • Provision de ration alimentaire Combien de mois de nourriture pour l'ensemble de votre ménage que le ménage produit chaque année? (c'est-à￾dire, à quel pourcentage des besoins alimentaires annuels du ménage couverts par les récoltes propres du ménage?) • Gestion de l'eau FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 89 • Préparation culinaire • Acquérir plus de connaissances sur la santé de vos enfants et prendre les mesures appropriées en cas de besoin • Obtenir plus de connaissances sur les méthodes de planification familiale et comment les utiliser • Changer l'accès des enfants et des femmes enceintes aux services de santé • Changer la qualité de la prestation des services de santé • Changements dans l'accès des ménages aux sources améliorées d'eau potable Avant le début du projet, votre ménage avait-il habituellement assez d'eau potable pour répondre à tous les besoins d'eau potable du ménage? Et maintenant? Qu'en est-il assez d'eau pour les animaux et les cultures / légumes? • Accès des ménages à une infrastructure sanitaire améliorée • Accès des ménages aux différents types d'aliments consommés par les ménages Votre ménage a-t-il amélioré l'accès à différents aliments par rapport à ce qu'il était avant le début du projet? Est-ce que vous faites la cuisine ou servez des aliments différents dans votre ménage? Pour les enfants de 6-23 mois? Pour les enfants de 2 à 5 ans? • Pratiques des ménages en matière d'allaitement maternel Pratiques d'allaitement pour les nourrissons de 0 à 5 mois? Pratiques d'allaitement maternel pour les enfants de 6- 23 mois? • Hygiène et assainissement Pour les ménages qui suivent la formation du projet sur l'hygiène et l'assainissement, voyez-vous des différences dans la santé des membres de votre ménage depuis que vous avez commencé à suivre ces pratiques? Quelles améliorations sanitaires voyez-vous? 4.1 Quelles activités les membres de la communauté n'ont-ils pas pratiquées? Pourquoi? Qu'est-ce qui les encouragerait à suivre ces pratiques? 4.2 Dans quelle mesure le coût de suivre ces pratiques a-t-il été un facteur parmi les personnes qui ne les ont pas suivies? 4.3 Certaines des activités promues ont-t-elles été en conflit avec les pratiques et les croyances culturelles? Si oui, lesquelles et exactement quels sont les conflits? Répartition des avantages 5. Certains ménages ont-ils bénéficié plus que d'autres? Pourquoi? 5.1 De quelles façons certaines personnes ont-elles bénéficié plus que d'autres? Quelles pratiques qui ont été impliquées dans cette répartition inégale des avantages? Explorer: Quels ménages qui ont moins bénéficié des activités de santé, nutrition et WASH dans votre communauté? Explorer: Pourquoi ces ménages ont-ils moins bénéficié? Explorer: Quelles suggestions avez-vous pour que ces ménages en profitent davantage? Explorer: Quels ménages ont bénéficié de plus des activités de santé, nutrition et WASH dans votre communauté? Explorer: Pourquoi ces ménages en ont-ils bénéficié de plus? 6. Pour chacun de ces sujets, y a-t-il des activités qui n'aident pas vraiment les ménages? Quelles sont ces activités? Quelles sont les raisons? Donnez-nous des exemples spécifiques. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 90 Les défis auxquels sont confrontés les bénéficiaires Maintenant, nous aimerions discuter des défis liés à ces sujets dans ce village. 7. En termes de connaissances sur le suivi de la santé de vos enfants et en prenant des mesures appropriées en cas de besoin, quels défis avez-vous rencontrés au début du projet? Explorer: ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autres auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 8. En ce qui concerne la connaissance des méthodes de planification familiale et comment les utiliser, quels défis avez-vous rencontrés au début du projet? Explorer: Ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autres auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 9. En termes d'accès aux services de santé pour les enfants et les femmes enceintes, quels défis avez-vous rencontrés au début du projet? Explorer: Ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autre auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 10. Quels défis avez-vous rencontrés en accédant à des sources améliorées d'eau potable au début du projet? Explorer: ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autre auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 11. En ce qui concerne l'accès à des installations sanitaires améliorées, quels sont les défis auxquels vous avez dû faire face au début du projet? Explorer: ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autre auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 12. En ce qui concerne l'accès des ménages aux différents types d'aliments consommés par les ménages, quels ont été les défis auxquels vous avez dû faire face au début du projet? Explorer: ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autre auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 13. En ce qui concerne l'allaitement, quels défis avez-vous rencontrés au début du projet? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 91 Explorer: ces défis persistent-ils? Explorer: Quels autres défis devraient être considérés pour l'avenir? Question: Comment pensez-vous que ces défis peuvent être surmontés? Que pouvez-vous faire pour les surmonter? Qui d'autre auraient besoin de faire quelque chose et que feraient-ils? 14. Y a-t-il des changements dans votre communauté concernant les attitudes des maris et au niveau de soutien pour la grossesse, l'alimentation, la nutrition et la planification familiale? Explorer: De quelle manière, et pourquoi? Sont-ils positifs ou négatifs? Explorer: Quelles activités ont eu le plus d'effet sur le changement d'attitude des hommes pour soutenir les femmes dans leurs activités agricoles ou autres activités de moyens de subsistance et pourquoi? Explorer: Y a-t-il d'autres contraintes auxquelles les femmes sont confrontées qui les empêchent d'avoir plus de soutien des hommes dans cette communauté? Peux-tu donner quelques exemples? 14.1 Que pourriez-vous faire pour augmenter le niveau de soutien de vos maris pour la grossesse, l'alimentation, la nutrition et la planification familiale? Qu'est-ce qui pourrait être fait par d'autres pour augmenter ce soutien? Quelles autres personnes qui peuvent donner le soutien? Qualité de service 15. Qu'est-ce que le projet aurait pu faire d'autre pour mieux travailler avec les membres de la communauté pour aider à améliorer la santé, la nutrition, l'hygiène et l'assainissement? 15.1 Le projet a-t-il fait quelque chose dans sa promotion de l'amélioration de la santé, de la nutrition, de l'hygiène et de l'assainissement qui va à l'encontre des croyances ou des pratiques culturelles de votre communauté? Quelles sont les activités spécifiques du projet à cet égard? Comment ces problèmes ont-ils pu être évités tout en permettant au projet de promouvoir des améliorations en matière de santé, de nutrition, d'hygiène et d'assainissement? Durabilité: Santé et nutrition 16. Les membres de la communauté pratiquent-ils encore des méthodes en rapport avec la santé et la nutrition de la mère et de l’enfant qu'ils reçoivent des formations du projet? [LISTE DES LIEUX] Explorer: Qu'est-ce qui encouragerait les membres de la communauté à continuer à utiliser ces méthodes dans l'avenir? Question: Pensez-vous que d'autres membres de la communauté, ceux qui n'ont pas bénéficié directement de ces activités du projet, ont également appris à utiliser ces méthodes? Comment les ont-ils appris? L'une de ces méthodes était-elle déjà mise en pratique par les membres de vos communautés avant que le projet ne commence à les promouvoir? Lesquels? Dans quelle mesure étaient-ils déjà pratiqués? Explorer: Ces méthodes se sont-elles répandues dans d'autres communautés en dehors de la zone du projet? Sonder: [SI OUI] Comment est-ce arrivé? 17. Avez-vous payé quelque chose pour les produits ou services de nutrition ou de santé fournis par le projet? Sonder: [Si OUI] Lesquels? Question: Pourquoi avez-vous décidé de payer pour ces services ou produits? Explorer: Continuerez-vous à payer pour ces services ou produits à l'avenir? Sonder: [SI NON] Pourquoi pas? [VOIR LES EXEMPLES CORRECTES] Explorer: Seriez-vous prêt à payer un peu plus pour certains de ces produits / services? [Si oui, lesquels?) FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 92 Explorer: Y a-t-il autre chose qui vous ferait payer pour l'un de ces produits et / ou services? Durabilité: WASH 18. Les membres de la communauté pratiquent-ils encore les méthodes d'assainissement qu'ils reçoivent sur les formations du projet? [LISTE DES LIEUX] Explorer: Qu'est-ce qui encouragerait les membres de la communauté à continuer à utiliser ces méthodes à l'avenir? Question: Pensez-vous que d'autres personnes non bifocales dans la communauté ont également appris à utiliser ces méthodes? Comment les ont-ils appris? Explorer: Ces méthodes se sont-elles répandues dans d'autres communautés en dehors de la zone du projet? Sonder: [SI OUI] Comment est-ce arrivé? 19. Avez-vous payé pour les produits ou services d'assainissement fournis par le projet? Sonder: [Si OUI] Lesquels? Question: Pourquoi avez-vous décidé de payer pour ces services ou produits? Explorer: Continuerez-vous à payer pour ces services ou produits à l'avenir? Sonder: [SI NON] Pourquoi pas? [VOIR LES EXEMPLES CORRECTES] Explorer: Seriez-vous prêt à payer un peu plus pour certains de ces produits / services? [Si oui, lesquels?) Explorer: Y a-t-il autre chose qui vous ferait payer pour l'un de ces produits et / ou services? Questions basées sur les résultats préliminaires de l’enquête quantitative Diversité alimentaire des ménages et des femmes: Il n'y a eu qu'une augmentation marginale pour les deux évaluations (l’évaluation de base et l’évaluation finale). 20. Quels types de formations et de changement de comportements sur la nutrition et l'alimentation les bénéficiaires ont-ils reçus? Explore : Le message a-t-il été compris / perçu d’une façon efficace? Explore : De quelles façons les ménages et les femmes ont-ils augmenté les différents types d'aliments qu'ils mangent? Explore : À quels défis sont-ils confrontés pour accéder aux différents types d'aliments? Explore : Quelles sont les autres raisons qui empêchent les ménages d'incorporer différents types d'aliments nutritifs dans leurs repas (y compris des raisons culturelles)? Prévalence des ménages souffrant de faim modérée à la faim sévère: Les résultats quantitatifs préliminaires montrent une très forte baisse de la situation. Est-ce soutenu par des données qualitatives? 21. De quelle manière les ménages décrivent-ils les changements dans leur production alimentaire et leur sécurité alimentaire? Explore : De quelle manière leur accès à la nourriture a-t-il changé au cours de l'année et surtout pendant la période de soudure? Explore : Quelles sont les raisons de ces changements? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 93 Diète minimum acceptable (DMA) pour les enfants de 6-23 mois (notez que le DMA est déterminé par un nombre adéquat de repas par jour (fréquence des repas) et par une diversité alimentaire adéquate (différents types d'aliments nutritifs): Les résultats quantitatifs montrent peu de changement à ce sujet, et en particulier pour les enfants allaités de 6 à 8 mois. Il y avait aussi peu de changement dans le pourcentage d'enfants recevant une fréquence de repas minimum acceptable, en particulier pour les enfants allaités. En outre, l'utilisation de fruits et de légumes riches en vitamine A n'a pas beaucoup changé, bien que la sensibilisation sur ce point ait été au centre du projet. 22. Quels sont les défis auxquels les femmes sont confrontées pour allaiter leurs enfants tout au long de la journée? 23. Quels sont les défis auxquels les ménages sont confrontés pour obtenir ou utiliser des aliments riches en vitamine A? Il y a des défis pour l'augmentation des différents types d'aliments utilisés par les ménages, en général (ceci est également lié à la diversité alimentaire ci-dessus). 24. Quelles sont les autres raisons qui expliquent que la DMA n'a pas beaucoup augmenté ? (p. Ex., Quels types de formation les femmes ont-elles reçu à ce sujet?) Explore : Le message a-t-il été compréhensible? Surtout dans les communautés bénéficiaires du projet ViM? Pourcentage d'enfants de 0-23 mois avec une carte de suivi de la croissance montrant au moins une pesée au cours des 2 derniers mois: Ceci a diminué pendant la durée du projet, mais le pourcentage de mères avec enfants de 0-23 mois ayant eu 4 visites prénatales et plus a augmenté, tout comme le pourcentage d'enfants complètement vaccinés. Cela suggère que les enfants reçoivent des visites de routine de la clinique de santé. 25. Jusqu'à quel âge les femmes continuent-elles à emmener leurs enfants dans des centres de santé pour des examens de contrôle après la naissance? Explore : Quels sont les obstacles à cela? Explore : Y a-t-il d'autres explications pour (1) ne pas effectuer une pesée régulière; ou (2) ne pas avoir la carte de croissance et de surveillance ou l'avoir mise à jour? Indicateurs d’hygiène et assainissement: Les résultats quantitatifs montrent qu’il y a eu des améliorations modérées, mais le pourcentage de ménages avec de l'eau et du savon / produit de nettoyage local (comme les cendres) dans un endroit de lavage des mains ou avec un accès à une installation sanitaire améliorée est faible. 26. Quels sont les obstacles pour les ménages à installer et / ou utiliser un endroit de lavage des mains fonctionnel à leur domicile? Question de clôture Y a-t-il quelque chose que vous aimeriez dire à propos du projet ViM dont nous n'avons pas déjà parlé? Je vous remercie. Avez-vous des questions pour moi? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 94 Evaluation Finale du projet ViM: PROTOCOLE POUR L’INTERVIEW DES INFORMATEURS CLES (Autorités Régionales et Communales; Agents du projet et relais) Introduction et Consentement Pour débuter, l’interviewer doit lire le scripte de consentement qui suit: Bonjour et merci d’avoir accepté de me parler. Je m’appelle (nom d’intervieweur/intervieweuse) ____ et voici mon collègue ___ qui prendra des notes pendant la conversation et _____ qui lui servira d’interprète. Nous travaillons pour CRDA, en collaboration avec NORC à l’Université de Chicago, basé aux Etats Unis. Nous sommes chargés de mener une étude pour évaluer les impacts du projet ViM. Dans le cadre de cette étude, nous voudrions parler avec vous sur vos expériences sur ce projet et ses activités dans votre communauté. La discussion dura au maximum 1 heure. L’objectif de cette discussion est de vous écouter et de capturer vos expériences des activités liées du projet ViM, ainsi que de votre perception des changements qui en ont découlés. Notez qu’il n’y a pas de bonnes ou mauvaises réponses. Sentez-vous libre de partager votre expérience et réactions, positives ou négatives, et d’être précis. Si c’est possible, donnez des exemples pour illustrer ce que vous dites. Notre rôle ici est de poser des questions et d’écouter votre avis et expériences. Nous allons enregistrer cette discussion afin de noter fidèlement le contenu de la conversation, et de ne rien oublier de tout ce qui a été dit. Vos identités ne seront pas divulguées. Les informations qui vont être collectées à travers cette discussion seront conserver en sécurité et sont considérées comme confidentielles, elles ne seront partagées avec USAID que de façon anonyme. Votre participation est entièrement libre et vous pouvez choisir de ne pas répondre à une question ou d’interrompre votre participation à tout moment si vous trouvez les discussions gênantes ou vous vous sentez mal à l’aise. Néanmoins, votre contribution est très importante pour aider l’USAID à rendre leurs programmes de nutrition et sécurité alimentaire plus efficace et mieux adapté aux besoins de la population de Burkina Faso. Si vous avez des questions sur l’étude, vous pouvez nous les poser maintenant, ou contacter Mr. Karim Pare par téléphone: [numero de téléphone]. Etre-vous d’accord de participer à la discussion d’aujourd’hui? OUI NON INFORMATION SUR L’INTERVIEW Désignation de l’Activité ___________________ Partenaire de mise en Œuvre ___________________ Facilitateur _______________________________ Enregistreur _______________________________ Nom de l’interviewé ____________________________ Employeur ou structure affilié ___________________ Titre du Poste _________________________ Date ________________________________ Heure de début d’interview ____________ Heure de fin d’interview _____________ FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 95 Questions Introductives 1. SVP, pourriez-vous brièvement présenter votre Organisation? 2. Pourriez-vous donner un aperçu de votre fonction dans le cadre du projet ViM ? o Quand avez-vous commencé à travailler sur le projet ViM? 3. Aviez-vous participé ou contribué de quelque façon dans la conception du projet? En quel manier? Ciblage et répartition des avantages pour les bénéficiaires du Projet 4. Quels sont les groupes qui sont principalement ciblés par les activités du projet, dans les communautés où ViM est mis en œuvre ? o Pensez-vous que les groupes ciblées sont ceux qui conduisent à un meilleur impact du projet ? o Y aurait-il d’autres groupes qui ne sont pas touchés par le projet mais qui aurait amélioré l’impact actuel du projet s’ils étaient bénéficiaires? Pourquoi ? Efficacité des interventions 5. Parmi les différentes activités mises en œuvre par le projet ViM, pensez￾vous que certaines était particulièrement efficace pour améliorer l’agriculture, la nutrition, la sante, et les moyens de subsistance? Si oui, lesquelles ? o Quelles approches considérez-vous comme les plus efficaces, et pourquoi ? o A votre avis, y a-t-il eu des activités qui ont été inefficace ou qui ont eu moins d’effet? Si oui, lesquelles ? Quels en sont les raisons ? o D’après vous, quelles sont les facteurs ou les contraintes qui ont contribué à une faible efficacité ou performance de ces activités ? 6. Avez-vous identifié des leçons particulières à tirées et ou découvert des effets inattendus liés aux actions / activités du ViM? Si oui, lesquelles? Contribution à l’atteinte des objectifs du projet 7. Selon vous, y a-t-il eu des changements sur le niveau de malnutrition et l’état de santé général parmi : o Les groupes le plus vulnérables dans votre communauté et d’autres que vous connaissez qui ont bénéficié des interventions de ViM o La population de ces communautés plus généralement ? Possibilités d’amélioration 8. Y aurait-il des défis ou contraintes spécifiques qui limitent le potentiel des activités mises en œuvre dans le cadre du projet ViM à produire des meilleurs résultats ? Si oui, lesquelles ? 9. Avez-vous des recommandations pour améliorer la mise en œuvre des activités du projet ViM auxquelles vous avez pris part ou que vous avez contribué à réaliser ? Si oui, lesquelles ? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 96 Pérennité des acquis du projet 10. Selon vous, est-ce-que les bénéficiaires ont reçu les formations et ressources nécessaires et ont acquis des connaissances suffisantes pour pérenniser certaines ou la totalité des pratiques par eux-mêmes? Pourquoi? o [Si oui] Pensez-vous que les bénéficiaires sont en mesure de partager certaines de ces pratiques avec d’autres qui n’ont pas participés au projet? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas? o [Si non] Pourquoi pas? Quelles sont les principales raisons qui empêchent les bénéficiaires de maintenir durablement ces pratiques ? Y a-t-il des exceptions selon vous ? 11. Pensez-vous que les organisations qui mettent en œuvre les activités du projet ViM sont motivées et intéressées à continuer d’offrir certaines ou la totalité de ces activités, une fois le projet terminée ? o Y a-t-il des exceptions notables ? o [Si non] Quelles sont les principaux obstacles qui les en empêchent ? 12. Pensez-vous que les bénéficiaires vont continuer à demander certains ou la totalité des services, le cas échéant ? Pensez-vous qu’ils soient assez intéressés et à même de supporter en partie les couts associés à ces services ? o [Si non] Quelles sont les principaux obstacles qui les en empêchent ? 13. Selon vous, est-ce-que certaines ou la totalité des activités pourraient être continuées indépendamment du financement de USAID? Si ou, lesquelles et de quel manière ? o Y a-t-il des exceptions à votre réponse ? Pourquoi considérez-vous ces activités comme des exceptions? 14. Quels sont les éléments de soutient clés (p. ex., des fonds, un soutien en nature, rendre les services payants, la formation et le renforcement des capacités, ou la promotion) qui seraient nécessaires pour que votre organisation de continuer d'offrir certaines des services de ViM ? 15. Que considérez-vous être les défis les plus important pour que les activités de ViM soient pérennes? Question de clôture 16. Auriez-vous d’autres commentaires que vous voudriez bien ajoutés? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 97 VIII. ANONYMIZED KII AND GD LIST Table 24: Anonymized List of KIIs Number Date of Interview Respondent’s Position/Title Location 1 January 27, 2018 Facilitator/Lead Mother Tibtenga 2 January 27, 2018 ASBC Delga 3 January 27, 2018 ASBC Konean 4 January 27, 2018 ASC Facilitator Basma 5 January 26, 2018 CLTS Committee Namissigma 6 January 27, 2018 CLTS Sanrgho Sanrgho 7 January 27, 2018 Facilitator/Lead Mother Tibi Yarce 8 January 26, 2018 President of CVD Basma 9 January 26, 2018 President of CVD Konean 10 January 26, 2018 President of CVD Basarlgho 11 January 27, 2018 Facilitator/Lead Mother Karka 12 January 26, 2018 Lead Mother Barsalogo 13 January 26, 2018 Facilitator for Health/Nutrition Nagraogo Foulcé 14 January 27, 2018 Poultry vaccinator Pissila 15 January 27, 2018 ASBC Silmiougou 16 January 27, 2018 Poultry vaccinator Sangro 17 January 27, 2018 President of the CLTS committee Silmiougou 18 January 31, 2018 Head of Animal Production Kaya 19 January 30, 2018 Head of Nutrition (CUS) Barsalogho 20 January 31, 2018 Government employee Barsalogho 21 February 1, 2018 Head of Marketing Pissila 22 February 1, 2018 Head of Human Resources and Coordinator of SILC Kaya 23 February 1, 2018 Member of Union of Onion Producers Pissila 24 February 1, 2018 Head of Livestock Technical Support Pissila 25 February 5, 2018 Member of Union of Onion Producers Kaya 26 February 2, 2018 Member of Union of Onion Producers Barsalogho 27 February 3, 2018 Member of Union of Onion Producers Kaya 28 February 2, 2018 Member of Union of Onion Producers Namissiguima 29 February 2, 2018 Member of Union of Onion Producers Kaya 30 February 5, 2018 Member of Animal Resources Department Kaya 31 February 2, 2018 Member of Veterinary Services Department Barsalogho 32 February 6, 2018 Member of Land Administration and Decentralization Department Kaya 33 February 5, 2018 Member of the Ministry of Women, National Solidarity, and the Family Kaya 34 February 6, 2018 Member of the Animal Resources Department Kaya 35 February 6, 2018 Member of the Animal Resources Department Kaya 36 February 6, 2018 Member of the Ministry of the Environment, the Green Economy, and Climate Change (MEEVCC) Kaya FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 98 Table 25: Anonymized List of GDs Number Date of Discussion Village Name Commune Name Number of Male Participants Number of Female Participants 1 January 20, 2018 Barsalogho Barsalogho 0 10 2 January 20, 2018 Barsalogho Barsalogho 9 0 3 January 22, 2018 Basma Barsalogho 0 8 4 January 2018 Basma Barsalogho 11 0 5 January 21, 2018 Delga Kaya 0 11 6 January 21, 2018 Delga Kaya 0 12 7 January 20, 2018 Firka Pissila 9 0 8 January 22, 2018 Gabou Barsalogho 0 12 9 January 20, 2018 Gabou Barsalogho 13 0 10 January 20, 2018 Karka Pissila 0 11 11 January 20, 2018 Karka Pissila 0 12 12 January 20, 2018 Kondibito Barsalogho 0 9 13 January 22, 2018 Kondibito Barsalogho 8 0 14 January 20, 2018 Konean Kaya 0 10 15 January 20, 2018 Konean Kaya 9 0 16 January 21, 2018 Nagraogo Foulce Barsalogho 0 10 17 January 21, 2018 Nagraogo Foulce Barsalogho 8 0 18 January 21, 2018 Namissiguima Namissiguima 0 8 19 January 21, 2018 Namissiguima Namissiguima 9 0 20 January 19, 2018 Pissila Pissila 0 23 21 January 22, 2018 Pissila Pissila 9 0 22 January 21, 2018 Sangro Kaya 0 10 23 January 21, 2018 Sangro Kaya 0 9 24 January 22, 2018 Silmiougou Kaya 0 11 25 January 22, 2018 Silmiougou Kaya 0 8 26 January 22, 2018 Tamsin Namissiguima 0 11 27 January 22, 2018 Tamsin Namissiguima 11 0 28 January 20, 2018 Tibi-Yarce Pissila 0 13 29 January 20, 2018 Tibi-Yarce Pissila 13 0 30 January 22, 2018 Tibi-Tenga Pissila 0 9 31 January 22, 2018 Tibi-Tenga Pissila 9 0 GD Participants Totals: 118 207 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 99 IX. QUANTITATIVE INSTRUMENT Burkina Faso Victoire sur la Malnutrition (ViM) Survey Questionnaire Title II Food Security Development Project (2011-2017) ENDLINE QUANTITATIVE SURVEY 2017 A. IDENTIFICATION. No. Question Response Skips A1 Date of interview |__|__|/|__|__| DD / MM A2 Team Code A......................................... 1 B......................................... 2 C ........................................3 |__| D ........................................ 4 E......................................... 5 F......................................... 6 G ........................................ 7 H ........................................ 8 I .......................................... 9 J ....................................... 10 A3 Enumerator pair Code |__| A4 Commune Barsalogho........................1 Kaya................................. 2 |__| Namissiguima ...................3 Pissila................................4 A5 Village Barsalogho BASMA ..............................................1 BARSALOGHO..................................2 BIGUELLE .........................................3 BOLLE ...............................................4 FOUBE...............................................5 GABOU ..............................................6 GUIENDBILA .....................................7 KAMSE-PEULH .................................8 KONDIBITO .......................................9 KORKO-PEULH...............................10 NAGRAOGO-FOULBE....................11 Skip if A4≠1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 100 SIDIGA.............................................12 SOMYALKA .....................................13 TATOUKOU.....................................14 YANTENGA .....................................15 TOECE.............................................16 Kaya AROUEM .........................................17 BASNERE........................................18 DAHISMA.........................................19 DELGA.............................................20 FANKA.............................................21 GAH .................................................22 KALAMBAOGO................................23 KONEAN..........................................24 LEGOURE .......................................25 OUALGA..........................................26 SANRGO .........................................27 SILMIOUGOU..................................28 ZOURA ............................................29 TIBTENGA.......................................30 Skip if A4≠2 Namissiguima NAMISSIGUIMA ..............................31 TAMSIN ..................................32 Skip if A4≠3 Pissila DIBILOU...........................................33 DOUAGA .........................................34 FIRKA ..............................................35 GUIBA..............................................36 ISSAOGO ........................................37 KARKA.............................................38 KOMSILGA ......................................39 NIANDIN ..........................................40 NOAKA ............................................41 OUINTOKOULGA............................42 PISSILA ...........................................43 POULALLE ......................................44 RIMKILGA........................................45 ROUMBA-MOSSI ............................46 SOLOMNORE..................................47 TAMBDOGO....................................48 TIBI-YARCE.....................................49 TOEGHIN.........................................50 Skip if A4≠4 A6 Household Number |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| A6a Phone number of the household (recorded any phone number whose someone can use to contact the household) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 101 A7 Is this the first contact with the household or are you returning to this household to complete a previous interview? First contact ...................... 1 Returning to complete....................... 2 A8 If returning to complete, which section(s) of the questionnaire do you need to complete? SELECT ALL THE APPLY A Identification ................... 1 B Household roster ............ 2 C Sanitation and hygiene... 3 D Assets and savings ........ 4 M Training…………………..5 E Agriculture ...................... 6 F Household food security 7 G-J Women’s questionnaire8 K-L Child questionnaire ..... 9 Skip if A7 = 1 If A8≠1, skip to beginning of selected section A9 Hello. My name is __________ and I work for CRDA, a survey research organization in Ouagadougou. We are working with NORC at the University of Chicago – a non-profit research institution based in the United States. We are conducting an endline survey for the Victoire sur la Malnutrition (ViM) project implemented by ACDI/VOCA and their partners SNV, Save the Children, ATAD in Kaya region, APIL in Pissila region, and AZND in Bassalogho and Namissiguima regions. The information we collect will be used for evaluating the project. You have been selected at random to participate in this survey. Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose not to participate. You are free to not answer any questions for any reason or to stop the interview at any time. Your responses will be kept confidential and we assure you that your individual responses will not be disclosed to anyone outside of the survey staff. There are not right or wrong answers. We will be grateful if you can provide us with true information. The survey will take approximately 120 minutes. We will be asking you questions about members of your household, agricultural practices, food security, water, sanitation and hygiene as well as maternal and child health. We will ask to measure and weigh the children in the household under the age of 5. YES..................................................1 NO...................................... 2 If A9 = 2, Skip to N5 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 102 If you have any questions about the survey you may contact Karim Pare at 072160066 or 078749808 at CRDA. Do you have any questions for me about the survey? Do you agree to participate in the survey? EVERY QUESTION AFTER THIS POINT SHOULD INCLUDE REFUSE AND DON’T KNOW AS POSSIBLE RESPONSES. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 103 B. HOUSEHOLD ROSTER. ASK OF THE HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD OR ANOTHER RESPONSIBLE ADULT MEMBER OF THE HOUSEHOLD SAY TO RESPONDENT “Please tell me the name and sex of each person who lives here, starting with the head of the household. Let me tell you a little bit about what we mean by 'household.' For our purposes today, members of a household are those that live together and eat from the "same pot." Each person contributes to and benefits from the household. It should include anyone who has lived in your house for 6 of the last 12 months, but it does not include anyone who lives here but eats separately.” PUT AT THE TOP OF THE LIST THE HOUSEHOLD HEAD. THEN LIST THE FIRST SPOUSE, HER CHILDREN FROM OLDEST TO YOUNGEST. THEN SI THE HEAD IS POLYGAMOUS, LIST THE NAMES OF THE OTHER HOUSEHOD MEMBES. THEN ASK: “Does anyone else live here even if they are not at home now? These may include children in school or household members at work.” IF YES, COMPLETE THE LISTING. THEN, COLLECT THE REMAINING COLUMNS OF INFORMATION FOR EACH MEMBER, ONE PERSON AT A TIME. How many members live in the households? _________________ COLLECT ALL NAMES FIRST, THEN LOOP QUESTIONS 2-10 FOR EACH NAME LISTED Line No (1) Name (2) [NAME]’s relationship to head of HH (3) [NAME]’s sex (4) Please tell me how old [NAME] is. How old was [NAME] on his/her last birthday? IF LESS THAN ONE YEAR, ENTER “0”. ONLY SELECT DK IF AGE > 49 YEARS. IF 100+ YEARS, USE “99.” (4a) What is the highest level of education that [NAME] completed? (6) Eligible for Module E Is [NAME] a farmer? (7) Eligibility for Module F Was [NAME] in charge of the household’s food preparation yesterday? (10) Eligibility for Module K-M FOR EACH CHILD UNDER 5 YEARS OF AGE: Who is the primary caregiver of [NAME]? LIST ALL NAMES 1 ______ _ |__| |__| SELECT AGE RANGE AND THEN ENTER NUMBER OF YEARS |__| |__| |__| |__| … ______ _ |__| |__| |__| |__| |__| |__| 20 ______ _ |__| |__| |__| |__| |__| |__| FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 104 Column 2: Relationship to Head of HH 1 = Spouse 2 = Child 3 = Grandchild 4 = Parent/grandparent 5 = Sibling (including in-law) 6 = Cousin 7 = Nephew/niece 8 = Aunt/uncle 9 = Other Column 3: Sex 1 = Male 2 = Female Column 4: Age 1 = 0-5 years old 2 = 6-14 years old 3 = 15-49 years old 4 = 50 years old or older Column 4a: Education 1 = None (No formal schooling) 2 = Primary 3 = Secondary 4 = Greater than secondary 5 = Other Column 6, 7, 8, 9: 1 = Yes 2 = No Next Screen Page: NOTE RESPONDENT NAMES ON FIELD CONTROL SHEET FOR EACH SECTION C. Sanitation and Hygiene: [INSERT NAME FROM B1, ROW 1] or another responsible adult member of the household D. Assets: [INSERT NAME FROM B1, ROW 1] or another responsible adult member of the household M. Training participation and perception of changes: Choose main farmer from [INSERT NAME(S) FROM B6 ON SEPARATE LINES] E. Agriculture: [INSERT NAME(S) FROM B6 ON SEPARATE LINES] F. Household food security: Choose one from [INSERT NAME(S) FROM B6 ON SEPARATE LINES] G, H, I, J. Women’s dietary diversity, group participation and literacy, decision-making, and antenatal care: [INSERT NAME(S) FROM B8 ON SEPARATE LINES] K, L. Child anthropometrics and feeding practices: Caregiver(s) of [INSERT NAME(S) FROM B9 ON SEPARATE LINES] FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 105 C. SANITATION AND HYGIENE ASK OF THE HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD OR ANOTHER RESPONSIBLE ADULT MEMBER OF THE HOUSEHOLD No. Question Response SKIPS C1 ASK TO THE HOUSEHOLD HEAD OR ANOTHER RESPONSIBLE ADULT MEMBER OF THE HOUSEHOLD WHO KNOWS THE SANITATION AND HYGIENE HABITS OF THE HOUSEHOLD. WHO IS THE RESPONDENT? LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER NO MEMBER AVAILABLE…………..0 IF 0, SKIP TO SECTION D C2a HAS THE RESPONDENT FOR THIS SECTION ALREADY BEEN INTERVIEWED FOR A PREVIOUS SECTION? YES ................................................... 1 NO..................................................... 2 If yes, skip to C3 C2b Hello. My name is __________ and I work for CRDA, a survey research organization in Ouagadougou. We are working with NORC at the University of Chicago – a non-profit research institution based in the United States. We are conducting an endline survey for the Victoire sur la Malnutrition (ViM) project implemented by ACDI/VOCA and their partners SNV, Save the Children, ATAD in Kaya region, APIL in Pissila region, and AZND in Bassalogho and Namissiguima regions.. The information we collect will be used for evaluating the project. You have been selected at random to participate in this survey. Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose not to participate. You are free to not answer any questions for any reason or to stop the interview at any time. Your responses will be kept confidential and we assure you that your individual responses will not be disclosed to anyone outside of the survey staff. There are not right or wrong answers. We will be grateful if you can provide us with true information. Do you agree to participate in the survey? YES ................................................... 1 NO..................................................... 2 If no, return to C1 C3 What kind of toilet facility do members of your household usually use? NO FACILITY/BUSH/FIELD.............. 1 FLUSH OR POUR/FLUSH TOILET .. 2 If NO FACILITY FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 106 VENTILATED IMPROVED PIT LATRINE .......................................................... 3 PIT LATRINE WITH SLAB................ 4 TRADITIONAL PIT LATRINE............ 5 PIT LATRINE WITH NO SLAB/OPEN PIT..................................................... 6 COMPOSTING TOILET .................... 7 OTHER (SPECIFY)_____________. 8 |__| (1), skip to C5 C3A Where is the toilet water channeled? PIPELIINE SYSTEM……………….1 SEPTIC TANK……………………...2 PIT LATRINE ………………………3 SOMEWHERE ELSE……………..4 SKIP IF C3≠2 C4 Do you share this facility with other households? YES ................................................... 1 NO, FACILITY ONLY USED BY MY HOUSEHOLD ............................................................ C5 Are there any children under 2 years of age (0–23 months) that live in this household? YES ................................................... 1 NO..................................................... 2 C6 Can you show me where members of your household most often wash their hands? ASK TO SEE AND OBSERVE. RECORD ONLY ONE HAND WASHING PLACE. THIS IS THE HAND WASHING PLACE THAT IS USED MOST OFTEN BY THE RESPONDENT OR HOUSEHOLD. Inside/within 10 paces of the toilet facility .......................................................... 1 Inside/within 10 paces of the kitchen/cooking place........................ 2 Elsewhere in home or yard ............... 3 Outside yard ...................................... 4 No specific place ............................... 5 No permission to see ........................ 6 |__| IF 5 OR 6, SKIP TO C10 C7 OBSERVE: Is water present at the specific place for hand washing? IF THERE IS A TAP OR PUMP PRESENT AT THE SPECIFIC PLACE FOR HAND WASHING, OPEN THE TAP OR OPERATE THE PUMP TO SEE IF WATER IS COMING OUT. IF THERE IS A BUCKET, BASIN, OR OTHER TYPE OF WATER CONTAINER, EXAMINE IT TO SEE WHETHER WATER IS PRESENT IN THE CONTAINER. YES (WATER IS AVAILABLE).......... 1 NO (WATER IS NOT AVAILABLE)... 2 C8 OBSERVE: Is soap or detergent present at the specific place for hand washing? RECORD OBSERVATION. CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY. None.................................................. 1 Bar soap............................................ 2 Detergent (powder/liquid/paste)........ 3 Liquid soap (including shampoo) ...... 4 |__| Multiple selection C9 OBSERVE: Is locally used cleansing agent present at the specific place for hand washing? RECORD OBSERVATION. CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY. None.................................................. 1 Ash .................................................... 2 Mud/sand........................................... 3 Other (specify)__________............... 4 |__| Multiple selection FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 107 C10 Do you have any soap in your household for washing hands? YES ................................................... 1 NO..................................................... 2 Avoid if C8≠1 and C9≠1, skip to section D IF C10=2, SKIP TO SECTION D C11 Can you please show it to me? (RECORD OBSERVATION AND CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY) Not able to show ............................... 1 Bar soap............................................ 2 Detergent (powder/liquid/paste)........ 3 Liquid soap (including shampoo) ...... 4 |__| C12 Do you have any ash or sand or mud in your household for washing hands? YES ................................................... 1 NO..................................................... 2 IF C12=2, SKIP TO SECTION D C13 Can you please show it to me? (RECORD OBSERVATION AND CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY) Not able to show ............................... 1 Ash .................................................... 2 Mud/sand........................................... 3 |__| End of Module D. ASSETS ASK OF THE HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD OR ANOTHER RESPONSIBLE ADULT MEMBER OF THE HOUSEHOLD No. Question Response Skips D1 ASK TO THE HOUSEHOLD HEAD OR ANOTHER RESPONSIBLE ADULT MEMBER OF THE HOUSEHOLD WHO KNOWS THE ASSETS OF THE HOUSEHOLD. WHO IS THE RESPONDENT? LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER NO MEMBER AVAILABLE…………..0 IF 0, SKIP TO SECTION M D2a HAS THE RESPONDENT FOR THIS SECTION ALREADY BEEN INTERVIEWED FOR A PREVIOUS SECTION? YES ................................................... 1 NO..................................................... 2 If yes, skip to D3a D2b Hello. My name is __________ and I work for CRDA, a survey research organization in Ouagadougou. We are working with NORC at the University of Chicago – a non-profit research institution based in the United States. We are conducting an endline survey for the Victoire sur la Malnutrition (ViM) project implemented by ACDI/VOCA and their partners SNV, Save the Children, ATAD in Kaya region, APIL in Pissila region, and AZND in Bassalogho and YES ................................................... 1 NO..................................................... 2 If no, return to D1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 108 Namissiguima regions.. The information we collect will be used for evaluating the project. You have been selected at random to participate in this survey. Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose not to participate. You are free to not answer any questions for any reason or to stop the interview at any time. Your responses will be kept confidential and we assure you that your individual responses will not be disclosed to anyone outside of the survey staff. There are not right or wrong answers. We will be grateful if you can provide us with true information. Do you agree to participate in the survey? Now I’m going to ask you about some of the items you own in your house. If none owned, enter “0” LOOP THROUGH EACH ITEM; SKIP VALUE QUESTION IF # CURRENTLY OWNED = 0 OR REFUSE/DK # currently owned Estimated value if all units owned sold today (CFA) Domestic Assets D3a Sleeping mats |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3b Beds |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3c Mosquito nets |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3d Stove |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3e Watches |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3f Radio |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3g Television |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3h Chairs |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3i Mobile Phone |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3j Laptop/desk computer |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3k Solar Plates |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3l Gas or electric cooker |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3m Refrigerator |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D3n Other domestic equipments |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| Transportation assets FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 109 D4a Car/truck |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D4b Motorcycle |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D4c Bicycle |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| Productive assets D5a Houe |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5b Charrue / Sarcleur / Butteur |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5c Tractor |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5d Shovel |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5e Wheelbarrow |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5f Pickaxe |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5g “SHiner” |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5h Watering can |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5i Carts |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5j Motorized pump |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5k Manual pump |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5l Pulverizer |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5m Scythe |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5n Straw cutter |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5o Bundling machine |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5p Drinking Trough |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5q Food trough |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5r Traction - Cattle |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5s Traction - Donkey |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5t Traction - Horse |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5u Traction - Camel |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5v Hatchery |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5w Brooder |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5x Multi-purpose shredder |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5y Metallic box |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5z Wire mesh |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5aa Sloped Triangle |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5bb Mold for boots |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| D5cc Cage for transporting poultry |__| |__| |__|__|__|__|__|__| FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 110 SECTION M: TRAINING PARTICIPATION AND PERCEPTION OF CHANGES ASK THE PRIMARY FARMER IN HOUSEHOLD No. Question Response Skips M0a ASK TO THE PRIMARY FARMER OF THE HOUSEHOLD, THE MEMBER WITH THE LARGEST CROP SURFACE OF LAND IN THE LAST AGRICULTURAL SEASON. WHO IS THE RESPONDENT? LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER NO MEMBER AVAILABLE…………..0 IF 0, SKIP TO SECTION E M0b HAS THE RESPONDENT FOR THIS SECTION ALREADY BEEN INTERVIEWED FOR A PREVIOUS SECTION? YES ................................................... 1 NO ..................................................... 2 If yes, skip to M1 M0c Hello. My name is __________ and I work for CRDA, a survey research organization in Ouagadougou. We are working with NORC at the University of Chicago – a non-profit research institution based in the United States. We are conducting an endline survey for the Victoire sur la Malnutrition (ViM) project implemented by ACDI/VOCA and their partners SNV, Save the Children, ATAD in Kaya region, APIL in Pissila region, and AZND in Bassalogho and Namissiguima regions.. The information we collect will be used for evaluating the project. You have been selected at random to participate in this survey. Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose not to participate. You are free to not answer any questions for any reason or to stop the interview at any time. Your responses will be kept confidential and we assure you that your individual responses will not be disclosed to anyone outside of the survey staff. There are not right or wrong answers. We will be grateful if you can provide us with true information. Do you agree to participate in the survey? YES ................................................... 1 NO ..................................................... 2 If no, return to CM0a FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 111 I want to ask about trainings that you or another household member may have attended. TOPIC M1.1 During the past five years (2012-2017) did any member of your household participate in [TOPIC]? 1 YES 2 NO (If NO, skip to next topic) M1.2 How many trainings did members of your household receive on [TOPIC] during the past five years (2012- 2017)? Range 1-30 M1.3 In which year the members of the household received most recent trainings on [TOPIC]? (Record Year) a. ViM agriculture trainings or meetings? (Good agricultural practices: improved farming techniques and expanded use of agricultural inputs & through Farmer Field Schools, Demonstration plots) |__| |__|__| |__|__||__|__| b. ViM livestock trainings or meetings? (Animal care, Demonstration herds etc.) |__| |__|__| |__|__||__|__| c. ViM women health and nutrition trainings or meetings? (Maternal health and nutrition) |__| |__|__| |__|__||__|__| d. ViM child health and nutrition trainings or meetings? (Infant and Young Children Feeding (IYCF), Immunization, Growth Monitoring |__| |__|__| |__|__||__|__| e. ViM WASH activities? (Hygiene and sanitation training/Hand washing) |__| |__|__| |__|__||__|__| f. ViM savings and internal lending (SILC) group? (Borrowing, savings and financial literacy) |__| |__|__| |__|__||__|__| g. ViM training on Gender inequality |__| |__|__| |__|__||__|__| h. Vim training on Natural Resources management |__| |__|__| |__|__||__|__| i. Other ViM activities? (Specify) |__| |__|__| |__|__||__|__| M1.4.1 During 2012-2017 did your household receive any food rations from ViM? 1 YES 2 NO (If NO, skip to M2) M1.4.2 For which activities did your household receive food rations from ViM? READ ALL OPTIONS AND SELECT ALL THAT APPLY 1 Ration for children 2 Ration for pregnant or lactatcing women 3 Ration for household M1.4.3 How many times the household receive food ration from ViM during 2012-2017? |__|__| M2. The following questions ask about changes you have seen in the past 5 years (2012-2017) in your farm and household. TOPIC M2. Over the last 5 years (during 2012-2017), how has [TOPIC] changed? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 112 5 improved a lot, 4 improved somewhat, 3 about the same, 2 somewhat worse, and 1 a lot worse. a. your Household’s financial situation |___| b. your Household’s food availability during the hungry season (June through September) |___| c. your household’s Yield (Output per hectare) of most important crops |___| d. your household’s Farm income |___| e. Women’s empowerment in the househohld |___| f. Natural Resources management |___| G. Nutrition status of children and women |___| The following questions ask you about factors that may have contributed to the changes in your household’s farm income. FACTOR M3. How important was [FACTOR] in bringing about a change in your household’s yield for most important crops and household farm income? Was it (5) essential, (4) very important, (3) important, (2) not very important (1) not important at all? 0 = NO CHANGE M3.1 FARM YIELD (MOST IMPORTANT CROP) M3.2 FARM INCOME a. Weather, pests, production conditions |___| IF M3.1a=0, THEN SKIP M3.1b-g |___| IF M3.2a=0, THEN SKIP M3.2b-g b. Market conditions: availability or cost of inputs, etc. |___| |___| c. Me and my family and community: skills, hard work, collaboration |___| |___| d. Training, information, input supply, market linkages offered by ViM interventions |___| |___| e. Training, information, input supply, market linkages offered by other program |___| |___| f. Training on gender offered by ViM |___| |___| g. Training on natural resource management offered by ViM |___| |___| MOTIVATION OF THE BENEFICIAIRIES ON THE ADOPTION OF ViM IMPROVED PRATICES AFTER THE END OF ViM INTERVENTIONS FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 113 M4. Which of the following technologies or practices do you intend to use after the end of ViM activities next year? Improved agriculture practices…1 Improved crops seed………2 Improved fertilizers, pesticides, Phytosanitary products….3 Improved livestock practices….4 Natural resource management practices (Zaï, Stony cordons,)…5 ViM child health and nutrition pratices (Infant and Young Children Feeding (IYCF), Immunization, Growth Monitoring practices)………………………6 ViM WASH practices …………….7 Participating on savings and internal lending (SILC) group (Borrowing, savings and financial)……….8 NONE ………………………………….0 SELECT ALL THE APPLY, EXCEPT FOR “NONE” [INSERT M4 SELECTION] M5. Who will help you to adopt or apply these improved technologies and practices after the end of ViM intervention? 1= Farmers groups 2= MLA and CARE groups 3= Government 4= Private institution 5= Another NGOs 6= Other (specify) 0= MYSELF ASK FOR EACH SELECTION IN M4 SELECT ALL THE APPLY, EXPECT “MYSELF” M6. Which of the following trainings do you expect to continue to attend after the end of Vim intervention? Agricultures training (crops) …1 Livestock training …………………….2 Sanitation and WASH training ……………3 Literacy training …………………4 Gender training …………….5 Natural resource management training---6 Child health and nutrition pratices (Infant and Young Children Feeding (IYCF)/Immunization, Growth Monitoring practices)…………………… 7 Participating on savings and internal lending (SILC) group (Borrowing, savings and financial)……….8 NONE ……………………….0 SELECT ALL THE APPLY, EXCEPT FOR “NONE” [INSERT M6 SELECTION] M7. From which source do you expect to receive the training? 1= Farmers groups 2= MLA and CARE groups 3= Government 4= Private institution 5= Another NGOs 6= Other (specify) ASK FOR EACH SELECTION IN M6 SELECT ALL THE APPLY FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 114 E. AGRICULTURE THIS MODULE IS TO BE ADMINISTERED TO ALL FARMERS IN THE HOUSEHOLD For this section, the most recent agricultural year refers to the period from April 2016 to March 2017 No. Question Response Skips E1 ASK TO ALL THE FARMERS IN THE HOUSEHOLD, THE MEMBERS WHO HAVE ACCESS AND MAKE DECISIONS ON A PLOT OF LAND (EVEN A SMALL ONE). WHO IS THE RESPONDENT? LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER NO MEMBER AVAILABLE…………..0 IF 0, SKIP TO SECTION F E2a HAS THE RESPONDENT FOR THIS SECTION ALREADY BEEN INTERVIEWED FOR A PREVIOUS SECTION? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 If yes, skip to E3a FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 115 2b Hello. My name is __________ and I work for CRDA, a survey research organization in Ouagadougou. We are working with NORC at the University of Chicago – a non-profit research institution based in the United States. We are conducting an endline survey for the Victoire sur la Malnutrition (ViM) project implemented by ACDI/VOCA and their partners SNV, Save the Children, ATAD in Kaya region, APIL in Pissila region, and AZND in Bassalogho and Namissiguima regions.. The information we collect will be used for evaluating the project. You have been selected at random to participate in this survey. Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose not to participate. You are free to not answer any questions for any reason or to stop the interview at any time. Your responses will be kept confidential and we assure you that your individual responses will not be disclosed to anyone outside of the survey staff. There are not right or wrong answers. We will be grateful if you can provide us with true information. Do you agree to participate in the survey? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 If no, return to E1 E3a Have you received any of the following agricultural inputs from ViM project during the period 2012- 2017? PROBE BY READING EACH RESPONSE Improved seeds …………………1 Fertilizers, pesticides, phytosanitary products……………………….….2 Small ruminants …………………3 Poultry ……………………………4 Vaccination ………………………5 Animals Feed, SPAI……………..6 Enhancement poultry……………7 Plants (Moringa, Baobab,etc.)….8 Others inputs (specify) ………….9 NONE………………………………0 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N, EXCEPT FOR “NONE” FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 116 E3b Have you received any of the following extension services, trainings or supports from ViM project during the period 2012- 2017? PROBE BY READING EACH RESPONSE Plant Production ………………………1 Animal Production………………….…2 Natural Resources management …..3 Value chain agriculture (Plant) ……..4 Value chain livestock ………..………5 Gender …………………….………….6 Financial management …….……….7 Governance…………….…………….8 FaaB (farming as a business) .…….9 Literacy……………………………….10 Small grants of ViM …………….......11 Health …………………….…………..12 Nutrition……………...……………….13 Sanitation …………………………….14 Other (Specify) ………………………15 NONE……………………………………0 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N, EXCEPT FOR “NONE” E3c Have you received any of the following equipment from ViM project during the period 2012- 2017? PROBE BY READING EACH RESPONSE Labour equipment………………..……1 Seedlings equipment ………………….2 Weeding equipment ………………..…3 Treatment equipment ………..…….4 Harvest equipment ……………..…….5 Transport equipment ……………..….6 Other (specify)…………………..…7 NONE………………………………..0 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N, EXCEPT FOR “NONE” E3d Have you benefited from a plot of lowland (for rice production) or irrigate perimeters (for vegetable crops) from ViM Project during the period 2012-2017 YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 E3e Have you benefited from any other support during the periods 2012- 2017, such as from the government or another NGO? NO…………………………….0 ANOTHER NGO/ PROJECT…………1 GOVERNMENT…………………….2 OTHERS ………………………….3 IF E3.i =0, SKIP TO E3.0k E3f What kind of support from the government or other NGO have you benefited from during the periods 2012-2017? PROBE BY READING EACH ONE Agriculture inputs………………………1 Livestock input…………………………2 Small ruminants………………………..3 Agriculture ……………………………..4 Equipment’s……………………………5 Agriculture extension services, training………………………………….6. Sanitations / nutritional…………….…7 training…………………………………8 Livestock production training………..9 Others (specify) …………………….10 E3g In what years have you benefited from any of the activities of ViM? PROBE BY READING EACH YEAR 2012……………………………………1 2013……………………………………2 2014……………………………………3 2015……………………………………4 2016……………………………………5 2017……………………………………6 RECEIVED NO BENEFIT…………..0 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N, EXCEPT FOR “NO BENEFIT” FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 117 E3.1 Did you have access to a plot of land (even if very small) over which over which you make decisions about what will be grown, how it will be grown, and how to dispose of the harvest? VERIFY THAT RESPONDENT UNDERSTANDS THAT HAVING “ACCESS” AND MAKING “DECISIONS” OVER A PLOT OF LAND DOES NOT REQUIRE “LEGAL OWNERSHIP” OF THE LAND. A PERSON CAN HAVE ACCESS AND MAKE DECISIONS OVER A PLOT OF LAND (E.G. A SMALL VEGETABLE GARDEN) EVEN IF HE/SHE DOES NOT LEGALLY OWN THE LAND. YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 |__| SKIP TO E4 IF E3.1=NO E3.2 How many parcels/PLOTS did you have access to (for which YOU were responsible for decision making) during the most recent agricultural year, regardless of whether or not they were cultivated by you? |__|__| E4 Do you have animals over which you make decisions about how to dispose of the production? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF BOTH E3.1 = NO AND E4 = NO, END MODULE E5.1 Are you a member of any producer’s groups YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E5.1 =2, SKIP TO E6 E5.2 What type of producer groups are you a member of? PROBE BY READING EACH RESPONSE Cowpeas farmer’s groups ………….1 Sorghum farmer’s groups…….…….2 Tomatoes farmer’s groups………….3 Onion farmer’s groups………………4 Small ruminant farmer’s groups……5 Poultry farmer’s groups……………..6 Others farmer’s groups (specify)…..7 …………………………………………. ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E5.3 Among the groups that you mentioned, which benefit from ViM? [SELECTED RESPONSES FROM E5.2] NO GROUP………………………….8 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELETION S EXCEPT “NO GROUP” Financial Services & marketing E6 Did you take any agricultural credit from any formal institutions (banks, microfinance institutions, savings/loan groups), in cash or in kind, in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 118 E7 Did you save any money in the most recent agricultural year? In other words, did you put any money aside to use later? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 E7.1 Did you save any money in any formal financial institutions (banks, microfinance institutions, savings/loan groups) in the most recent agricultural year? In other words, did you put any money aside in any formal savings/bank account to use later? YES....................................................1 NO ....................................................... E7.2 In the most recent agricultural year did you warrant your crops? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 E8 In the most recent agricultural year did you sell any crops and/or livestock products? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E8≠1, SKIP TO E11 E9 If yes, what was the source of market pricing information for your products? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Cell phone update……………………1 Radio broadcast ................................2 Government information system .......3 Other producers.................................4 Collectors (i.e. middlemen)................5 Other..................................................6 No market info received.....................7 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E10 What was the primary way in which revenue from agricultural production sales was spent? Food……………………………………1 Health ................................................2 Education...........................................3 Investment .........................................4 Home building/repair .........................5 Other..................................................6 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 119 E11 Over the past 12 months, what have been your sources of income, either in cash or in kind SELECT ALL THE APPLY CROP SALES………………….………1 LIVESTOCK SALES..........................2 AGRICULTURAL DAY LABOR .........3 NON-AGRICULTURAL DAY LABOR 4 PETTY TRADE..................................5 SMALL BUSINESS............................6 SALARIED EMPLOYMENT...............7 WAGE LABOR ..................................8 SALE OF CRAFTS............................9 GOLD MINING ................................10 OTHER ............................................11 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N Pest and Natural resource management E12 Now I would like to ask you about pest management practices related to the plots of land/animals over which you make decisions. Did you practice any of the following pest management practices directly related to your plots of land/animals during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Physical treatment .............................1 Chemical treatment ...........................2 Biological treatment ...........................3 Integrated treatment ..........................4 Organic treatment..............................5 Other..................................................6 None used .........................................7 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E13 In the most recent agricultural year, did you use any natural resource management practices/techniques that are not directly related to on-farm production such as [ANTI￾EROSION BUNDS, BUND FILTERS, STONY CORDONS, ETC.]? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF 2, SKIP TO E15 E14 Did you use any of the following natural resource management practices/techniques during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Anti erosion Bund ............................1 Bund filter ..........................................2 Stony cordons....................................3 Revegetation of bund .......................4 Soil stabilization using grass ............5 Live brush mats .................................6 Zai system .........................................7 Demi-Lunes ......................................8 V stone technique .............................9 Gully treatment ...............................10 Agroforestry ....................................11 Assisted Natural Regeneration........12 Other................................................13 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N Agricultural crop production FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 120 E15 In the most recent agricultural year, did you plant any crops in the plot over which you make decisions? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 AVOIDE IF E3.1=2 IF E3.1≠1, SKIP TO E117. IF E15≠1, SKIP TO E117. E16 List the crops you planted during the most recent agricultural year in the plot over which you make decisions SELECT ALL THE APPLY Sorghum ............................................1 Millet ..................................................2 Maize .................................................3 Rice....................................................4 Cowpeas............................................5 Onions ...............................................6 Tomatoes...........................................7 Sesame..............................................8 Peanuts..............................................9 Other (specify)………………………10 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N For each crop grown, PDA will ask the following questions E17 Now, I would like to ask you about production activities related to the plot of land for sorghum over which you make decisions. Did you use any of the following agriculture practices/technologies for Sorghum in the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ploughing………………………………1 Line planting ......................................2 Sarclage/binage.................................3 Le buttage..........................................4 Chemical fertilization .........................5 Organic fertilization............................6 Crop rotation......................................7 Improved seeds .................................8 Plant treatment ..................................9 Traitement des sémences……...…..10 Intercropping....................................11 Thinning...........................................12 Zai....................................................13 Other................................................14 None of the above ...........................15 AVOID IF E16≠1, SKIP TO E28 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E18 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your sorghum production during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Joint purchase of inputs.....................1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Bulk transport through farmer’s groups ...........................................................3 Sorting/grading ..................................4 Processing (flour, dolo, etc.)..............5 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................6 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).7 Delayed sales ....................................8 Other..................................................9 None of the above ...........................10 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E19.1 How many plots you planted Sorghum in the most recent agricultural year? |__|__| FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 121 E19.2 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Sorghum? 0 – 0.5 HECTARES…….. 1 0.6-1 HECTARES…….. 2 1.1-2 HECTARES…….. 3 2.1-10 HECTARES…….. 4 10.1-20 HECTARES…….. 5 20.1-100 HECTARES…….. 6 E19.3 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Sorghum? |__|__|.. |__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E19.2 E20 What were the local units used to measure amount of sorghum produced? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E21.0 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Sorghum? 0 TO 10…….. 1 11 TO 20…….. 2 21-50…….. 3 51-100…….. 4 100-1000…….. 5 1,001-9,999…….. 6 E21 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Sorghum? |__|__|__|__| Valid Range determined by E21.0 E21a What was the total cost of inputs used for to sorghum production (e.g., purchased water, fuel, seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, hired labor, hired enforcement, or hired equipment services) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E22 Did you sell any sorghum in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E22≠1, SKIP TO E26 E23 What local unit measurement was used for sorghum crops sold? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 122 E24 What was the total amount of sorghum sold, in [local units]s? |__|__|__|__| E25 How much total income (CFA) did you receive from the sales of this crop? |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E25a What was the main destination for the sorghum sale? In the village………………….. 1 Local market……………….2 Regional market…………..3 Group Sale…………………………..4 Other (specify)………………...…5 E26 Did you store Sorghum in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E26≠1, SKIP TO E28 E27 What was the main method of storage used for this crop? Greniers en paille pour épis...............1 Greniers en banco pour grains..........2 Jarres en banco pour grains..............3 Sac pour grains .................................4 Other..................................................5 E27_ a What was the total amount of sorghum consumed by the household? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E27_ b What was the total amount of sorghum gave as gift to others? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 123 E27_ c What were the majors constraints you are facing in producing the sorghum? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No Technical mastery…..,,,1 Unavailability/ deficiency of improved seed………………………….2 Unavailability/ deficiency of fertilizers……………………3 Unavailability/ deficiency others inputs………………………4 Poor soil………………,,….,5 Land insufficiency………,,,6 Water deficiency………,,,..7 Too many taxes………,,,..8 Parasitic attacks………,,,.9 Flood………………,…….,10 Drought…………………,,,11 Other (to be specified) ….12 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E27_ d What were the majors constraints you are facing in the marketing of sorghum? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No buyers…………………..1 Low selling price…………..2 Remote Sales Center….....3 Bad Road condition……....4 Poor quality of product……5 Other (specify) …………….6 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E28 Now, I would like to ask you about production activities related to the plot of land for millet over which you make decisions. Did you use any of the following agriculture practices/technologies for Millet in the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ploughing………………………………1 Line planting ......................................2 Sarclage/binage.................................3 Le buttage..........................................4 Chemical fertilization .........................5 Organic fertilization............................6 Crop rotation......................................7 Improved seeds .................................8 Plant treatment ..................................9 Traitement des sémences……...…..10 Intercropping....................................11 Thinning...........................................12 Zai....................................................13 Other................................................14 None of the above ...........................15 IF E16≠2, SKIP TO E39 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E29 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your millet production during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Joint purchase of inputs.....................1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Bulk transport through farmer’s groups ...........................................................3 Sorting/grading ..................................4 Processing (flour, dolo, etc.)..............5 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................6 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).7 Delayed sales ....................................8 Other..................................................9 None of the above ...........................10 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 124 E30.1 How many plots you planted Millet in the most recent agricultural year? |__|__| E30.2 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Millet? 0 – 0.5 HECTARES…….. 1 0.6-1 HECTARES…….. 2 1.1-2 HECTARES…….. 3 2.1-10 HECTARES…….. 4 10.1-20 HECTARES…….. 5 20.1-100 HECTARES…….. 6 E30.3 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Millet? |__|__|.. |__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E30.2 E31 What were the local units used to measure amount of millet produced? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E32.0 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Millet? 0 TO 10…….. 1 11 TO 20…….. 2 21-50…….. 3 51-100…….. 4 100-1000…….. 5 1,001-9,999…….. 6 E32 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Millet? |__|__|__|__| Valid Range determined by E32.0 E32a What was the total cost of inputs used to millet production (e.g., purchased water, fuel, seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, hired labor, hired enforcement, hired equipment services) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E33 Did you sell any millet in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E33≠1, SKIP TO E37 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 125 E34 What local unit measurement was used for millet crops sold? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E35 What was the total amount of millet sold in [UNIT]s? |__|__|__|__| E36 How much total income (CFA) did you receive from the sales of this crop? |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E36a What was the main destination for the millet sale? In the village………………….. 1 Local market……………….2 Regional market…………..3 Group Sale…………………………..4 Other (specify)………………...…5 E37 Did you store Millet in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E37≠1, SKIP TO E39 E38 If yes, what was the main method of storage used for this crop? Greniers en paille pour épis...............1 Greniers en banco pour grains..........2 Jarres en banco pour grains..............3 Sac pour grains .................................4 Other..................................................5 E38_ a What was the total amount of millet consumed by the household? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 126 E38_ b What was the total amount of millet gave as gift to others? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E38_ c What were the majors constraints you are facing in producing the millet? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No Technical mastery…..,,,1 Unavailability/ deficiency of improved seed………………………….2 Unavailability/ deficiency of fertilizers……………………3 Unavailability/ deficiency others inputs………………………4 Poor soil………………,,….,5 Land insufficiency………,,,6 Water deficiency………,,,..7 Too many taxes………,,,..8 Parasitic attacks………,,,.9 Flood………………,…….,10 Drought…………………,,,11 Other (to be specified) ….12 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E38_ d What were the majors constraints you are facing in the marketing of millet? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No buyers…………………..1 Low selling price…………..2 Remote Sales Center….....3 Bad Road condition……....4 Poor quality of product……5 Other (specify) …………….6 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E39 Now, I would like to ask you about production activities related to the plot of land for maize over which you make decisions. Did you use any of the following agriculture practices/technologies for Maize in the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ploughing………………………………1 Line planting ......................................2 Sarclage/binage.................................3 Le buttage..........................................4 Chemical fertilization .........................5 Organic fertilization............................6 Crop rotation......................................7 Improved seeds .................................8 Plant treatment ..................................9 Traitement des sémences……...…..10 Intercropping....................................11 Thinning...........................................12 Zai....................................................13 Other................................................14 None of the above ...........................15 IF E16≠3, SKIP TO E39 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 127 E40 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your maize production during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Joint purchase of inputs.....................1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Bulk transport through farmer’s groups ...........................................................3 Sorting/grading ..................................4 Processing (flour, dolo, etc.)..............5 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................6 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).7 Delayed sales ....................................8 Other..................................................9 None of the above ...........................10 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E41.1 How many plots you planted Maize in the most recent agricultural year? |__|__| E41.2 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Maize? 0 – 0.5 HECTARES…….. 1 0.6-1 HECTARES…….. 2 1.1-2 HECTARES…….. 3 2.1-10 HECTARES…….. 4 10.1-20 HECTARES…….. 5 20.1-100 HECTARES…….. 6 E41.3 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Maize? |__|__|.. |__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E41.2 E42 What were the local units used to measure amount of maize produced? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E43.0 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Maize? 0 TO 10…….. 1 11 TO 20…….. 2 21-50…….. 3 51-100…….. 4 100-1000…….. 5 1,001-9,999…….. 6 E43 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Maize? |__|__|__|__| Valid Range determined by E43.0 E44 Did you sell any maize in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E44≠1, SKIP TO E48 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 128 E44a What was the total cost of inputs used for maize production (e.g., purchased water, fuel, seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, hired labor, hired enforcement, hired equipment services) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E45 What local unit measurement was used for maize crops sold? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E46 If yes, what was the total amount of maize sold, in [LOCAL UNITS]s? |__|__|__|__| E47 How much total income (CFA) did you receive from the sales of this crop? |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E47a What was the main destination for the maize sale? In the village………………….. 1 Local market……………….2 Regional market…………..3 Group Sale…………………………..4 Other (specify)………………...…5 E48 Did you store Maize in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E48≠1, SKIP TO E50 E49 If yes, what was the main method of storage used for this crop? En épis sur une branche....................1 Epis dans des greniers en paille .......2 En grains dans des sacs ...................3 Other..................................................4 E49_ a What was the total amount of Maize consumed by the household? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 129 E49_ b What was the total amount of maize gave as gift to others? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E49_ c What were the majors constraints you are facing in producing the maize? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No Technical mastery…..,,,1 Unavailability/ deficiency of improved seed………………………….2 Unavailability/ deficiency of fertilizers……………………3 Unavailability/ deficiency others inputs………………………4 Poor soil………………,,….,5 Land insufficiency………,,,6 Water deficiency………,,,..7 Too many taxes………,,,..8 Parasitic attacks………,,,.9 Flood………………,…….,10 Drought…………………,,,11 Other (to be specified) ….12 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E49_ d What were the majors constraints you are facing in the marketing of maize? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No buyers…………………..1 Low selling price…………..2 Remote Sales Center….....3 Bad Road condition……....4 Poor quality of product……5 Other (specify) …………….6 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 130 E50 Now, I would like to ask you about production activities related to the plot of land for rice over which you make decisions. Did you use any of the following agriculture practices/technologies for Rice in the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ploughing………………………………1 Line planting ......................................2 Sarclage/binage.................................3 Le buttage..........................................4 Chemical fertilization .........................5 Organic fertilization............................6 Crop rotation......................................7 Improved seeds .................................8 Plant treatment ..................................9 Traitement des sémences……...…..10 Intercropping....................................11 Thinning...........................................12 Zai....................................................13 Pepiniere/repiquage……………….14 Other................................................15 None of the above ...........................16 IF E16≠4, SKIP TO E62 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 131 E51 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your rice production during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Joint purchase of inputs.....................1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Bulk transport through farmer’s groups ...........................................................3 Sorting/grading ..................................4 Processing (flour, dolo, etc.)..............5 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................6 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).7 Delayed sales ....................................8 Parboiling...........................................9 Other................................................10 None of the above ...........................11 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E52.1 How many plots you planted rice in the most recent agricultural year? |__|__| E52.2 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Rice? 0 – 0.5 HECTARES…….. 1 0.6-1 HECTARES…….. 2 1.1-2 HECTARES…….. 3 2.1-10 HECTARES…….. 4 10.1-20 HECTARES…….. 5 20.1-100 HECTARES…….. 6 E52.3 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Rice? |__|__|.. |__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E52.2 E53 What was the total area (in Ha) irrigated for rice production? |__|__|.|__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E52.3 E54 What were the local units used to measure amount of rice produced? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E55.0 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Rice? 0 TO 10…….. 1 11 TO 20…….. 2 21-50…….. 3 51-100…….. 4 100-1000…….. 5 1,001-9,999…….. 6 E55 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Rice? |__|__|__|__| Valid Range determined by E55.0 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 132 E55a What was the total cost of input used for to Rrice production (e.g., purchased water, fuel, seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, hired labor, hired enforcement, hired equipment services) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E21a E56 Did you sell any Rice in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E56≠1, SKIP TO E60 E57 What local unit measurement was used for Rice sold? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E58 If yes, what was the total amount of Rice sold in [local units]s? |__|__|__|__| E59 How much total income (CFA) did you receive from the sales of this crop? |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E59a What was the main destination for the rice sale? In the village………………….. 1 Local market……………….2 Regional market…………..3 Group Sale…………………………..4 Other (specify)………………...…5 E60 Did you store Rice in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E60≠1, SKIP TO E62 E61 If yes, what was the main method of storage used for this crop? Grenier en banco pour riz paddy.......1 Sac pour grains .................................2 Other..................................................3 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 133 E61_ a What was the total amount of Rice consumed by the household? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E61_ b What was the total amount of rice gave as gift to others? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E61_ c What were the majors constraints you are facing in producing the rice? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No Technical mastery…..,,,1 Unavailability/ deficiency of improved seed………………………….2 Unavailability/ deficiency of fertilizers……………………3 Unavailability/ deficiency others inputs………………………4 Poor soil………………,,….,5 Land insufficiency………,,,6 Water deficiency………,,,..7 Too many taxes………,,,..8 Parasitic attacks………,,,.9 Flood………………,…….,10 Drought…………………,,,11 Other (to be specified) ….12 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E61_ d What were the majors constraints you are facing in the marketing of rice? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No buyers…………………..1 Low selling price…………..2 Remote Sales Center….....3 Bad Road condition……....4 Poor quality of product……5 Other (specify) …………….6 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 134 E62 Now, I would like to ask you about production activities related to the plot of land for cowpeas over which you make decisions. Did you use any of the following agriculture practices/technologies for Cowpeas in the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ploughing………………………………1 Line planting ......................................2 Sarclage/binage.................................3 Le buttage..........................................4 Chemical fertilization .........................5 Organic fertilization............................6 Crop rotation......................................7 Improved seeds .................................8 Plant treatment ..................................9 Traitement des sémences……...…..10 Intercropping....................................11 Thinning...........................................12 Zai....................................................13 Other................................................14 None of the above ...........................15 AVOID IF E16≠5, SKIP TO E73 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E63 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your cowpea production during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Joint purchase of inputs.....................1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Bulk transport through farmer’s groups ...........................................................3 Sorting/grading ..................................4 Processing (flour, dolo, etc.)..............5 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................6 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).7 Delayed sales ....................................8 Other..................................................9 None of the above ...........................10 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E63a Did the practice of theses cowpeas value chain activities improve your access to the following services ?? Access to inputs ................................1 Access to financial services...............2 Access to market information ............3 Others (specify) ................................4 SELECT ALL THE APPLY E64.1 How many plots you planted Cowpeas in the most recent agricultural year? |__|__| E64.2 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Cowpeas? 0 – 0.5 HECTARES…….. 1 0.6-1 HECTARES…….. 2 1.1-2 HECTARES…….. 3 2.1-10 HECTARES…….. 4 10.1-20 HECTARES…….. 5 20.1-100 HECTARES…….. 6 E64.3 What was the total area (in Ha) planted for Cowpeas? |__|__|.. |__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E64.2 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 135 E65 What were the local units used to measure amount of cowpeas produced? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E66.0 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Cowpeas? 0 TO 10…….. 1 11 TO 20…….. 2 21-50…….. 3 51-100…….. 4 100-1000…….. 5 1,001-9,999…….. 6 E66 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Cowpeas? |__|__|__|__| Valid Range determined by E66.0 E66a What was the total cost of inputs used for to cowpeas production (e.g., purchased water, fuel, seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, hired labor, hired enforcement, hired equipment services) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E67 Did you sell any cowpeas in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E67≠1, SKIP TO E71 E68 What local unit measurement was used for cowpeas crops sold? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E69 If yes, what was the total amount of cowpeas sold in [local units]s? |__|__|__|__| E70 How much total income (CFA) did you receive from the sales of this crop? |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 136 E70a What was the main destination for the cowpeas sale? In the village………………….. 1 Local market……………….2 Regional market…………..3 Group Sale…………………………..4 Other (specify)………………...…5 E71 Did you store Cowpeas in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E71≠1, SKIP TO E73 E72 If yes, what was the main method of storage used for Cowpeas? Triple deeping bag.............................1 Plastic barrel/can ...............................2 Attic/garret .........................................3 Jar......................................................4 Plastic bottle ......................................5 Other..................................................6 E72_ a What was the total amount of cowpeas consumed by the household? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E72_ b What was the total amount of cowpeas gave as gift to others? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 137 E72_ c What were the majors constraints you are facing in producing the cowpeas? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No Technical mastery…..,,,1 Unavailability/ deficiency of improved seed………………………….2 Unavailability/ deficiency of fertilizers……………………3 Unavailability/ deficiency others inputs………………………4 Poor soil………………,,….,5 Land insufficiency………,,,6 Water deficiency………,,,..7 Too many taxes………,,,..8 Parasitic attacks………,,,.9 Flood………………,…….,10 Drought…………………,,,11 Other (to be specified) ….12 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E72_ d What were the majors constraints you are facing in the marketing of cowpeas? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No buyers…………………..1 Low selling price…………..2 Remote Sales Center….....3 Bad Road condition……....4 Poor quality of product……5 Other (specify) …………….6 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E73 Now, I would like to ask you about production activities related to the plot of land for onions over which you make decisions. Did you use any of the following agriculture practices/technologies for onions in the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ploughing………………………………1 Line planting ......................................2 Sarclage/binage.................................3 Le buttage..........................................4 Chemical fertilization .........................5 Organic fertilization............................6 Crop rotation......................................7 Improved seeds .................................8 Plant treatment ..................................9 Traitement des sémences……...…..10 Intercropping....................................11 Thinning...........................................12 Zai....................................................13 Pepiniere/repiquage………………...14 Other................................................15 None of the above ...........................16 AVOID IF E16≠6, SKIP TO E84 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E74 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your onions production during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Joint purchase of inputs.....................1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Bulk transport through farmer’s groups ...........................................................3 Sorting/grading ..................................4 Processing (flour, dolo, etc.)..............5 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................6 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).7 Delayed sales ....................................8 Other..................................................9 None of the above ...........................10 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 138 E75.1 How many plots you planted onions in the most recent agricultural year? |__|__| E75.2 What was the total area (in square meters) planted for onions? 0-50 SQ METERS…….. 1 51-200 SQ METERS…….. 2 201-300 SQ METERS…….. 3 301-400 SQ METERS…….. 4 401-500 SQ METERS…….. 5 501-1,000 SQ METERS…….. 6 E75.3 What was the total area (in square meters) planted for onions? |__|__|.. |__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E75.2 E76 What were the local units used to measure amount of onions produced? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E77.0 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Onions? 0 TO 10…….. 1 11 TO 20…….. 2 21-50…….. 3 51-100…….. 4 100-1000…….. 5 1,001-9,999…….. 6 E77 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Onions? |__|__|__|__| Valid Range determined by E77.0 E77a What was the total cost of inputs used for onion production (e.g., purchased water, fuel, seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, hired labor, hired enforcement, hired equipment services) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E78 Did you sell any onions in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E78≠1, SKIP TO E82 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 139 E79 What local unit measurement was used for onion crops sold? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E80 If yes, what was the total amount of onions sold in [local units]s? |__|__|__|__| E81 How much total income (CFA) did you receive from the sales of this crop? |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E81a What was the main destination for the onions sale? In the village………………….. 1 Local market……………….2 Regional market…………..3 Group Sale…………………………..4 Other (specify)………………...…5 E82 Did you store onions in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E82≠1, SKIP TO E84 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 140 E83 If yes, what was the main method of storage used for onions? On a grid in a warehouse ..................1 In a granary .......................................2 On sand in a warehouse....................3 On cool area in a warehouse.............4 Other..................................................5 E83_ a What was the total amount of onion consumed by the household? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E83_ b What was the total amount of onions gave as gift to others? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E83_ c What were the majors constraints you are facing in producing the onions? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No Technical mastery…..,,,1 Unavailability/ deficiency of improved seed………………………….2 Unavailability/ deficiency of fertilizers……………………3 Unavailability/ deficiency others inputs………………………4 Poor soil………………,,….,5 Land insufficiency………,,,6 Water deficiency………,,,..7 Too many taxes………,,,..8 Parasitic attacks………,,,.9 Flood………………,…….,10 Drought…………………,,,11 Other (to be specified) ….12 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 141 E83_ d What were the majors constraints you are facing in the marketing of onions? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No buyers…………………..1 Low selling price…………..2 Remote Sales Center….....3 Bad Road condition……....4 Poor quality of product……5 Other (specify) …………….6 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E84 Now, I would like to ask you about production activities related to the plot of land for tomatoes over which you make decisions. Did you use any of the following agriculture practices/technologies for tomatoes in the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ploughing………………………………1 Line planting ......................................2 Sarclage/binage.................................3 Le buttage..........................................4 Chemical fertilization .........................5 Organic fertilization............................6 Crop rotation......................................7 Improved seeds .................................8 Plant treatment ..................................9 Traitement des sémences……...…..10 Intercropping....................................11 Thinning...........................................12 Zai....................................................13 Pepiniere/repiquage……………….14 Other................................................15 None of the above ...........................16 AVOID IF E16≠7, SKIP TO E95 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E85 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your tomatoes production during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Joint purchase of inputs.....................1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Bulk transport through farmer’s groups ...........................................................3 Sorting/grading ..................................4 Processing (flour, dolo, etc.)..............5 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................6 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).7 Delayed sales ....................................8 Other..................................................9 None of the above ...........................10 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E86.1 How many plots you planted tomatoes in the most recent agricultural year? |__|__| E86.2 What was the total area (in square meters) planted for tomatoes? 0-50 SQ METERS…….. 1 51-200 SQ METERS…….. 2 201-300 SQ METERS…….. 3 301-400 SQ METERS…….. 4 401-500 SQ METERS…….. 5 501-1,000 SQ METERS…….. 6 E86.3 What was the total area (in square meters) planted for tomatoes? |__|__|.. |__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E86.2 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 142 E87 What were the local units used to measure amount of tomatoes produced? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E88.0 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Tomatoes? 0 TO 10…….. 1 11 TO 20…….. 2 21-50…….. 3 51-100…….. 4 100-1000…….. 5 1,001-9,999…….. 6 E88 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Tomatoes? |__|__|__|__| Valid Range determined by E88.0 E88a What was the total cost of inputs used for tomatoes production (e.g., purchased water, fuel, seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, hired labor, hired enforcement, hired equipment services) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E89 Did you sell any tomatoes in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E89≠1, SKIP TO E93 E90 What local unit measurement was used for tomato crops sold? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E91 If yes, what was the total amount of tomatoes sold in [LOCAL UNITS]s? |__|__|__|__| E92 How much total income (CFA) did you receive from the sales of this crop? |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 143 E92a What was the main destination for the sale of tomatoes? In the village………………….. 1 Local market……………….2 Regional market…………..3 Group Sale…………………………..4 Other (specify)………………...…5 E93 Did you store tomatoes in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E93≠1, SKIP TO E95 E94 If yes, what was the main method of storage used for tomatoes? Drying……………………………………1 Making paste……………………………2 Other……………………………………..3 E94_ a What was the total amount of tomatoes consumed by the household? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E94_ b What was the total amount of tomatoes gave as gift to others? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ..............................116 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 144 E94_ c What were the majors constraints you are facing in producing the tomatoes? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No Technical mastery…..,,,1 Unavailability/ deficiency of improved seed………………………….2 Unavailability/ deficiency of fertilizers……………………3 Unavailability/ deficiency others inputs………………………4 Poor soil………………,,….,5 Land insufficiency………,,,6 Water deficiency………,,,..7 Too many taxes………,,,..8 Parasitic attacks………,,,.9 Flood………………,…….,10 Drought…………………,,,11 Other (to be specified) ….12 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E94_ d What were the majors constraints you are facing in the marketing of tomatoes? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No buyers…………………..1 Low selling price…………..2 Remote Sales Center….....3 Bad Road condition……....4 Poor quality of product……5 Other (specify) …………….6 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E95 Now, I would like to ask you about production activities related to the plot of land for sesame over which you make decisions. Did you use any of the following agriculture practices/technologies for sesame in the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ploughing………………………………1 Line planting ......................................2 Sarclage/binage.................................3 Le buttage..........................................4 Chemical fertilization .........................5 Organic fertilization............................6 Crop rotation......................................7 Improved seeds .................................8 Plant treatment ..................................9 Traitement des sémences……...…..10 Intercropping....................................11 Thinning...........................................12 Zai....................................................13 Other................................................14 None of the above ...........................15 AVOID IF E16≠8, SKIP TO E106 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E96 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your sesame production during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Joint purchase of inputs.....................1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Bulk transport through farmer’s groups ...........................................................3 Sorting/grading ..................................4 Processing (flour, dolo, etc.)..............5 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................6 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).7 Delayed sales ....................................8 Other..................................................9 None of the above ...........................10 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 145 E97.1 How many plots you planted sesame in the most recent agricultural year? |__|__| E97.2 What was the total area (in square meters) planted for sesame? 0-50 SQ METERS…….. 1 51-200 SQ METERS…….. 2 201-300 SQ METERS…….. 3 301-400 SQ METERS…….. 4 401-500 SQ METERS…….. 5 501-1,000 SQ METERS…….. 6 E97.3 What was the total area (in square meters) planted for sesame? |__|__|.. |__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E97.2 E98 What were the local units used to measure amount of sesame produced? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E99.0 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Sesame? 0 TO 10…….. 1 11 TO 20…….. 2 21-50…….. 3 51-100…….. 4 100-1000…….. 5 1,001-9,999…….. 6 E99 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Sesame? |__|__|__|__| Valid Range determined by E99.0 E99a What was the total cost of inputs used for Sesame production (e.g., purchased water, fuel, seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, hired labor, hired enforcement, hired equipment services) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E100 Did you sell any sesame in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E100≠1, SKIP TO E104 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 146 E101 What local unit measurement was used for sesame crops sold? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E102 If yes, what was the total amount of sesame sold in [LOCAL UNITS]s? |__|__|__|__| E103 How much total income (CFA) did you receive from the sales of this crop? |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E103 a What was the main destination for the sesame sale? In the village………………….. 1 Local market……………….2 Regional market…………..3 Group Sale…………………………..4 Other (specify)………………...…5 E104 Did you store sesame in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E104≠1, SKIP TO E106 E105 If yes, what was the main method of storage used for sesame? Greniers en paille pour épis...............1 Greniers en banco pour grains..........2 Jarres en banco pour grains..............3 Sac pour grains .................................4 Other..................................................5 E105 _a What was the total amount of Sesame consumed by the household? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 147 E105 _b What was the total amount of sesame gave as gift to others? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E105 _c What were the majors constraints you are facing in producing the sesame? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No Technical mastery…..,,,1 Unavailability/ deficiency of improved seed………………………….2 Unavailability/ deficiency of fertilizers……………………3 Unavailability/ deficiency others inputs………………………4 Poor soil………………,,….,5 Land insufficiency………,,,6 Water deficiency………,,,..7 Too many taxes………,,,..8 Parasitic attacks………,,,.9 Flood………………,…….,10 Drought…………………,,,11 Other (to be specified) ….12 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E105 _d What were the majors constraints you are facing in the marketing of sesame? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No buyers…………………..1 Low selling price…………..2 Remote Sales Center….....3 Bad Road condition……....4 Poor quality of product……5 Other (specify) …………….6 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E106 Now, I would like to ask you about production activities related to the plot of land for peanuts over which you make decisions. Did you use any of the following agriculture practices/technologies for peanuts in the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ploughing………………………………1 Line planting ......................................2 Sarclage/binage.................................3 Le buttage..........................................4 Chemical fertilization .........................5 Organic fertilization............................6 Crop rotation......................................7 Improved seeds .................................8 Plant treatment ..................................9 Traitement des sémences……...…..10 Intercropping....................................11 Thinning...........................................12 Zai....................................................13 Other................................................14 None of the above ...........................15 AVOID IF E16≠9, SKIP TO E117 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 148 E107 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your peanuts production during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Joint purchase of inputs.....................1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Bulk transport through farmer’s groups ...........................................................3 Sorting/grading ..................................4 Processing (flour, dolo, etc.)..............5 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................6 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).7 Delayed sales ....................................8 Other..................................................9 None of the above ...........................10 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E108. 1 How many plots you planted peanuts in the most recent agricultural year? |__|__| E108. 2 What was the total area (in square meters) planted for peanuts? 0-50 SQ METERS…….. 1 51-200 SQ METERS…….. 2 201-300 SQ METERS…….. 3 301-400 SQ METERS…….. 4 401-500 SQ METERS…….. 5 501-1,000 SQ METERS…….. 6 E108. 3 What was the total area (in square meters) planted for peanuts? |__|__|.. |__|__|__|__| ha Valid Range determined by E108.2 E109 What were the local units used to measure amount of peanuts produced? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E110. 0 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Peanuts? 0 TO 10…….. 1 11 TO 20…….. 2 21-50…….. 3 51-100…….. 4 100-1000…….. 5 1,001-9,999…….. 6 E110 What was the total number of [LOCAL UNIT]s harvested for Peanuts? |__|__|__|__| Valid Range determined by E110.0 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 149 E110 a What was the total cost of inputs used for peanuts production (e.g., purchased water, fuel, seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, hired labor, hired enforcement, hired equipment services) |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E111 Did you sell any peanuts in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E111≠1, SKIP TO E115 E112 What local unit measurement was used for peanuts crops sold? Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E113 If yes, what was the total amount of peanuts sold in [LOCAL UNIT]s? |__|__|__|__| E114 How much total income (CFA) did you receive from the sales of this crop? |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E114 a What was the main destination for the sale of peanuts? In the village………………….. 1 Local market……………….2 Regional market…………..3 Group Sale…………………………..4 Other (specify)………………...…5 E115 Did you store peanuts in the most recent agricultural year? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF E115≠1, SKIP TO E117 E116 If yes, what was the main method of storage used for peanuts? Greniers en paille pour épis...............1 Greniers en banco pour grains..........2 Jarres en banco pour grains..............3 Sac pour grains .................................4 Other..................................................5 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 150 E116 _a What was the total amount of peanuts consumed by the household? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E116 _b What was the total amount of peanuts gave as gift to others? |__|__|__|__| SELECT THE UNITS: Sacks (100 kg) ..................................1 Sacks (50 kg) ....................................2 Tins (20 kg) .......................................3 Box……………………………………..4 Yoruba plate……………………………5 Kilograms………………………………6 Large crate ........................................7 Small crate.........................................8 Calabash............................................9 Basket..............................................10 Other (Specify) ................................11 E116 _c What were the majors constraints you are facing in producing the peanuts? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No Technical mastery…..,,,1 Unavailability/ deficiency of improved seed………………………….2 Unavailability/ deficiency of fertilizers……………………3 Unavailability/ deficiency others inputs………………………4 Poor soil………………,,….,5 Land insufficiency………,,,6 Water deficiency………,,,..7 Too many taxes………,,,..8 Parasitic attacks………,,,.9 Flood………………,…….,10 Drought…………………,,,11 Other (to be specified) ….12 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E116 _d What were the majors constraints you are facing in the marketing of peanuts? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSES No Difficulty………………,,,0 No buyers…………………..1 Low selling price…………..2 Remote Sales Center….....3 Bad Road condition……....4 Poor quality of product……5 Other (specify) …………….6 ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 151 Livestock production E117. 0 During the most recent agricultural year, which of the following animals did you tend to? These could be animals you currently own, animals you sold, animals that died, or animals your household consumed. PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY Cattle………………………………………………..1 Donkeys……………………………………………..2 Horses…………………………………………………3 Sheep and Goats……………………………….4 Pigs…………………………………………….……….5 Poultry……………………………………………….6 Other (Specify)………………………………….7 E117 How many of the following types of livestock do you currently own? If none, enter “0.” A Cattle |__|__|__| ASK FOR ANIMALS THAT WERE SELECTED FOR E117.0 B Donkeys |__|__| C Horses |__|__| D Sheep and goats |__|__|__| E Pigs |__|__|__| F Poultry |__|__|__| G Other specify |__|__|__| E118 How many of the following types of your livestock died from disease during the most recent agricultural year? If none, enter “0.” A Cattle |__|__|__| ASK FOR ANIMALS THAT WERE SELECTED FOR E117.0 B Donkeys |__|__| C Horses |__|__| D Sheep and goats |__|__|__| E Pigs |__|__|__| F Poultry |__|__|__| G Other specify |__|__|__| E119 How many of the following types of livestock did you sell in the most recent agricultural year? If none, enter “0.” A Cattle |__|__|__| ASK FOR ANIMALS THAT WERE SELECTED FOR E117.0 B Donkeys |__|__| C Horses |__|__| D Sheep and goats |__|__|__| E Pigs |__|__|__| F Poultry |__|__|__| G Other specify |__|__|__| E120. 2 How many of the following types of your livestock are consumed you’re your household during the most recent agricultural year? If none, enter “0.” A Cattle |__|__|__| ASK FOR B Donkeys ANIMALS |__|__| FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 152 C Horses |__|__| THAT WERE SELECTED FOR E117.0 D Sheep and goats |__|__|__| E Pigs |__|__|__| F Poultry |__|__|__| E120 What was the total amount (in CFA) you received from sales of the following livestock in the last agricultural year? A Cattle |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| SKIP IF E119=0 FOR CATTLE B Donkeys |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| SKIP IF E119=0 FOR DONKEYS C Horses |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| SKIP IF E119=0 FOR HORSES D Sheep and goats |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| SKIP IF E119=0 FOR SHEEP/GO ATS E Pigs |__|__|__|__|__|__|__ SKIP IF E119=0 FOR PIGS F Poultry |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| SKIP IF E119=0 FOR POULTRY G Other specify |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| SKIP IF E119=0 FOR OTHER E117 a What is the cost of inputs used for livestock production during the most recent agricultural year A Cattle |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| ASK FOR ANIMALS THAT WERE SELECTED FOR E117.0 B Donkeys |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| C Horses |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| D Sheep and goats |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| E Pigs |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| F Poultry |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| G Other specify |__|__|__|__|__|__|__| E120. 1 What was the main destination for the livestock products sale? In the village………………….. 1 Local market………………….. 2 Regional market……………….3 Group-sale……………………..4 other (specify)………………….5 SKIP IF E119 = 0 FOR ALL ANIMALS FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 153 E120. 3 Did you practice any of the following value chain activities directly related to your livestock production during the most recent agricultural year? Joint purchase of vaccinations ..........1 Bulk sale through farmer’s groups.....2 Record keeping (production, input costs, sales, etc.)...............................3 Marketing skills (marketing through groups, negotiation, numeracy, etc.).4 Delayed sales ....................................5 Other..................................................6 NONE OF THE ABOVE...................10 SELECT ALL THE APPLY E120. 4 Which of the following services did the interventions of the ViM project help to improve? Access to inputs ................................1 Access to financial services...............2 Access to market information ............3 Others (specify) ................................4 SELECT ALL THE APPLY E121 Now I would like to ask you about livestock management practices related to the animals over which you make decisions. Did you practice any of the following livestock management practices directly related to your animals during the most recent agricultural year? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Food complementation .......................1 Veterinary care ...................................2 Habitat Construction ..........................3 Maintaining sex ratio..........................4 Control/regulation of production ........5 Genetic amelioration..........................6 Other..................................................7 None of the above .............................8 |__| ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E122 Did you practice any of the following fodder activity for your livestock during the most recent agricultural year? Planting…………………………..…..1 Cut and stock………………………..2 Natural fodder……………………….3 Other…………………………………..4 None of the above…………………….5 |__| ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIO N E123 What kind of habitat did you build for your poultry during the most recent agricultural year? Case en paille....................................1 Case en banco ..................................2 Poulailler en parpaings coiffé en tôle 3 Other..................................................4 None……………………………………5 No poultry owned…………………….6 E124 In the most recent agricultural year, did your animals require any veterinary care? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF NO SKIP TO E127 E125 If yes, did you obtain any veterinary care? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF NO SKIP TO E127 E126 If yes, from where did you obtain veterinary care? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ministry of animal resources..............1 Other government agency.................2 Private veterinary clinic……………....3 NGO...................................................4 CBO...................................................5 Friend/neighbor/relative.....................6 Private organization...........................7 Volunteer village vaccinators………..8 Other..................................................9 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 154 E127 In the most recent agricultural year, have any of your animals obtained any vaccinations? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF NO/DK, GO TO E129 E128 If yes, from where did you obtain vaccinations? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Ministry of animal resources..............1 Other government agency.................2 Private veterinary clinic………..……..3 NGO...................................................4 CBO...................................................5 Friend/neighbor/relative.....................6 Private organization...........................7 Volunteer village vaccinators………..8 Other..................................................9 E129 In the most recent agricultural year, how much did you pay for: A Vet fees |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA SKIP IF E125=NO B Medicines |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA C Vaccinations |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA SKIP IF E127=NO D Other materials |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| CFA E130 How did you pay for this? Cash ..................................................1 Credit .................................................2 In-kind………………….………..……..3 SKIP IF E129=0 FOR ALL ITEMS E131 What were your major constraints in livestock activities? PROBE FOR MULTIPLE ANSWERS NEED RESPONSES ALLOW MUTIPLE SELECTIO N IS THERE ANOTHER FARMER PRESENT TO ENTER INFORMATION FOR? YES....................................................1 NO .....................................................2 IF RESPONSE =1, START AT E1 END MODULE F. HOUSEHOLD FOOD SECURITY. ASK THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR HOUSEHOLD FOOD PREPARATION No. Question Response Skips F1 ASK TO THE MEMBER IN CHARGE OF MEAL PREPARATION FOR THE HOUSEHOLD. WHO IS THE RESPONDENT? LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER NO MEMBER AVAILABLE…………..0 IF 0, SKIP TO SECTION G F2 HAS THE RESPONDENT FOR THIS SECTION ALREADY BEEN INTERVIEWED FOR A PREVIOUS SECTION? YES............................... 1 NO ................................ 2 If yes, skip to F3a FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 155 F3 Hello. My name is __________ and I work for CRDA, a survey research organization in Ouagadougou. We are working with NORC at the University of Chicago – a non￾profit research institution based in the United States. We are conducting an endline survey for the Victoire sur la Malnutrition (ViM) project implemented by ACDI/VOCA and their partners SNV, Save the Children, ATAD in Kaya region, APIL in Pissila region, and AZND in Bassalogho and Namissiguima regions.. The information we collect will be used for evaluating the project. You have been selected at random to participate in this survey. Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose not to participate. You are free to not answer any questions for any reason or to stop the interview at any time. Your responses will be kept confidential and we assure you that your individual responses will not be disclosed to anyone outside of the survey staff. There are not right or wrong answers. We will be grateful if you can provide us with true information. Do you agree to participate in the survey? YES............................... 1 NO ................................ 2 If no, return to F1 F3a During the last 7 days, generally how many meals did the household eat each day? Now I would like to ask you about the types of foods that you or anyone else in your household ate yesterday during the day and at night. READ THE LIST OF FOODS. CHOOSE “YES” IF ANYONE IN THE HOUSEHOLD ATE THE FOOD IN QUESTION. CHOOSE “NO” IF NO ONE IN THE HOUSEHOLD ATE THE FOOD. THE FOODS LISTED SHOULD BE THOSE PREPARED IN THE HOUSEHOLD AND EATEN IN THE HOUSEHOLD OR TAKEN ELSEWHERE TO EAT. DO NOT INCLUDE FOODS CONSUMED OUTSIDE THE HOME THAT WERE PREPARED ELSEWHERE. VERIFY THAT YESTERDAY WAS NOT UNUSUAL OR SPECIAL (FESTIVAL, FUNERAL, OR VISITOR). IF IT WAS A SPECIAL DAY DO NOT ADMINISTER THE REST OF THIS MODULE IN THIS HOUSEHOLD. Yesterday was a normal day .............................. 1 Yesterday was a special day .............................. 2 If special day, skip to F16 F4 Any “tô”, couscous, bread, rice, noodles, flat cake ,biscuits, or other foods made from millet, sorghum, maize, rice or wheat? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F5 Any potatoes, yams, manioc, cassava, or any other foods made from roots or tubers? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F6 Any vegetables? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F7 Any fruits? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 156 F8 Any beef, pork, lamb, goat, rabbit, wild game, chicken, duck, or other birds, liver, kidney, heart, or other organ meats? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F9 Any eggs? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F10 Any fresh or dried fish or shellfish? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F11 Any foods made from beans, cowpeas, lentils, or nuts? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F12 Any cheese, yogurt, milk, or other milk products? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F13 Any foods made with oil, fat, or butter? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F14 Any sugar or honey? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F15 Any other foods, such as condiments, coffee or tea? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F16. In the past 30 days, was there ever no food to eat of any kind in your house because of lack of resources to get food? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 If no skip to F18 F17. How often did this happen in the past 30 days? Rarely (1-2 times)....... 1 Sometimes (3-10 times)2 Often (more than 10 times ........................... 3 F18. In the past 30 days, did you or any household member go to sleep at night hungry because there was not enough food? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 If no skip to F20 F19. How often did this happen in the past 30 days? Rarely (1-2 times)....... 1 Sometimes (3-10 times)2 Often (more than 10times .................................... 3 F20. In the past 30 days, did you or any household member go a whole day and night without eating anything at all because there was not enough food? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 F21. How often did this happen in the past 30 days? Rarely (1-2 times)....... 1 Sometimes (3-10 times)2 Often (More than 10 times).......................... 3 F16. 1 During the month of July, was there ever no food to eat of any kind in your house because of lack of resources to get food? THE OBJECTIVE OF COLLECTING FOOD CONSUMPTION DATA CONCERNING JULY PERIOD IS TO PERMIT A GOOD COMPARISON WITH BASELINE FOOD CONSUMPTION DATA COLLECTED DURING THE PERIOD OF JULY 2012. YES............................. 1 NO………………2 If no skip to F18.1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 157 F17. 1 How often did this happen from the month of July? Rarely (1-2 times)....... 1 Sometimes (3-10 times)2 Often (more than 10 times 3 F18. 1 From the month of July, did you or any household member go to sleep at night hungry because there was not enough food? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 If no skip to F20.1 F19. 1 How often did this happen from the month of July? Rarely (1-2 times)....... 1 Sometimes (3-10 times)2 Often (more than 10times 3 F20. 1 From the month of July, did you or any household member go a whole day and night without eating anything at all because there was not enough food? YES............................. 1 NO .............................. 2 If no, end the module F21. 1 How often did this happen from the month of July? Rarely (1-2 times)....... 1 Sometimes (3-10 times)2 Often (More than 10 times) 3 End of Module G. WOMEN’S DIETARY DIVERSITY ASK THE FOLLOWING MODULES OF EACH WOMAN OF REPRODUCTIVE AGE (15-49 YEARS) IN THE HH No. Question Response Skips G1 ASK TO EACH WOMEN AGE 15-49 YEARS OLD IN THE HOUSEHOLD. WHO IS THE RESPONDENT? LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER NO MEMBER AVAILABLE…………..0 IF 0, SKIP TO SECTION K G2a HAS THE RESPONDENT FOR THIS SECTION ALREADY BEEN INTERVIEWED FOR A PREVIOUS SECTION? YES ...................................................1 NO .....................................................2 If yes, skip to G3 G2b Hello. My name is __________ and I work for CRDA, a survey research organization in Ouagadougou. We are working with NORC at the University of Chicago – a non-profit research institution based in the United States. We are conducting an endline survey for the Victoire sur la Malnutrition (ViM) project implemented by ACDI/VOCA and their partners SNV, Save the Children, ATAD in Kaya region, APIL in Pissila region, and AZND in Bassalogho and Namissiguima regions.. The information we collect will be used for evaluating the project. You have been selected at random to participate in this survey. Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose not to participate. You are free to not answer any YES ............................ 1 NO .............................. 2 If no, return to G1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 158 questions for any reason or to stop the interview at any time. Your responses will be kept confidential and we assure you that your individual responses will not be disclosed to anyone outside of the survey staff. There are not right or wrong answers. We will be grateful if you can provide us with true information. Do you agree to participate in the survey? G3 In what month and year were you born? Month Year G4 Please tell me how old you are. What was your age at your last birthday? RECORD AGE IN COMPLETED YEARS years G4A Did you or your children benefit from of ViM food ration distribution during the period 2012- 2016? YES ...................................................1 NO .....................................................2 G5 CHECK G3 AND G4: IS THE RESPONDENT BETWEEN THE AGES OF 15 AND 49 YEARS? IF THE INFORMATION IN G3 AND G4 CONFLICTS, DETERMINE WHICH IS MOST ACCURATE YES ............................ 1 NO .............................. 2 If NO, end the module G6 Please describe everything that you ate yesterday during the day or night, whether at home or outside the home. a) Think at when you first woke up yesterday. Did you eat anything at that time? C) IF YES: Please tell me everything you ate at that time. PROBE: Anything else? UNTIL RESPONDENT SAYS NOTHING ELSE. IF NO, CONTINUE TO PART b) b) What did you do after that? Did you eat anything at that time? IF YES: Please tell me everything you ate at that time. PROBE: Anything else? UNTIL RESPONDENT SAYS NOTHING ELSE. REPEAT QUESTION b) ABOVE UNTIL RESPONDENT SAYS SHE WENT TO SLEEP UNTIL THE NEXT DAY. IF RESPONDENT MENTIONS MIXED DISHES LIKE A PORRIDGE, SAUCE OR STEW, PROBE: Porridge, bread, rice, noodles, or other foods (galettes, beignets…) made from grains……………………….1 SELECT ALL THAT APPLY Pumpkin, carrots, squash, or sweet potatoes that are yellow or orange inside……………………….2 White potatoes, white yams, manioc, cassava, or any other foods made from roots……………………….3 Any dark green leafy vegetables……………………….4 Ripe mangoes, ripe papayas or (Insert other local vitamin A-rich fruits) ……………………….5 Any other fruits or vegetables ……………………….6 Liver, kidney, heart or other organ meats……………………….7 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 159 c) What ingredients were in that (MIXED DISH)? PROBE: Anything else? UNTIL RESPONDENT SAYS NOTHING ELSE. AS THE RESPONDENT RECALLS FOODS, SELECT THE CORRESPONDING FOOD FROM THE LIST. SELECT ALL THAT APPLY IF FOODS ARE USED IN SMALL AMOUNTS FOR SEASONING OR AS A CONDIMENT, THEY SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED ANYWHERE. Any meat, such as beef, pork, lamb, goat, chicken, or duck ……………………….8 Eggs……………………….9 Fresh or dried fish, shellfish, or seafood……………………….10 Any foods made from beans, peas, lentils, nuts, or seeds ……………………….11 Cheese, yogurt, or other milk products ……………………….12 Any oil, fats, or butter, or foods made with any of these ……………………….13 Any sugary foods such as chocolates, sweets, candies, pastries, cakes, or biscuits……………………….14 Condiments for flavor, such as chilies, spices, herbs or fish powder ……………………….15 Grubs, snails or insects ……………………….16 Foods made with red palm oil, red palm nut, or red palm nut pulp sauce ……………………….17 DID NOT EAT ANY FOOD………18 G7 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Porridge, bread, rice, noodles, or other foods (galettes, beignets…) made from grains YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=1 OR 18 G8 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Pumpkin, carrots, squash, or sweet potatoes that are yellow or orange inside YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=2 OR 18 G9 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : White potatoes, white yams, manioc, cassava, or any other foods made from roots YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=3 OR 18 G10 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=4 OR 18 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 160 Any dark green leafy vegetables G11 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Ripe mangoes, ripe papayas or (Insert other local vitamin A-rich fruits) YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=5 OR 18 G12 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Any other fruits or vegetables YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=6 OR 18 G13 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Liver, kidney, heart or other organ meats YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=7 OR 18 G14 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Any meat, such as beef, pork, lamb, goat, chicken, or duck YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=8 OR 18 G15 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Eggs YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=9 OR 18 G16 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Fresh or dried fish, shellfish, or seafood YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=10 OR 18 G17 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Any foods made from beans, peas, lentils, nuts, or seeds YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=11 OR 18 G18 Yesterday during the day or night, did you drink or eat any : Cheese, yogurt, or other milk products YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=12 OR 18 G19 Yesterday during the day or night, did you drink or eat any : Any oil, fats, or butter, or foods made with any of these YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=13 OR 18 G20 Yesterday during the day or night, did you drink or eat any : Any sugary foods such as chocolates, sweets, candies, pastries, cakes, or biscuits YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=14 OR 18 G21 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Condiments for flavor, such as chilies, spices, herbs or fish powder YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=15 OR 18 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 161 G22 Yesterday during the day or night, did you eat any : Grubs, snails or insects YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=16 OR 18 G23 Yesterday during the day or night, did you drink or eat any : Foods made with red palm oil, red palm nut, or red palm nut pulp sauce YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF G6=17 OR 18 H. WOMEN’S GROUP PARTICIPATION AND LITERACY H1 Do you know any Mother Leader Animatrices (MLA) group? YES .....................................1 NO…………………………….2 If No or DNK, skip to H2a H2 Are you a member of the Mother Leader Animatrices (MLA) group? YES .....................................1 NO…………………………….2 If No or DNK, skip to H2a H3.1 Do you feel that you are more respected after participating in the Mother Leader Animatrices (MLA) group? YES .....................................1 NO…………………………….2 If No or DNK, skip to H2a H3.2 From whom did you get more respected after participating in the Mother Leader Animatrices (MLA) group? SELECT ALL THE RESPONSES MENTIONED SPOUSE..............................1 OTHER WOMEN IN HOUSEHOLD…….2 OTHER MEN IN HOUSEHOLD…….3 OTHER WOMEN OUTSIDE OF OWN HOUSEHOLD …….4 OTHER MALES OUTSIDE OF OWN HOUSEHOLD …….5 OTHER PERSON OUTSIDE OF OWN HOUSEHOLD …….6 (SPECIFY) ALLOW MULTIPL E SELECTIO N H2a Are you member of a neighborhood grou? YES .....................................1 NO…………………………….2 H4 Are you a member of a producer group or other community organization? This includes women’s groups, church groups, farmer’s associations, or any other organization. YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 If NO, skip to H7 H5 what groups are you a member of? SELECT ALL THE APPLY Farmer’s group .................... 1 Women’s economic group... 2 Women’s empowerment group……3 Women’s literacy group....... 4 Church group....................... 5 Village savings and loans group….6 Other.................................... 7 ALLOW MULTIPL E SELECTIO N H6 What positions did you hold in your group(s)? SELECT ALL THE APPLY GENERAL MEMBER........... 1 SECRETARY....................... 2 ALLOW MULTIPL FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 162 TREASURER ...................... 3 GROUP LEADER................ 4 IN CHARGE OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION ……………..5 OTHER ................................ 6 E SELECTIO N H7 Are you involved with the following activities for your household? Agriculture value chain activities……………………1 Livestock value chain activities….2 Small business activities……….3 Other (specify)………………4 NONE………………………….0 SELECT ALL THE APPLY, EXPECT “NONE” H8 Now I would like you to read this sentence to me. SHOW CARD TO RESPONDENT IF RESPONDENT CANNOT READ WHOLE SENTENCE, PROBE: Can you read any part of the sentence to me? CANNOT READ AT ALL ..... 1 ABLE TO READ ONLY PARTS OF SENTENCE......................... 2 ABLE TO READ WHOLE SENTENCE ............................................. 3 NO CARD WITH REQUIRED LANGUAGE......................... 4 BLIND/VISUALLY IMPAIRED5 I. DECISION-MAKING I1 Are you currently married or living with a man? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 If NO, skip to J0 I2 As you know, some women take up jobs for which they are paid in cash or kind. Others sell things, have a small business or work on the family farm or in the family business. Aside from your own housework, have you done any work in the last 12 months? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 If NO/DNK, skip to I6 I3 What is your occupation, that is, what kind of work do you mainly do? 1= Agriculture 2= Child care 3= Small business 4= Mining activities 5= Other I4 Were you paid in cash or kind for this work or were you not paid at all? Cash only............................. 1 Cash and kind...................... 2 In kind only .......................... 3 Not paid ............................... 4 If 3 or 4, skip to I6 I5 Who usually decides how the money you earn will be used: you, your (husband/partner), or you and your (husband/partner) jointly Respondent ......................... 1 Husband/partner.................. 2 Husband/partner jointly ....... 3 Other specify__________ ... 4 I6 Who usually makes decisions about health care for yourself: you, your (husband/partner), you Respondent ......................... 1 Husband/partner.................. 2 Husband/partner jointly ....... 3 Other specify___________ . 4 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 163 and your (husband/partner) jointly, or someone else I7 Do you have any children less than 18 years old? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 If NO, skip to I9 I8 Who usually makes decisions about health care for your children less than 18: you, your (husband/partner), you and your (husband/partner) jointly, or someone else Respondent ......................... 1 Husband/partner.................. 2 Husband/partner jointly ....... 3 Other specify___________ . 4 I9 Sometimes a husband is annoyed or angered by things which his wife does. In your opinion, in which of the following situations is a husband justified in hitting or beating his wife/partner: (READ EACH OF THE FOLLOWING AND SELECT THE APPROPRIATE ANSWER) I9A If she goes out to do something without telling him YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 I9B If she neglects the children YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 I9C If she argues with him YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 I9D If she refuses to sleep /have sex with him YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 I9E If she burns the food YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 I9F Any other reason YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 J. ANTENATAL CARE J0 I would like to ask you about pregnancies and births that you may have had. Have you ever been pregnant? IF ‘NO’ PROBE BY ASKING: Were you ever pregnant, even if pregnancy did not result in the birth of a live child? YES ..................................... 1 NO ..................................... 2 If NO, end the module J1 Have you ever given birth? IF ‘NO’ PROBE BY ASKING: I mean, to a child who ever breathed or cried or showed other signs of life – even if he or she lived only a few minutes or hours? YES .....................................1 NO .......................................2 If NO, end the module J2 When was the last time you gave birth (even if your child is no longer living)? IF THE RESPONDENT DOES NOT KNOW THE BIRTHDATE ASK: Do you have a health/vaccination card for that child with the birthdate recorded? Date of last birth DAY...................... |___|___| MONTH................ |___|___| YEARY... |___|___||___|___| FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 164 IF THE HEALTH/VACCINATION CARD IS SHOWN, RECORD THE DATE OF BIRTH AS DOCUMENTED ON THE CARD. J3 CHECK Q2: DID THE RESPONDENT’S LAST BIRTH OCCUR WITHIN THE LAST 2 YEARS, THAT IS, SINCE (DAY AND MONTH OF INTERVIEW, YEAR 2017)? YES, LIVE BIRTH SINCE(DAY AND MONTH OF INTERVIEW, YEAR 2017) .............................................1 NO LIVE BIRTH SINCE(DAY AND MONTH OF INTERVIEW, YEAR 2017) .............................................2 No birth since day and month of interview 2017 ....................3 If 2 or 3, end the module J4 What is the name of your child who was born on (DATE INDICATED IN J2)? Name:……………….. J5 During your pregnancy with (NAME INDICATED IN J4, did you see anyone for antenatal care? YES .....................................1 NO .......................................2 If no, skip to J7 J6a Whom did you see? Anyone else? PROBE TO IDENTIFY EACH TYPE OF PERSON AND RECORD ALL MENTIONED Doctor..................................1 Nurse/midwife......................2 Auxiliary midwife..................3 Traditional birth attendant .............................................4 Community/village health worker ......5 Other....................................6 Do not know.........................7 ALLOW MULTIP LE SELECT ION J6b Do you have a health card which contains your antenatal care consultations? YES .....................................1 NO .......................................2 J6c During your pregnancy with (Name), how many times did you receive antenatal care? Ask once? Twice? Three times? Four time? More… times J7 Who assisted with the delivery of (NAME OF CHILD)? PROBE TO IDENTIFY EACH TYPE OF PERSON AND RECORD ALL MENTIONED Doctor..................................1 Nurse/midwife......................2 Auxiliary midwife..................3 Traditional birth attendant .............................................4 Community/village health worker ......5 Other....................................6 ALLOW MULTIP LE SELECT ION J8 In the first two months after delivery, did you receive a vitamin A dose like (this/any of these)? SHOW COMMON TYPES OF AMPULES/CAPSULES/SYRUPS. YES .....................................1 NO .......................................2 J9.1 During this pregnancy, were you given or did you buy any iron tablets or iron syrup? YES .....................................1 NO .......................................2 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 165 SHOW COMMON TYPES OF TABLETS/SYRUP J9.2 During the past seven days, were you given or did you buy any iron tablets or iron syrup? SHOW COMMON TYPES OF TABLETS/SYRUP YES .....................................1 NO .......................................2 J10 During the whole pregnancy, for how many days did you take the tablets or syrup? IF ANSWER IS NOT NUMERIC, PROBE FOR APPROXIMATE NUMBER OF DAYS times J11 FILTER QUESTION FOR PDA: IS THERE ANOTHER WOMAN 15-49 years in the household? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 End of Module K. CHILD ANTHROPOMETRICS Ask this module of each caregiver of children under five years (60 months) in the household No. Question Response Skips K1 CAREGIVER FOR THIS SECTION LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER NO MEMBER AVAILABLE…………..0 K2 CHILD FOR THIS SECTION LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER NO MEMBER AVAILABLE…………..0 IF K1 OR K2 = 0, SKIP TO SECTION N K3a HAS THE RESPONDENT FOR THIS SECTION ALREADY BEEN INTERVIEWED FOR A PREVIOUS SECTION? YES ....................................1 NO......................................2 If yes, skip to K4 K3b Hello. My name is __________ and I work for CRDA, a survey research organization in Ouagadougou. We are working with NORC at the University of Chicago – a non-profit research institution based in the United States. We are conducting an endline survey for the Victoire sur la Malnutrition (ViM) project implemented by ACDI/VOCA and their partners SNV, Save the Children, ATAD in Kaya region, APIL in Pissila region, and AZND in Bassalogho and Namissiguima regions. . The information we collect will be used for evaluating the project. You have been selected at random to participate in this survey. Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose not to participate. You are free YES................................... 1 NO..................................... 2 If no, Return to K1 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 166 to not answer any questions for any reason or to stop the interview at any time. Your responses will be kept confidential and we assure you that your individual responses will not be disclosed to anyone outside of the survey staff. There are not right or wrong answers. We will be grateful if you can provide us with true information. Do you agree to participate in the survey? K4 What is [CHILD NAME]’s sex? MALE.................................1 FEMALE............................2 K4a Did [CHILD NAME] benefit from ViM food ration distribution during the period 2012-2017? YES................................... 1 NO..................................... 2 K5a Do you have a vaccination card or other official document for [CHILD NAME] that contains the child’s birthdate? Can I see it? YES, SEEN ..................... 1 YES, NOT SEEN............. 2 NO CARD........................ 3 K5b I would like to ask you some question about [CHILD NAME] In what month and year was [CHILD NAME] born? What is his/her birthday? IF THE RESPONDENT DOES NOT KNOW THE EXACT BIRTHDATE ASK: Does [CHILD NAME] have a health/vaccination card with the birthdate recorded? IF THE HEALTH/VACCINTATION CARD IS SHOWN AND THE RESPONDENT CONFIRMS THE INFORMATION IS CORRECT, RECORD THE DATE OF BIRTH AS DOCUMENTED ON THE CARD DAY M O N T H YEAR K6 How old was [CHILD NAME] at his/her last birthday? RECORD AGE IN COMPLETED YEARS Years K7 How many months old is [CHILD NAME]? RECORD AGE IN COMPLETED MONTHS Months K8 CHECK QUESTIONS K5, K6, AND K7 TO VERIFY CONSISTENCY K8a IS THE YEAR RECORDED IN K5 CONSISTENT WITH THE AGE IN YEARS RECORDED IN K6? YES ...................................1 NO.....................................2 K8b ARE YEAR AND MONTH OF BIRTH RECORDED IN K5 CONSISTENT WITH AGE IN MONTHS RECORDED IN K7? YES ...................................1 NO.....................................2 IF THE ANSWER TO A) OR B) IS ‘NO’, RESOLVE ANY INCONSISTENCIES. IF THE BIRTHDATE WAS RECORDED ON A HEALTH CARD, THIS MAY BE USED AS THE CORRECT DATA SOURCE FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 167 Infant and young child feeding practices IF CHILD IS 24 MONTHS OR OLDER (K7>23), THEN SKIP THIS MODULE. START SECTION K FOR NEXT CHILD OR GO TO SECTION N. L2 Has [CHILD NAME] ever been breastfed? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 If NO or DK, skip to L6 L3 How long after birth did you first put [CHILD NAME] to the breast? IF RESPONDENT REPORTS SHE PUT THE INFANT TO THE BREAST IMMEDIATELY AFTER BIRTH, ENTER “IMMEDIATELY”. IF NOT IMMEDIATELY, BUT WITHIN THE FIRST HOUR OR 23 HOURS, ENTER “HOURS”. IF MORE THAN 1 DAY AFTER BIRTH, ENTER DAYS AND RECORD NUMBER OF COMPLETED DAYS. Immediately ......................... 1 Less than 1 hour 2 Hours (1-23) .................... 3 Days (1-99).......................... 4 L4a How many hours after birth did you put [CHILD NAME] to the breast? |__|__| hours Skip if L3 ≠3 L4b How many days after birth did you put [CHILD NAME] to the breast? |__|__| days Skip if L3 ≠4 L5 Was [CHILD NAME] breastfed yesterday during the day or at night YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 If YES, skip to L7 L6 Sometimes babies are fed breast milk in different ways, for example by spoon, cup or bottle. This can happen when the mother cannot always be with her baby. Sometimes babies are breastfed by another woman, or given breast milk from another woman by spoon, cup or bottle or some other way. This can happen if a mother cannot breastfeed her own baby. YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 K9 CHECK K7. IS THE CHILD LESS THAN 60 MONTHS? YES ...................................1 NO.....................................2 If NO or DK, end module K10 DOES CHILD HAVE EDEMA? YES ...................................1 NO.....................................2 K11 Weight in kilograms WEIGH [CHILD NAME] kg K12 CHILDREN UNDER 24 MONTHS SHOULD BE MEASURED LYING DOWN. CHILDREN 24 MONTHS OR OLDER SHOULD BE MEASURED STANDING UP. HEIGHT IN CENTIMETERS: MEASURE THE CHILD . cm .. . FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 168 Did [CHILD NAME] consume breast milk in any of these ways yesterday during the day or at night? L7 Now I would like to ask you about some medicines and vitamins that are sometimes given to infants. Was [CHILD NAME] given any vitamin drops or other medicines as drops yesterday during the day or at night YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 L8 Was [CHILD NAME] given [LOCAL NAME FOR ORS] yesterday during the day or at night? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 L9 READ THE QUESTIONS BELOW. READ THE LIST OF LIQUIDS ONE BY ONE AND MARK YES OR NO, ACCORDINGLY. Next I would like to ask you about some liquids that [CHILD NAME] may have had yesterday during the day or at night. Did [CHILD NAME] have any [ITEM FROM LIST]?: READ THE LIST OF LIQUIDS STARTING WITH ‘PLAIN WATER’ L10 Plain water? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 L11 Infant formula such as [insert local examples]? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 If no or don’t know, skip to L12 L11a How many times yesterday during the day or at night did [CHILD NAME] consume any infant formula? |__|__| L12 Milk such as tinned, powdered, or fresh animal milk? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 If no or don’t know, skip to L13 L12a How many times yesterday during the day or at night did [CHILD NAME] consume any milk? |__|__| L13 Juice or juice drinks? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 L14 Clear broth? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 L15 Yogurt? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 If no or don’t know, skip to L16 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 169 L15a How many times yesterday during the day or at night did [CHILD NAME] consume any yogurt? |__|__| L16 Thin porridge? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 L17 Any other liquids such as tisane, dolo YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 L18 Any other liquids such as zoom kom, bissap? YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 L18a Please describe everything that [CHILD NAME] ate yesterday during the day or night, whether at home or outside the home. a) Think about when [CHILD NAME] first woke up yesterday. Did [CHILD NAME] eat anything at that time? IF YES: Please tell me everything [CHILD NAME] ate at that time. PROBE: Anything else? UNTIL RESPONDENT SAYS NOTHING ELSE. IF NO, CONTINUE TO PART b) b) What did [CHILD NAME] do after that? Did [CHILD NAME] eat anything at that time? IF YES: Please tell me everything [CHILD NAME] ate at that time. PROBE: Anything else? REPEAT QUESTION b) ABOVE UNTIL RESPONDENT SAYS THE CHILD WENT TO SLEEP UNTIL THE NEXT DAY. IF RESPONDENT MENTIONS MIXED DISHES LIKE A PORRIDGE, SAUCE OR STEW, PROBE: c) What ingredients were in that (MIXED DISH)? PROBE: Anything else? UNTIL RESPONDENT SAYS NOTHING ELSE AS THE RESPONDENT RECALLS FOODS, SELECT THE CORRESPONDING FOOD FROM THE LIST. SELECT ALL THAT APPLY. IF FOODS ARE USED IN SMALL AMOUNTS FOR SEASONING OR AS A CONDIMENT, THEY SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED ANYWHERE. Porridge, bread, rice, noodles, or other foods (galettes, beignets…) made from grains……………………….1 SELECT ALL THAT APPLY Pumpkin, carrots, squash, or sweet potatoes that are yellow or orange inside……………………….2 White potatoes, white yams, manioc, cassava, or any other foods made from roots……………………….3 Any dark green leafy vegetables……………………….4 Ripe mangoes, ripe papayas or (Insert other local vitamin A-rich fruits) ……………………….5 Any other fruits or vegetables ……………………….6 Liver, kidney, heart or other organ meats……………………….7 Any meat, such as beef, pork, lamb, goat, chicken, or duck ……………………….8 Eggs……………………….9 Fresh or dried fish, shellfish, or seafood……………………….10 Any foods made from beans, peas, lentils, nuts, or seeds ……………………….11 Cheese, yogurt, or other milk products ……………………….12 Any oil, fats, or butter, or foods made with any of these ……………………….13 Any sugary foods such as chocolates, sweets, candies, pastries, cakes, or biscuits……………………….14 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 170 Condiments for flavor, such as chilies, spices, herbs or fish powder ……………………….15 Grubs, snails or insects ……………………….16 Foods made with red palm oil, red palm nut, or red palm nut pulp sauce ……………………….17 CHILD ATE NO FOOD…….18 L19 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Porridge, bread, rice, noodles, or other foods (galettes, beignets…) made from grains YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=1 OR 18 L20 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Pumpkin, carrots, squash, or sweet potatoes that are yellow or orange inside YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=2 OR 18 L21 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : White potatoes, white yams, manioc, cassava, or any other foods made from roots YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=3 OR 18 L22 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Any dark green leafy vegetables YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=4 OR 18 L23 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Ripe mangoes, ripe papayas or (Insert other local vitamin A-rich fruits) YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=5 OR 18 L24 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Any other fruits or vegetables YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=6 OR 18 L25 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Liver, kidney, heart or other organ meats YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=7 OR 18 L26 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Any meat, such as beef, pork, lamb, goat, chicken, or duck YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=8 OR 18 L27 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Eggs YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=9 OR 18 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 171 L28 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Fresh or dried fish, shellfish, or seafood YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=10 OR 18 L29 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Any foods made from beans, peas, lentils, nuts, or seeds YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=11 OR 18 L30 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] drink or eat any : Cheese, yogurt, or other milk products YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=12 OR 18 L31 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] drink or eat any : Any oil, fats, or butter, or foods made with any of these YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=13 OR 18 L32 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] drink or eat any : Any sugary foods such as chocolates, sweets, candies, pastries, cakes, or biscuits YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=14 OR 18 L33 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Condiments for flavor, such as chilies, spices, herbs or fish powder YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=15 OR 18 L34 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] eat any : Grubs, snails or insects YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=16 OR 18 L35 Yesterday during the day or night, did [CHILD NAME] drink or eat any : Foods made with red palm oil, red palm nut, or red palm nut pulp sauce YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 SKIP IF L18=17 OR 18 L37 How many times did [CHILD NAME] eat solid, semi-solid, or soft foods other than liquids yesterday during the day or at night? times L38 Within the last six months, was [CHILD NAME] given a Vitamin A does like (this/any of these?) SHOW COMMON TYPES OF AMPULES/CAPSULES/SYRUPS YES ..................................... 1 NO ....................................... 2 L39 Does [CHILD NAME] have a growth monitoring card? That is, a card that looks like something like this? SHOW COMMON TYPES OF GROWTH MONITORING CARDS YES, CARD AVAILABLE .... 1 YES, NO CARD AVAILABLE…. 2 NO ....................................... 9 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 172 L40 IF YES, AS TO SEE THE CARD. RECORD THE LAST DATE OF MEASUREMENT DAY M O N T H YEAR SKIP IF L39≠1 L41 ASK CAREGIVER: Please mention all of the occasions when it is important to wash your hands. DO NOT READ ANSWERS. AFTER RESPONDENT INITIALLY ANSWERS, ASK TWO MORE TIMES IF THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE. RECORD RESPONSES. CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY. IF THE RESPONDENT INDICATES THAT SHE DOES NOT KNOW, DO NOT PROBE FOR ADDITIONAL RESPONSES. BEFORE EATING…….... 1 AFTER EATING…………. 2 BEFORE PRAYING..……. 3 BEFORE BREASTFEEDING OR FEEDING A CHILD….. 4 BEFORE COOKING OR PREPARING FOOD………..5 AFTER DEFECATION/URINATION…..6 AFTER CLEANING A CHILD THAT HAS DEFECATED/CHANGING A CHILD’S NAPPY…………...7 WHEN MY HANDS ARE DIRTY… 8 AFTER CLEANING THE TOILET OR POTTY………...9 OTHER ……………….10 L42 The last time [CHILD NAME] passed stool, where did he/she defecate? USED POTTY .....................1 USED WASHABLE DIAPER2 USED DISPOSABLE DIAPERS..3 WENT IN HIS/HER CLOTHES ...4 WENT IN HOUSE/YARD ....5 WENT OUTSIDE THE PREMISES..........................6 USED OWN SANITATION FACILITY.............................7 USED PUBLIC LATRINE....8 OTHER (SPECIFY) ............9 If 7 or 8, skip to L45 L43 The last time [CHILD NAME] passed stool, where were his/her feces disposed? DROPPED INTO TOILET FACILITY.............................1 BURIED...............................2 SOLID WASTE/TRASH ......3 IN YARD..............................4 OUTSIDE PREMISES.........5 PUBLIC LATRINE ...............6 INTO SINK OR TUB............7 THROWN INTO WATERWAY ....8 AT THE WELL.....................9 THROWN ELSEWHERE (SPECIFY) ........................10 WASHED OR RINSED AWAY(SPECIFY) .............11 If 1-10, skip to L45 L44 Where was the wastewater disposed? DROPPED INTO TOILET FACILITY.............................1 SOLID WASTE/TRASH ......2 SKIP IF L43≠11 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 173 IN YARD..............................3 OUTSIDE PREMISES.........4 PUBLIC LATRINE ...............5 INTO SINK OR TUB............6 THROWN INTO WATERWAY ....7 AT THE WELL.....................8 THROWN ELSEWHERE (SPECIFY) ..........................9 Child vaccination L45 Does the caregiver have a vaccination card for [CHILD NAME]? Have you seen it? Yes, Seen........................ 1 Yes, Not Seen................. 2 No Card........................... 3 If 2 or 3 skip to L47 L46 (1) COPY VACCINATION DATE FOR EACH VACCINE FROM THE CARD. (2) ENTER DECEMBER 1, 2017 (01-12-2017) IF CARD SHOWS THAT A VACCINATION WAS GIVEN BUT NO DATE IS RECORDED. Day Month Year BCG ...... 20 Polio 0 ... 20 Polio 1 ... 20 Polio 2 ... 20 Polio 3 ... 20 Penta 1.. 20 Penta 2.. 20 Penta 3.. 20 Rougeole 20 Fièvre Jaune 20 CHILD DID NOT RECEIVE ANY……………………..-99 L47 Has [CHILD NAME] received any vaccinations that were not recorded on this card? YES................................... 1 NO..................................... 2 If 2 or DK, skip to L54 L48 Please tell me if [CHILD NAME] received any of the following vaccinations: A BCG vaccination against tuberculosis, that is, an injection in the left shoulder that caused a scar? YES................................... 1 NO..................................... 2 L49 Polio vaccine that is, drops in the mouth? YES................................... 1 NO..................................... 2 IF L49≠1, SKIP TO L51 L50 How many times did [CHILD NAME] receive polio vaccine: Times L51 Penta vaccination, that is, an injection given in the thigh or buttocks, sometimes at the same time as polio drops? YES................................... 1 NO..................................... 2 IF L49≠1, SKIP TO L53 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 174 L52 How many times? Number of times.............. L53 An injection given to prevent measles after 9 months of age? VAA at 9 months .............. 1 Rougeole rappel at 15 months…………………..2 Meningite at 15 months….3 NONE………………….0 L54 Did the child receive postnatal health check within the two days of birth? YES................................... 1 NO....................................... FILTER QUESTION FOR PDA: IS THERE ANOTHER CHILD UNDER 5 YEARS TO ENTER INFORMATION FOR? YES................................... 1 NO...................................... 2 IF YES, REPEA T MODUL ES K AND L WITH NEXT CHILD End of Module N. RESPONDENT VERIFICATION No. Question Response Skips N1 Were there any eligible respondents you were unable to interview ? Yes............................. 1 No .............................. 2 If no, go to N3 N2 If yes, who? LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER N3 Where there any respondents that refused to be interviewed ? Yes............................. 1 No .............................. 2 If no, end interview N4 If yes, who? LIST ALL NAMES FROM HOUSEHOLD ROSTER N5 Household Number |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__ | THANKS! FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 175 X. EVALUATION SOW IX EVALUATION SOW I. Introduction ACDI/VOCA is contracting NORC to carry out a final end–of-project summative performance evaluation for the Burkina Faso Victory against Malnutrition Project (ViM), implemented in four communes of Sanmatenga province in the Central North Region of Burkina Faso. The evaluation will cover the nearly six-year period, from August 2011 through July 2017. The final evaluation consists of two components to determine to what extent the food security status of the targeted population has changed and how the project has contributed to the resiliency of the targeted communities. Component One: This will be a quantitative performance evaluation to measure change and assess the results achieved. The quantitative performance evaluation will compare the results of the quantitative end-line survey with the baseline conducted during the same period in 2012 (July to August). This end￾line survey will measure change and assess the results achieved by the ViM program by statistically comparing the end-line survey results against the baseline survey results in ViM operational areas. 7 All quantitative data must be sex-disaggregated and, if possible, age disaggregated. Component Two: This will be a qualitative evaluation analyzing changes in awareness, perception, knowledge, and behavior of target beneficiaries. A series of focus groups, collection of most significant change stories, and key informant interviews will be conducted to gather information on respondents’ attitudes and practices related to agriculture and livestock, market, health, nutrition, sanitation, environment protection and gender equity and women's empowerment. All data must be sex￾disaggregated, and collected in a way that does not put women in any unsafe or compromising positions (i.e. that does not ask questions on impact in front of husbands). The respondents will be sampled from beneficiaries in the ViM intervention areas, as well as key stakeholders from the targeted communes, the central north regional authorities, government ministry representatives, and implementing NGO and CBO representatives. The final end–of-project summative performance evaluation will be conducted on the ground during the period of July – August, 2017, with preparatory work starting in early July, 2017. The draft report will be completed by November, 2017 and take into consideration USAID feedback. A final draft of the report will then be completed, with the final report completed and presented by December, 2017. 7 USAID’S Office of Food for Peace Policy and guidance for monitoring, evaluation, and reporting for development food security activities, Page 74. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 176 Description of the Project The Victory against Malnutrition (ViM) Project is an USAID/Food for Peace funded Title II Multi Year Assistance Program (MYAP), managed by ACDI/VOCA, in partnership with Save the Children (SC) and the Netherlands Development Organization (SNV) and three Local Implementing Partners (LIPs). ViM’s primary goal under the MYAP is to reduce food insecurity among vulnerable rural populations in four targeted communes of Sanmatenga province in the Centre Nord region of Burkina Faso. Its activities and intermediate results are designed around three integrated Strategic Objectives (SO): Strategic Objective 1 (SO1): Increased and diversified agricultural production IR 1.1 Improved agricultural practices adopted IR 1.2 Improved smallholder access to agricultural inputs IR 1.3 Improved livestock practices adopted Strategic Objective 2 (SO2): Improved household incomes IR 2.1 Market linkages improved IR 2.2 Access to business development services improved Strategic Objective 3 (SO3): Reduced chronic malnutrition among children under five years of age and pregnant and lactating women (PLW) IR 3.1 Improved mother and child health and nutrition (MCHN) practices IR 3.2 Improved quality of health services IR 3.3 Improved hygiene and sanitation practices. The project is also addressing gender equity and environmental stewardship across these objectives. Key partners and coordination of activities ViM is implemented through a consortium of three international organizations: • ACDI/VOCA: Prime award recipient and lead organization responsible for interventions pertaining to Strategic Objectives 1 and 2 in collaboration with Local Implementing Partners (LIPs); • Save the Children: subaward recipient responsible for implementing Strategic Objective 3 aimed at reducing chronic malnutrition; • SNV: subaward recipient responsible for the capacity building of mainly the Local Implementing Partners to allow them to properly implement activities under SO1 and SO2. Key Local Implementing Partners Grant funding is also provided to three local implementing partners (LIPs) who assist ViM with the implementation of SO1 and SO2 activities in each of the four targeted communes: • Alliance Technique d’Assistance au Développement (ATAD) operating in Kaya ; • Action pour la Promotion des Initiatives Locales (APIL) operating in Pissila; and • Association Zood Noma pour le Développement (AZND) operating in both Barsalogo and Namissiguima communes. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 177 LIPs are responsible for mobilizing and organizing producer groups, providing technical and training support to targeted beneficiaries through Farmer Field Schools (FFS) for agricultural production and Demonstration Herd (DH) for Livestock, and supplementing this assistance with agricultural and livestock inputs, technical follow-up, and field support on agricultural and livestock improved production practices at field sites with targeted beneficiaries. Other local implementing partners providing services under ViM include: • Association des Grossistes et Détaillants d’Intrants Agricoles (AGRODIA) coordinating the supply of subsidized agricultural and livestock inputs through its wholesaler / retailer members to targeted beneficiaries under a voucher program. • Burkina Faso Coalition for Women's Rights (CBDF) to develop relevant educational messages that can contribute to develop women’s leadership as well as get them fully participate into the project activities. To this same end, gender training was also directed toward ViM, LIPs, producers, traditional, and religious leaders. • Caisse Populaire and Organisation Catholique pour le Développment Economique et la Solidarité (OCADES) are engaged in micro credit promotion, particularly for women. • Institute for Environment and Agricultural Research of Burkina Faso (INERA) which provides support in the promotion of adapted crops and livestock species and improved and sustainable production techniques as well. Geographical location Project implementation occurs in the four contiguous communes of Namissiguima, Kaya, Barsalogo, and Pissila in Sanmatenga province (Refer to Figure 1 below). ViM targets those communities within these communes that are considered to be food insecure and having high malnutrition rates, and are directed at benefiting pregnant and lactating women and children under five as well as members of producer groups. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 178 Figure 5: Targeted beneficiary groups and geographic coverage of the project FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 179 1.2 Background ViM is a six-year Title II MYAP Program that began in August 2011 and operates through September 2017. The project supports activities directed at agriculture, livestock and improved livelihoods as well as health and nutritional initiatives through Preventing Malnutrition in Children under 2 Approach (PM2A). To ensure appropriate integration of the project activities ViM: • Identifies and works with producer groups that have significant numbers of PM2A and vulnerable households; • Encourages vulnerable PM2A households to participate in producer group activities; • Utilizes the mother care groups as a foundation for promotion of health, nutrition, and sanitation knowledge and practices; • Monitors PM2A households and the producer group members for potential livelihood program activities that could be supported through the small grant program, particularly off-farm activities. These, along with ViM’s Title II approach, are guided by four main pillars. These include food availability, access, and utilization, along with empowering women: Food availability. People living in the targeted communes of Namissiguima, Kaya, Barsalogo, and Pissila are heavily dependent on agriculture for their livelihoods. Farming activities include rainy season crops consisting primarily of sorghum, millet, maize and cowpeas, and dry-season irrigated crops, also called “market garden”, consisting of vegetables including cabbage, onions and tomatoes. The activities face challenges with low agricultural productivity and post-harvest losses. They are specifically impeded by poor and eroded soils, over-grazed and over-farmed land, and a lack of water resources. The ministry of agriculture extension agents lack adequate resources for knowledge transfer and technical assistance. The lack of purchasing power particularly true for women limits the smallholders’ access to agricultural inputs. Also, the lack of insecticide and reliable storage facilities forces smallholders to sell crops at harvest, when market prices are low. Livestock production is based on extensive grazing and is characterized by a low production due to a lack of adequate feeding and veterinary care. In addition, the women who represents about 52% of the total population lack an access to agricultural and livestock services and also lack access to improved production technologies for their own plots; and this affects food availability. Decreasing and erratic rainfall regularly put farmers at risk of unpredictable harvests due to the fact that soils are superficial, eroded from livestock grazing, and overharvested for fuel and crop production. Food access. Burkina Faso has the ability to produce enough cereal to cover the population’s needs. However, low income and lack of market knowledge and access limits opportunities for acquisition and consumption. Food access remains critical in many areas due to limited production, transfer from production zones to zones where the demand and the prices are very high, particularly the big cities as well as the exportation of a portion of the production to neighboring countries taking advantage of higher prices. While poverty rates have declined in the Centre Nord since 1998, the poor remain trapped in a vicious cycle with natural disasters, poor harvest, and high global food prices. Producers are organized in groups or unions at regional, provincial, and communal levels, but vertical linkages along the value chains are underdeveloped. Producers have little information on market demand or standards. With regards to marketing gardening crops as well as cash crops like cowpea, inadequate storage limits producers’ bargaining power, therefore forcing them to sell at whatever is offered rather than risk losing their produce to spoilage. There are several constraints faced by the poor in accessing credit: the lack of collateral, especially for women, the high rate of illiteracy, and the lack of birth certificates or identity FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 180 card without which it is impossible to get a loan. While most the population is engaged in agricultural and livestock production, there are some opportunities for off-farm activities such as handicraft and pottery, food processing, and carpentry. However, high illiteracy rates, inadequate skill levels, and lack of access to training hamper the development of these sectors. Food utilization. In the Centre-Nord, stunting (40%) and wasting (11%) for children under five were considered in 2009 “very high” and “serious” according to WHO standards. Children often have poor, non-diversified diets that are low in essential nutrients and micronutrients (lacking fruits, vegetables). Furthermore, child feeding practices such as exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months, lack of food diversification in complementary feeding and lack of understanding about feeding frequency and food density are inadequate and therefore increasing malnutrition rates. Anemia, vitamin A deficiency, and non-regular prenatal consultative visits and poor maternal health and nutrition are also key factors affecting mothers’ health and likely to result in child malnutrition. In addition, there are several barriers to health services: lack of qualified health staff and lack of or nonfunctioning water and sanitation facilities. Poor hygiene and sanitation practices are prevalent because few households have access to soap or ash for hand washing or other public sanitation facilities. Moreover, washing hands with soap and water is not a social norm and people are not necessarily aware of the linkages between washing hands and diarrheal disease. This is linked to an elevated rate of diarrheal disease, one of the leading causes of childhood morbidity and mortality. Gender-based constraints to education, decision-making, and means of production: In Centre-Nord, the majority of women have received no formal education. In addition, the literacy rate is far lower among women in the project area. Women do not often participate in the decision-making processes, and as a result are not equitably and equally involved in the development action conducted by the government or by other actors. They usually lack appropriate knowledge for improved production, nutrition, hygiene, or sanitation following a lack of an adapted extension services and a limited access to technology and inputs. As a result, the rate of poverty is higher for women relying on marginal agricultural and livestock production with few opportunities for off-farm activities and very poor access to credit services. Brief description of key interventions and implementation activities Key interventions and activities addressing the above issues are implemented as follows: As of the end of the 2016 fiscal year (FY16), ViM reached 111,252 beneficiaries in 20,057 households. ViM’s integrated approach addresses chronic child malnutrition through PM2A activities, agriculture and livestock production intensification and diversification, and income-generation interventions to develop sustainable livelihood opportunities. This approach uses in-depth value chain analyses and is centered on improving agricultural and livestock productivity through improved practices and technologies, developing sustainable relationships between beneficiaries and public and private stakeholders, and linking smallholders to domestic and regional markets. Below is a summary of activities carried out under each component. Build technical, organizational, and management capacities for Producer Groups. ViM uses a training-of-trainers (TOT) methodology to train its LIPS. ViM’s technical approach, coupled with grant funding, also has a dual approach to strengthen organizational and financial management and develop their LIP capacity to deliver technical assistance to beneficiaries. During the six years (2011- FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 181 2016) the project identified to date 600 target producer groups (corresponding to 19,299 farmers) through consultation with the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Animal Resources, community leaders, and local implementing partners. All of the 600 targeted groups received training on key topics of group management, sustainable agriculture and livestock production techniques as well as organizational and financial management, business plan development, and access to financial resources (credit or from government/donor). Other training modules addressed health/nutrition and gender sensitizing and women’s leadership. Moreover, ViM contributed to the reinforcement of the human capital of the populations through the opening of 112 literacy centers over the period 2015-2016, benefiting 3,512 recipients (88.5 percent women). The rate of the those declared having literacy skills at the end of the sessions is about 91.3 percent (94 percent for the men and 91 percent for the women). Enhance producer capacities in farming. ViM promotes hands-on demonstrations and dissemination of knowledge of modern technologies for improved, diversified and profitable production, and post￾harvest handling techniques. A total of 16, 253 ViM producers received on-site training through the Farmer Field School (FFS), and the “Demonstration Plots and Herd”. ViM addressed access to farming inputs by introducing improved farming techniques and the expanded use of agricultural inputs. ViM carries out a voucher program in partnership with AGRODIA, a national association that groups wholesalers and retailers of seeds, fertilizers, phytosanitary products, and farm equipment throughout Burkina Faso. A total of 1,755 market gardening producers (onion and tomato) were reached, as well as 5,111 sorghum and cowpea producers. Furthermore, ViM trained 1,899 market gardening producers on composting, use of organic manure, and soil conservation techniques. In addition, 3,579 poultry and small ruminants’ producers benefited from training on animal hygiene and feeding, shelter and health care, as well as immunization. Expanding market opportunities for producer groups. The value chain analysis carried out earlier in 2012 identified buyers, both domestic and regional, as well as new opportunities. The project links producer groups to buyers so farmers have direct access to domestic and international markets, and therefore building understanding of the benefits of collective marketing. ViM supports producer group members to participate in networking opportunities hosted by the government, private sector, or donors. The value chain analysis identified a range of off-farm options to support pre and post-production activities at the household or producer-group level. ViM is addressing producers’ access to credit and saving services by linking producer group members to sources of credit through microfinance institutions (MFIs). In order for women to directly access credit, ACDI/VOCA has signed an agreement with Caisse Populaire. This agreement enables ACDI/VOCA to provide a grant to Caisse Populaire to extend efforts to cover ViM beneficiaries. With the funding, Caisse Populaire recruited approximately three to four additional Mother Leader Moderators/Animatrices (MLA) for the life of project that work directly with ViM project beneficiaries to form women’s saving groups. With this partnership with Caisse Populaire, ViM promoted village savings groups that allowed its women beneficiaries to obtain credit and develop income generating activities. Through the partnership with another financial institution, Mutuelle d'Epargne et du Crédit des Artisans et des Producteurs (MECAP) of Sanmatenga, ViM also facilitated vulnerable farmers access to the “warrantage” sytem for credit. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 182 In addition, in partnership with Organisation Catholique pour le Développement Économique et la Solidarité (OCADES), ViM established Savings and Internal Lending Community (SILC) groups in 21 villages in the commune of Kaya to further promote savings ad access to small credit. To further diversify the sources of income and further improve the producers’ resilience, ViM also promoted off-farm employment opportunities such as the processing of agricultural products, leather working, pasture fattening ovine, improved poultry farming and the non-woody forest products. Improved MCHN and hygiene practices. ViM’s 35 Health and Nutrition Promoter (HNPs) staff, with the aid of influential community members, identified existing entry points’ contact (e.g. community gatherings, special events) to disseminate key messages on exclusive breastfeeding, complementary feeding for children aged 6-23 months, immunization, deworming and vitamin A campaigns, hygiene and sanitation, as well as health and nutrition of pregnant and lactating women. In each community, ViM staff and community members identified 2,405 influential “mothers” to serve as health and nutrition community volunteers “animatrices” named Mother Leader Animatrices (MLA). These MLA were trained to carry out Social Behavior Change (SBC) activities aimed primarily at PLW and children under 2, but inclusive of children under 5 years and other caretakers. MLA 1) provide individual counseling through home visits; and 2) facilitate peer support groups on the adoption of Infant and Young Children Feeding (IYCF) and maternal health and nutrition practices. During implementation year 5 (IY 5), the MLA reached 36,075 beneficiary mothers. Through the Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) approach, ViM’s two Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) Facilitators work with government extension agents, students in primary schools, and community leaders to create awareness about open defecation and its negative health effects, and facilitate community discussion and decision-making on how to eliminate it within the community. WASH Facilitators and community members promote SBC hygiene messages in collaboration with MLA, ensuring reinforced messaging within the community. Improved access to adequate hygiene and sanitation services. ViM facilitated community mapping exercises to identify areas used for open defecation and determine where community latrines were needed, enable development of improvement plans (e.g. type of facility required), and construct communal latrines. This community-led approach increases awareness of current sanitation and hygiene issues, and mobilizes grassroots approaches aiming for open defecation free (ODF) status. 60 WASH village committees with 313 members, including 132 women, were formed in FY16 to conduct the CLTS approach and coordinate WASH activities within their villages. Thus, 135 family latrines with 327 simplified hand washing were newly constructed during FY16 by villagers on their own. ViM also supported the construction of two public latrines during FY16 at health centers. Improved access to key MCHN services. ViM assists the Ministry of Health (MOH) with logistics and outreach support to carry out MOH community health and nutrition initiatives and activities. ViM supported the MOH officers for a two-day supervision of immunization campaigns. The 2,405 MLA mobilize communities for MOH-led initiatives, such as child vaccinations and micronutrient distributions. ViM’s Health and Nutrition Promoters (HNP) support and provide formal and on-the-job training and supervision to district MOH staff in Growth Monitoring and Promotion (GMP), emphasizing the need for individual counseling so that mothers understand how their children’s growth is progressing and are able to determine barriers and possible solutions to inadequate growth. During FY16, HNPs trained and supervised 30 nurses’ chiefs, 30 maternity care responsible, 30 itinerant agents of health and 120 community health agents on diagnosing and administering zinc and oral rehydration solution to children under 5 with diarrhea (2,117 cases screened in implementation during FY 16), detection and follow-up FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 183 of Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM) cases (356 children screened in implementation FY16) and supplementation of vitamin A for 95,805 children up to six months of age. ViM distributed year-round food rations during the first five years to 44,663 children aged 6 to 23 months and to 40,730 PLW from the second trimester to 6 months after birth. Household rations were distributed to 28,600 households with 188,760 members during the lean season. Crosscutting activities Women Empowerment. ViM implemented its gender strategy in collaboration with the Direction Régionale de la Promotion de la Femme et du Genre du Centre Nord to address the lack of participation of women in decision makings within the communities. The leadership role of the women was one of the key topics which was discussed with the population through the sensation sessions held in the communities for an appropriate integration of gender in all the project activities throughout the ViM 199 intervention villages. Public awareness campaigns were organized on the gender and agriculture in collaboration with the Radio Rurale Internationale (RRI) to disseminate selected relevant gender-based messages to a broader rural audience: roles of gender, food security and Farming as Family Business (FaaFB), the promotion of women leadership. Environment. ViM elaborated a PERSUAP with the starting of the project and all the agricultural production activities always refer to this document for an effective management of the environmental aspects in project’s implementation. For this reason, the use of biological pesticides and chemical products authorized by the PERSUAP was encouraged in the producers’ farms. II. Purpose and objectives of the evaluation 2.1 Evaluation Purpose This activity will serve as the end-line and final performance evaluation of ViM project. It will assess the overall performance of the program in delivering on the anticipated project overall goal, Strategic Objectives(SO), Intermediate Results (IR), and activities. 2.2 Evaluation Objectives and QUESTIONS I. To what extent was the ViM project effective in achieving strategic objectives and intermediate results? Assess the performance of the ViM project based on a comparative statistical analysis8 of outcome and impact indicator data, collected through the endline and the baseline surveys. For key outcome and impact indicators. Using econometric analysis, identify plausible determinants and their contributions to the change. II. Using quantitative analysis, evaluate the effectiveness of ViM promoted improved agricultural and livestock practices in increasing and diversifying smallholder agricultural production. Assess smallholders’ access, affordability and use of agriculture and livestock extension services, quality of the services, high quality agricultural and livestock inputs including veterinary services. 8 Using test of difference FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 184 III. Assess the effectiveness of ViM project promoted practices around infant and young child feeding, maternal and child health; water, sanitation and hygiene in reducing malnutrition among children under five, and pregnant and lactating women. How prevalent are these practices in the ViM target communities? IV. What is the level of motivation among the potential service providers9 and the likelihood of their sustained service provision after the end of ViM project? What are the incentives? Assess the effectiveness of the strategies implemented by ViM project to ensure that private/public providers of agriculture, livestock, health, and nutrition services will continue to provide services after the end of ViM? How and where will these providers get resources to provide these critical services? How would their access to resources be different for services that are considered public vs private? What has been done by ViM project to ensure that the service providers will have continuous access to enhance their capacities? Assess the technical, organizational, and management capacities of the producer groups developed by ViM project and their effectiveness to provide sustained service delivery after the end of ViM. V. Assess the level of demand among the community members and willingness to pay for these essential services? What has been done by ViM to increase the motivations of the beneficiaries and service providers? What is the likelihood of continuous demand for these services? VI. Assess the effectiveness of the interventions implemented by ViM to strengthen households’ and communities’ resilience to idiosyncratic and co-variate shocks. How the households’ and communities perceive their capacity to manage these shocks? How well ViM implemented the recommendations from the formative evaluation to integrate with RISE initiatives? How well the management (e.g. monitoring and evaluation, partnership, and resource management), approaches (e.g. mothers’ groups, and farmer field schools), and cross cutting areas (e.g. community participation, gender, governance, and natural resource management) of ViM project integrated with the RISE initiatives and what are the results. VII. How well did ViM take advantage of the other USG investments that provide complementary services necessary to achieve ViM’s goal? What are the missed opportunities? What key lessons learned and best practices related to coordination should inform future FFP programming in Burkina Faso? VIII. How effective are the approaches used by ViM project to address gender issues related to access to and control over resources; decision making roles and opportunities; participation in community and social institutions; and freedom of speech and movement? What has been or could be done to sustain the positive gender related outcomes that are achieved by ViM? What are the lessons learned? IX. How effective were the partnerships developed with GoBF at national, commune, and village level as well as other development actors in delivering intended results aligned with country development objectives? Was there a well-developed exit strategy effectively communicated? X. What are the unintended positive and/or negative consequences of the ViM project? What lessons can be learned to minimize unintended negative consequences in the design of future 9 Agriculture, livestock, health and nutrition FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 185 projects? How can FFP and its partners design strategies to systematically capture positive consequences? XI. How effective are the value chain approaches used by ViM project to promote cowpeas and small livestock value chain in the target communities? Did the ViM project apply the value chain principles for improving small farmers ‘access to intrans, financial services and market? This evaluation is to be in line with the USAID Evaluation Policy http://www.usaid.gov/evaluation/policy) and Automated Directive System (ADS) 203.3.1.3, which require that an evaluation be conducted for each large project implemented. This performance evaluation will help be used to help inform the design of future projects. The evaluation is anticipated to be designed in a manner that maximizes the utility of the baseline survey, annual surveys, mid-term studies, formative evaluation that were carried out as well reflecting on the data gathered through the regular field visits undertaken by staff to collect and analyze information regarding the progress in the program implementation. Table 1 - Indicators to be considered during the evaluation (Refer to IPTT) III. Project Performance Measures Table 26: Project Performance Measures No. Outcome (OC) and Impact (IM) Indicators Disaggregation Strategic Objective 1: Increased and diversified agricultural production IM1 1.1: Average number of different types of agricultural products produced per farmer N/A IM2 Average yield of crops per farmer (Sorghum, Cowpeas, onion, tomato) N/A IR. 1.1: Improved Agricultural Practices Adopted OC1 1.1.1: Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture (crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season Sex OC2 1.1.2: % Farmers using intercropping for sorghum, cowpeas, onions, tomatoes Sex OC3 1.1.3: % farmers using thinning for sorghum Sex OC4 1.1.4: % Percentage of farmers who used at least 1 improved storage technique in the most recent season Sex IR. 1.2: Smallholder access to agricultural inputs improved OC6 1.2.1: % of farmers using improved agricultural inputs Sex IR. 1.3: Improved livestock practices adopted OC7 1.3.1: %of farmers adopting improved livestock practices Sex OC8 1.3.2: % of farmers accessing government or private sector veterinary care and vaccinations Sex Strategic Objective 2: Increased household incomes IM3 2.1. Average Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) N/A IM4 2.2: Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger N/A FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 186 No. Outcome (OC) and Impact (IM) Indicators Disaggregation OC9 2.3: Average value of a set of assets (including savings, livestock, etc.) per household (CFA) N/A IR. 2.1: Market linkages improved OC10 2.1.1: % change in value of purchases from smallholders of targeted commodities as a results of USG assistance N/A OC11 2.1.2: % of rural smallholders reporting more than 3 sources of revenue Sex OC12 2.1.3: Percentage of farmers who practiced the value chain activities promoted by the project in the most recent season Sex IR 2.2: Access to business development services improved OC13 2.2.1: Percentage of farmers who used financial services (savings, agricultural credit, and/or agricultural insurance) in the most recent season Sex OC14 2.2.2: % of farmers reporting access to up-to-date pricing information Sex Strategic Objective 3: Reduced chronic malnutrition among children under five years of age and pregnant and lactating mothers IM5 3.1. Prevalence of stunted children under five years of age N/A IM6 3.2: % Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age N/A OC15 3.3: Women’s Dietary Diversity: Mean number of food groups consumed by women of reproductive age N/A IR 3.1 Improved MCHN practices OC16 3.1.1: Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding of children under six months of age N/A OC17 3.1.2: % of children born in the last 24 months who were put to the breast within one hour of birth N/A OC18 3.1.3: Prevalence of children 6-23 months receiving a minimum acceptable diet N/A IR 3.2 Improved Quality of Health Services OC19 3.2.1: % of mothers with children age 0-23 months who had four or more antenatal visits when they were pregnant with their youngest child N/A OC21 3.2.4: % children 6-23 months who received vitamin A supplementation within the past 6 months N/A OC22 3.2.5: % of pregnant and lactating women who received iron and folic acid supplementation (disaggregated by last 7 days and last year) N/A OC23 3.2.6: % of women who received vitamin A supplementation post-partum N/A OC24 3.2.7: % of children 12-23 months of age children fully immunized (BCG, DPT3B, polio3/OPV3, measles/MMR) Sex OC25 3.2.8: % of children 0-23 months who have a growth monitoring card showing at least one weighing in the last 2 months N/A OC26 3.2.9: % of trained health agents who appropriately apply CCM protocol N/A OC27 3.3.1: % of households with children aged 0-23 months that have water and soap or a locally available cleansing agent at a hand washing place N/A OC27a Percentage of households with soap and water at a handwashing station commonly used by family members Rural,Urban OC28 3.3.2: % of households with access to an improved sanitation facility N/A FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 187 No. Outcome (OC) and Impact (IM) Indicators Disaggregation OC29 3.3.3: % of respondents who know all critical moments for hand washing N/A Crosscutting: Gender OC33 3.3.9: % of currently married women age 15-49 reporting that she makes decisions either by herself or jointly with her spouse regarding seeking health services for her own health; seeking health services for her children's health; how to spend money she herself has earned N/A OC34 3.3.10: % of women who agree that it is justifiable for a man to hit his wife under one or more circumstances N/A OC35 3.3.11: % of Care Group Animatrices who indicate that they are more respected after participating in the program [disaggregated by person named who respects them more] N/A Crosscutting: Environment OC36 3.3.12: % of beneficiaries adopting at least 3 environmentally sustainable technologies Sex OC37 3.3.13: % of rural smallholders reporting use of 2 environmental mitigation principals in diversified Income Generating Activities Sex OC38 3.3.14: % of smallholder farmers demonstrating knowledge of 2 sound pest management practices Sex Quality of partnership and consortium Targeting • To what extent was the project successful in identifying and targeting its beneficiaries, taking into account the different SOs and the context in the project area? • Who else benefited from project activities even though not initially identified as an intended beneficiary? How did they benefit? Integration • Are project activities integrated (this will be further defined by ViM’s M&E team and shared with the evaluation team during the initial briefing) at the field and beneficiaries level)? Which challenges are there in the integration process (targeting of beneficiaries, farmer groups selection, linkage between SO1 & SO2 and SO3)? What are the recommendations for improvement? Gender • Did the project put in place systems to address gender equity while promoting techniques related to agriculture and natural resources management? What could be done to improve equitable participation, workload distribution, and the benefits from interventions? • To what extent did ViM effectively implement its strategy of facilitating women’s access to inputs, assets, and resources in the target villages? Is there evidence of this? Which impediments are being encountered in this process? What suggestions of improvement can be made in future projects? • To what extent did ViM promote women’s representation in group leadership positions? Which concrete recommendations can be made to improve the trend in future projects? • How are men engaged in MCHN learning opportunities and are their roles strengthened to support the health and nutritional status of their family? FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 188 • What is the sustainability of the gender-related changes (examples include strengthening male ability to support health and nutritional status of the family, husband not hitting their spouses), if any, brought about by the project? Monitoring and Evaluation • To what extent did the project monitoring and evaluation system enable the project to adapt its interventions? What evidence shows that the project utilized M&E and evaluation system to maximize impact of project intervention through informed decision making as well as resource re-allocation or adaptation of interventions/activities? Environment • Are there any unintended negative environmental impacts stemming from the project implementation? If so, are there sustainable mitigation measures put in place by the project to address these challenges? Behavior change • What intervention and strategies adopted by the project led to reaching high proportion of beneficiaries without compromising the quality of interventions? Which behavior change activities triggered high levels of adoption of technology and management practices? What worked well and did not work well? What recommendations can future projects adopt to excite behavior change among the same target beneficiaries? Were there any techniques that worked more efficiently at the community level? At the intrapersonal level? At the individual level? IV. Evaluation Methodological Approach Requirements for the proposed evaluation design • The evaluation should use a mixed method approach. The endline survey should match the data collection timing of the baseline survey. The endline survey design must use the FANTA Sampling Guide. The evaluation team must also review the project proposal, reports, and all other relevant documents. Where possible triangulation of information using secondary data such as DHS surveys particularly for impact indicators is recommended. • As this is an independent final performance evaluation, NORC will finalize as part of this SOW a detailed description of the proposed evaluation design and methodology in their proposal. The detailed study design proposed by the prospective applicant will be carefully reviewed and evaluated to determine the technical strength of the proposal. • The quantitative survey design, sampling strategy, and data treatment and analysis plan must follow robust methodology. The qualitative study will focus on exploring the plausible causes of adaption of practices as well as challenges for non-adoption. Findings from the qualitative study should be integrated with the quantitative and should be used to interpret the quantitative results. The applicant must also provide detailed design of the qualitative study including sampling methodology, approximate number of sample sites, how they will be selected, and the qualitative tools. Evaluation study must focus on changes to behavior at the household level (technology uptake, social behavior change, impact on household dietary diversity) and the FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 189 sampling strategy must be designed to enable the results to be generalized at the population level (not just the targeted beneficiaries. The sample size should be weighted based on population characteristics) and be quantitatively compared to baseline survey. NORC is expected to understand and provide details in the proposed sampling methodology in line with USAID FFP guidance. • The quantitative data should be collected through a population-based10 household survey using a well-structured questionnaire to be developed by the consultant. The household questionnaire should mirror the questionnaire utilized at baseline. Whenever possible, questions in the endline should be identical to the baseline if they are being used to measure the same indicator, in order to ensure comparability between the baseline and endline. • The quantitative survey must include anthropometric measurements using international standard scales and height/length boards. The locally produced height/length boards are often poor quality and provide erroneous measurement data. USAID may check the quality, therefore if the consultant plans to use locally made scales, the consultant must ensure accurate measurement. • Reference will also be made on gender tools. In order to incorporate gender sensitivity, the evaluation will ensure that there are an agreed upon number of gender disaggregated interviews, focus groups and meetings. • Sampling stratification (to ensure appropriate level of data is included to ensure generalizability of results) will need to be presented in full within the proposal. The inferential analysis should be used to detect the changes at 95% level of confidence intervals. • In addition, the consultant will need a process to review and utilize the indicator data collected by the project M&E team and partners and report on the final outcome indicators. • The qualitative methodology proposed should focus on gathering data that will facilitate a deeper understanding of processes and approaches, identify plausible causalities for adoption and/or non-adaption of practices promoted by the project, perceptions and behaviors and other factors that have contributed to achievement and/or non-achievement of objectives. It is anticipated that the qualitative methods proposed will use methodologies such as group discussions, focus group discussions, interviews, most significant changes stories, and secondary data review and the proposal should include the anticipated target populations to be included. • For the endline survey, the consultant is expected to use two-stage cluster sampling methodology. The consultant should review the baseline sampling frame in designing the sampling frame for the endline survey, and should try to align the two methodologies as much as possible to preserve comparability. In general, all communities received project services (does not matter the level of intensity) should be on the sampling frame. Unless household lists are available from very recent DHS or other surveys, the consultant is expected to carry out a listing exercise in the sample communities. FFP does not accept any sampling methodology for which a probability of a primary sampling unit cannot be computed. 10 All households living in the target (and not just the project beneficiaries) area are eligible to be on the sample FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 190 • Qualitative data collection at the community level could use non-probability sampling methods, as it was used for the baseline. Villages that have benefited from ViM activities will be sorted into several categories, taking into account several criteria such as level of participation in the project, geographical access, population size, socioeconomic status, etc. Furthermore, a number of villages will be selected from each group to host the data collection exercise. The criteria will be further elaborated by the M&E team in collaboration with the VIM staff and revised by NORC during the process of sites/village selection. • The data collection tools will be designed and applied in a way that ensures the collection of gender-specific data (for example, specific women focus groups will be considered). NORC is invited to suggest other sound data collection methods in addition to those listed above. Other components to be taken into consideration: • Definitions: Definitions of indicators, means of verification, and means of measurement should follow ViM Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS). • Evaluation Plan: An evaluation plan must be prepared that explains what methodologies will be used and a clear description of how beneficiaries will be selected for participation in the evaluation to gather qualitative data to answer the main evaluation questions for SO1, SO2 and SO3 from key program beneficiaries such as farmers, participants in literacy trainings, lead mothers, etc. The document should include sampling strategy and sample size estimation, weighting, sampling frame and household listing, data treatment and analysis plan, training of enumerators and supervisors, field testing of the instruments, and oversight and quality control mechanisms. The evaluation plan must be approved by USAID before implementation. • Methodologies anticipated to answer evaluation questions include but are not limited to: o Surveys o Focus group discussions o Key informant interviews o Observation for substantiation of adoption of behavior change promoted by the program. o Most significant change stories that demonstrate impact on individuals and communities. o Qualitative data that comes from focus groups, interviews, and observations. • Survey Question Review: The survey instrument used in the baseline survey should be the starting point, and is attached as Annex A. If there is a need for rephrasing any question, the contractor must add a question with revised statement instead of changing an existing one. Changing a question will void the comparability. • Additional Information: In consultation with ViM staff, and/or where baseline data was not collected for comparison purposes, the contractor may add questions to improve the specificity of impact and outcome information presented in the quantitative performance evaluation report. • Pretesting: The instruments will be tested in a community similar to those that are part of the target population, but will not be part of the target group. The “Moore” language version of the FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 191 questionnaire should be used during training and field testing. The questionnaire will then need to be modified based on the feedback from the field test. • Approval of Tools and Methodologies: The tools and methodologies should be finalized in consultation with the ViM M&E Director, and should be forwarded to USAID/FFP for their concurrence. • Involvement of FFP/USAID: As a key partner, FFP/USAID involvement in the review will include the following: o Review of this SOW; o Approval of the final evaluation technical design; o Initial briefing on the SOW and to highlight areas of interest; o Approval of Team leader and technical sector experts; o Final evaluation design: Before data collection begins; o Participation in fieldwork as needed; o Debriefing with NORC following the initial fieldwork; o Participation in the summary presentation of the preliminary findings for FFP and GoBF counterparts; o Review of draft report; and o Acceptance of final report. V. tasks and level of effort For a detailed tentative schedule of the tasks please see point X (Final Evaluation schedule). Week 1-4: refine the methodology and draft tools and inception report Week 5-6: in country orientation, trainings, meetings and a document review and refine the questionnaires and logistics; training Week 6-10: collect quantitative data in country Week 11-13: analyze quantitative data Week 9-12: collect qualitative data / information in country Week 12-14: analyze qualitative data Week 15-23: full draft report iterations, comments and changes Week 24-25: final PowerPoint presentation and key findings presented to USAID, ACDI/VOCA, et al. Week 26-28: finalize the report and translate it to French VI. Team Composition and qualifications The final evaluation will be an external process with the involvement of key actors, such as USAID/FFP. The evaluation team shall consist of a multi-disciplinary team/subject matter expert, i.e., a team leader and sectoral experts. The evaluation team will be under the responsibility of a Team Leader (TL) who will work alongside the ViM M&E unit and ACDI/VOCA’s regional M&E Specialist for the planning and implementation of the study. Extensive experience in implementing or evaluating food security programs and experience in leading evaluations will be the key determining factors in hiring the evaluation team leader. However, their knowledge of the local context, socioeconomic, cultural, and institutional and environmental parameters will also be considered. This latter experience will be useful during the finalization of tools, FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 192 data collection, and analysis. The TL will be the main contact with the M&E unit and will be responsible of all the deliverables. S/He will be assisted by an agricultural/livelihood/value chain specialist, a health and nutrition specialist, a gender specialist, a statistician and data analyst, and an environmental specialist that ViM will propose. All will be assisted by field enumerators with sound experience in the collection of quantitative and qualitative data. USAID/FFP mission will be invited to participate in all phases of the final evaluation. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security as well as the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Animal Resources through their local representatives will be involved in all phases of the evaluation process. 6.1. Scope of Work (SOW) and qualifications requested from NORC and Team Leader A specific SOW will clarify roles and responsibilities of each team member, expected outputs, and date of delivery. This will be developed further between NORC and the ViM M&E unit. However, the team’s qualifications and requirements can be found below. The final evaluation team will be composed of: 1. A Team leader with extensive experience in evaluation coupled with significant knowledge of qualitative survey methodology in the domains of nutrition, agriculture, livestock, off farm micro enterprises, rural credit, resilience, and/or Title II development programs. S/he will be responsible for designing, organizing, implementing, and documenting the results of the final evaluation. The team leader will lead the evaluation team and will be assisted by two key specialists. 2. A Health/Nutrition Expert 3. An Agricultural/Livelihood/Value Chain (Ag/LH) Expert 4. A Gender Specialist 5. A survey method specialist with quantitative background and extensive experience in designing and implementing large scale household surveys and data analysis. Preferably a Statistician or Econometrician 6. An Expert in qualitative survey 7. An Environmental Specialist Below is the desired profile of the evaluation team: The Evaluation Team Leader should have: • Advanced degree (At least Master Degree) with background and suitable expertise in food security, agriculture, livestock, rural development, or related academic fields relevant to the evaluation; • Demonstrated experience leading at least three multi-sectoral, program performance evaluations, preferably of USAID Title II funded programs in developing countries; • At least ten years’ experience in evaluation using Quantitative and qualitative tools, implementation; or evaluation of agriculture/food security/health and nutrition programs; • Experience in the evaluation of Title II food security programs is preferred; • Demonstrated large experience in Quantitative and qualitative data collection– including Quantitative and qualitative research study design, experience interpreting quantitative and qualitative findings, tool development, data collection, data analysis, and reporting; • Experience in integrating gender in evaluation is necessary; • Excellent verbal and written communication in French required and in English preferred; • Previous experience working in rural Burkina Faso or in the region will be preferred; FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 193 • Strong critical analysis and report-writing skills required (a writing sample may be requested); and • Experience working with USAID reporting and assessment tools. The Health & Nutrition Experts should have: • Advanced degree in public health, nutrition, medicine, nursing, or other related field; • Demonstrated experience designing and implementing at least two qualitative, performance evaluations of MCHN programs/strategies in developing country contexts; • Knowledge and hands on experiences in Care group model and community based management for acute malnutrition; • Demonstrated expertise in quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis – including qualitative research study design, tool development, data collection, data analysis, and reporting; • At least eight years’ experience in management, implementation, or evaluation of health and nutrition programs; • Knowledge and experience with multi-sectoral and food assistance approaches to improving MCHN; • Previous experience working in rural Burkina Faso or in the region preferred; • Experience in integrating gender in evaluation; and • Excellent verbal and written communication in French required and in English preferred. The Agriculture (Ag), Livelihood (LH) and Value Chain Expert should have: • Advanced degree in rural development, agronomy, development, livestock, international development, or related field; • Expertise in one or more of the following areas preferred: value chain analysis, income generation, villages loan schemes, savings and credit groups, or small/medium enterprises, in addition to the farmer field school training methodology; • Demonstrated experience designing and implementing at least two qualitative performance evaluations of Ag/LH programs/strategies in developing country contexts; • Experience implementing Ag/LH programming in developing country contexts preferred; • Demonstrated expertise in quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis – including qualitative research study design, tool development, data collection, data analysis, and reporting; • Knowledge and experience with multi-sectoral, and food assistance approaches to improving Ag/LH; • Previous experience working in rural Burkina Faso or in the region preferred; • Experience in integrating gender in evaluation; and • Excellent verbal and written communication in French required and in English preferred. 6.2. ViM Responsibilities ViM will perform the following functions under the SOW: • Liaise and organize meetings between USAID/FFP and NORC; • Provide logistical and administrative support to NORC, including necessary information and transport to facilitate the work of the evaluator. Specifically, ViM will provide two vehicles and drivers to facilitate the Final Evaluation team’s visits to the field; • Assist with the planning and organizing of meetings and focus group discussions according to an agenda to be provided by NORC; • Provide in a timely fashion, all necessary documentation (project document, reports, IPTT/data, list of villages/communities, other documents) requested by the evaluation team as available; FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 194 • Coordinate with the Team Leader (TL)in the selection of the villages; • Print evaluation forms and tools in enough quantity and provide them in a timely fashion (guide focus group, interview, etc.); • Facilitate the organization of a restitution session of the field findings with all actors including ViM staff, Save the Children, LIPs, FFP, locales authorities, and representatives of the ministries involved; • Share the first draft of the evaluation report with ViM staff, LIPs, Save the Children and USAID/FFP for their comments and input; • Compile all the comments and send to the Team Leader for the finalization of the report; and • Provide all necessary information and transport to facilitate the work of the evaluator. Logistics • It is expected that each evaluator will have and bring his/her own laptop computer and associated software, and be able to load appropriate printer drivers for use on locally available printers. The preferred software program is Microsoft Windows. • ACDI/VOCA will provide transportation for the evaluation specialist and assist with the field travel arrangements as much as possible, but there may be instances when the evaluation specialist will have to direct or arrange travel to and from focus group interviews and other meetings. The evaluation specialist will be asked to provide a list of confirmed interview locations. 6.3 Expected outputs from NORC The Team Leader will be accountable for the following: • Finalizing the evaluation questions, methodology, as well as interview and focus group guiding questions and informed consent forms in coordination with the M&E unit; • Conceiving and developing the data collection tools (questionnaire, focus group guides, interview protocol, etc.); • Conduct the data collection and supervising the field administration of the questionnaire/tools; • Organize in collaboration with ViM a debriefing session with the aim to share the preliminary findings; • Analyzing collected data and submitting a complete standard report with outlines and fully written text in a timely manner; • Submitting to ViM all the documents related to the study (filled questionnaires, electronic versions of the collected data, training manual, fieldwork logs, etc.); • Draft a preliminary report (in French) taking into account the discussion during the restitution; and • Revise the draft taking into account the comments and provide a final report (French and English). • A completed IPTT table 6.4 Deliverables The following are the deliverables from this contract a) Pertinent permissions, insurance, and other required permits: i) Obtaining all the necessary permissions for implementing the quantitative evaluation data collection; FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 195 ii) Adhering to country and local formalities and obtaining any required permits related to data collection from human subjects and logistics of survey implementation, as well as health and accident insurance, salary, and taxes for all enumerators and supervisors. Deliverable: Evidence of insurances and permits for implementing survey and other data collection activities in electronic form. b) Inception Report / Workplan, including detailed survey implementation plan: i) Specifying details for methodology, critical tasks, anticipated outputs, date-bound timelines, resource needs, and responsible person(s); ii) Composition of a standard field survey, team, including expected tasks and responsibilities of each team member, should also be described; and iii). Detailing a sampling plan for the quantitative population-based household survey. Deliverable: Inception report / work plan, including sampling plan, survey design and analysis plan, and detailed implementation plan reviewed and approved by ACDI/VOCA and USAID/FFP. c) Quantitative survey instrument: This instrument should be based upon the attached baseline survey instrument. This document needs to be reviewed and approved by ACDI/VOCA and USAID/FFP. d) Qualitative instruments and raw data. This should include: i) Focus group discussion guides, and key informant interview questions; ii) Raw transcripts for all focus group discussions, and key informant interview notes; iii) Codebook used for focus group discussion analysis; iv) Final qualitative data analysis software files (NVivo, Atlas, etc.) e) Data treatment and analysis plan. Data treatment and analysis plan reviewed and approved by ACDI/VOCA and USAID/FFP. f) Survey databases on SPSS and Stata, Data processing syntax and Indicators computed Syntax, and Data Analysis syntax on SPSS or Stata. Raw and cleaned data set, and syntax for data analysis, including syntax for variable transformations. Deliverables: i) Raw data set in SPSS and CSV formats; ii) Rules applied for cleaning data; iii) Syntax for all data analysis and variable transformations; iv) Final data set that includes cleaned data, sampling weights at each stage, final sampling weights, and all derived indicators; and v) Sampling weights used to tabulate the aggregate-level estimates for the USAID/FFP Standard Indicators. g) Briefings for ACDI/VOCA and USAID/FFP Burkina Faso. Presenting findings, conclusions, lessons learned, and recommendations based on the quantitative performance evaluation survey. Deliverables: Presentation (or report) of preliminary findings h) Draft end–of-project summative performance evaluation report: Not exceeding 50 pages, excluding appendices and attachments, presented in English and French. Draft end-of-project quantitative performance evaluation report reviewed and approved by ACDI/VOCA and USAID. i) Final end-of-project quantitative performance evaluation report: This report will be a revised version of the draft report that incorporates the comments of ACDI/VOCA, USAID/FFP and the USAID Burkina FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 196 Faso Mission. The final report must be presented in English and French. Deliverable: Final end-of-project quantitative performance evaluation report reviewed and approved by ACDI/VOCA and USAID. j) Presentation of Final Evaluation in Ouagadougou in French, including PowerPoint presentation to ViM senior management, USAID/Burkina Faso, international and local partners, etc. VII. Report outline The Team Leader of the Final Evaluation team shall be responsible for submitting the draft and final accepted report to ACDI/VOCA management in Ouagadougou and head office for review and final approval. Draft reports will be subject to written comments, clarification, and/or elaboration. The final report will be submitted by the Final Evaluation Leader after ACDI/VOCA and USAID/Burkina Faso have reviewed the report and all comments or requested clarification/elaboration are responded to by the evaluation team in the report. The finalized Final Evaluation report should be delivered to ACDI/VOCA Ouagadougou in hard copy, as well as on CD. Preferred software is Microsoft Office Word and Microsoft Office Excel. There should be a title page, a list of acronyms, a table of contents, and page numbers. The preferred font is Times New Roman 12. The format for the quantitative evaluation survey report is as follows: a) Cover page, Table of Contents, List of Acronyms. b) Executive Summary should be a clear and concise stand-alone document that states the c) most salient findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the evaluation survey and gives readers the essential contents of the quantitative performance evaluation report in two or three pages. The Executive Summary helps readers to build a mental framework for organizing and understanding the detailed information within the report. d) Introduction should include purpose, audience, and synopsis of task. e) Program background should describe ViM goal, theory of change, targeting, geographic scope, history and key timeline. f) Methodology should describe sampling design, study methods, data collection techniques, constraints and limitations of the study process and rigor, and issues in carrying out the study. g) Tabular summary of results should present quantitative evaluation survey results in table form for all the indicators by components; and also by region. h) Findings should present findings on all of the key indicators. Quantitative evaluation i) survey values must be presented in quantitative format and complemented by descriptive analysis for each stratum and at the aggregate ViM program level; the evaluation questions must be answered by strategic objectives. j) Conclusions and Recommendations should provide additional analysis of the data and results, drawing out programmatic and organizational recommendations for future program design. Recommendations must be relevant to program and context. k) Issues should provide a list of key technical and/or administrative issues, if any, for ViM for which the quantitative evaluation survey was conducted. l) Annexes should document the study methods, scope of work, schedules, interview lists and tables and be succinct, pertinent, and readable. These annexes must include: i) references; ii) lists of meetings, interviews, focus group discussions (dates, numbers, types); iii) data collection FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 197 instruments in both English and French; iv) data tables showing progress against the IPTT and SAPQ indicators (by strata and for the entire program); and v) data sets in electronic format and data weighting tables, and data dictionary and syntax files used to process the data in electronic format. VIII. Intellectual Property USAID reserves a royalty-free, worldwide, nonexclusive, and irrevocable right to use, disclose, reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute copies to the public, and perform publicly and display publicly, in any manner and for any purpose, and to have or permit others to do so. Ownership of informational findings and report material: All reports, information, and data sets/syntaxes/codebooks/tools produced during this consultancy will be the property of ACDI/VOCA and will be disseminated at ACDI/VOCA’s discretion. In the event of sensitive matters being included in the report, ACDI/VOCA reserves the right to withhold dissemination of part of or the whole of the report. [Not applicable to USAID] Confidentiality: The Final Evaluation evaluator shall treat as confidential all knowledge of ACDI/VOCA, including all documents and information shared, and follow its policies and procedures governing the release of information to anyone outside is organization. Disagreements: All disputes arising between ACDI/VOCA and the consultant will be settled by use of a third-party mediator. No Liability: There is no employment relationship between ACDI/VOCA and NORC hired to perform this SOW. This SOW is an agreement only for the provision of professional services and its deliverables. Consultants are responsible for making their own arrangements for payment of taxes. ACDI/VOCA will not be responsible for any liability in the course of the final evaluation. ix. Ethical Guidelines Every member of the evaluation team must adhere to ethical guidelines as outlined in the American Evaluation Association’s Guiding Principles for Evaluators. A summary of these guidelines is provided below. 1. Systematic inquiry: Evaluators conduct systematic, data-based inquiries. 2. Competence: The evaluation team possesses the education, abilities, skills, and experience appropriate to undertake the tasks proposed in the evaluation. Evaluators practice within the limits of their professional training and competence, and decline to conduct evaluations that fall substantially outside those limits. The evaluation team collectively demonstrates cultural competence. 3. Integrity/honesty: Evaluators display honesty and integrity in their own behavior, and attempt to ensure the honesty and integrity of the entire evaluation process. 4. Respect for people: Evaluators respect the security, dignity, and self-worth of respondents, activity participants, clients, and other evaluation stakeholders. Evaluators regard informed consent for participation in evaluations and inform participants and clients about the scope and limits of confidentiality. 5. Responsibilities for general and public welfare: Evaluators articulate and take into account the diversity of general and public interests and values that may be related to the evaluation. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 198 ViM’s Final Evaluation Schedule ViM’s Final Evaluation key milestones schedule Activity Estimative date Evaluation Design & preparation for data collection August 1 - Aug 31, 2017 Enumerator Training Aug 28 - Sep 5, 2017 Quantitative data collection Sep 6- Oct 7, 2017 Qualitative data collection Oct 1- Oct 27, 2017 Quantitative data analysis Oct 9- Oct 27, 2017 Qualitative data analysis Oct 16- Nov 10, 2017 Presentation of the preliminary findings to ACDI/VOCA and Save the Children Nov 17, 2017 Submission of 1st final evaluation draft report to ACDI/VOCA and Save the Children Dec 4, 2017 Submission of Second final evaluation draft report to ACDI/VOCA, Save the Children and USAID Dec 29, 2017 Submission of final report to ACDI/VOCA and USAID/FFP Jan 26, 2018 Final PowerPoint presentation and key findings presented to USAID, ACDI/VOCA, et al. Jan 29, 2018 Acceptance of evaluation final report by ACDI/VOCA and USAID/FFP Jan 31, 2018 FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 199 XI. EVALUATION TEAM AND TIMELINE Table 27: Evaluation Team Name of Staff & Firm associated with Area of Expertise Relevant to the Assignment Designation for this Assignment (and Location)11 Assigned Tasks or Deliverables Dr. Lauren Persha, NORC • Design and leadership of mixed methods research • Technical leadership for evaluation work on agriculture, livelihoods, and natural resource issues • Analysis and results synthesis for program evaluation • Survey design and large-scale data collection oversight • Technical support for qualitative and quantitative instrument development Team Leader and Environment Specialist • Provide technical leadership, including serving as point of contact for the ACDI/VOCA • Oversee report preparation and submission • Oversee and review the creation of both quantitative and qualitative data collection instruments • Preparation of final evaluation reports • Presentation of findings to ACDI/VOCA, USAID/FFP and other key stakeholders Dr. Santadarshan Sadhu, NORC • Quantitative data analysis and econometric analysis • Survey methodology, design and implementation • Agricultural finance & food security intervention assessment • Management of large-scale survey fieldwork, design • Questionnaire design • Quality assurance Survey method Specialist/ Statistician/ Econometrician • Lead quantitative survey design • Supervise quantitative data collection activities including data quality monitoring • Lead all quantitative data cleaning and analysis including baseline and endline data and M&E data • Conduct econometric analysis • Support preparation of final evaluation reports FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 200 Dr. Audra Grant, NORC • Qualitative research design and analysis of qualitative data • Conducting focus group discussions • Management of large-scale survey fieldwork, design • Interviewer training Qualitative Survey and Assessment expert • Lead qualitative survey design • Design of the protocols for focus group discussion • Supervise qualitative data collection activities including data quality monitoring • Lead all qualitative data cleaning and analysis including using NVivo software to undertake systematic coding of qualitative data transcripts. • Support preparation of final evaluation reports Dr. Eric Weiss, Consultant • M&E support • Agricultural productivity analysis • Survey and Questionnaire design and implementation • Analysis and reporting of collected qualitative and quantitative data • Oversight of site visits • Quality assurance Agriculture, Livelihoods, and Value Chain Expert • Lead design and delivery of survey instruments • Contribute to the preparation of evaluation design • Inform methodology related to assessing agricultural practices, livelihoods, and value chain indicators • Contribute to the preparation of evaluation reports Phocas Ntahorugiye, Consultant • Management, coordination, and implementation of maternal and child health programs • Survey enumerator training • Report writing and dissemination • Oversight and participation in the evaluation of health and nutrition programs • Qualitative and quantitative data collection and oversight Health/Nutrition Expert • Lead design and undertaking of MCHN analysis • Inform methodology related to assessing MCHN practices and quality of health service indicators in targeted areas • Lead enumerator training • Contribute to the preparation of evaluation reports • Support in-country qualitative and quantitative data collection efforts FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 201 including leading FGDs and conducting KIIs Letitia Onyango, NORC • Expertise in gender inequality, gender-based violence, and gender-based constraints to education • Management of qualitative data analysis • Large-scale quantitative and qualitative data management Gender Specialist • Lead design and undertaking of gender analysis • Incorporate gender￾disaggregated data collection methods • Contribute to the development of qualitative data collection instruments to ensure the collection of gender-specific data • Support in-country qualitative and quantitative data collection efforts including leading FGDs and conducting KIIs • Contribute to the preparation of evaluation reports Local data collection manager, CRDA • Obtaining local permits for data collection • Survey management and oversight • Management of supervisors and enumerators • Coordinating field logistics • Implementing quality control procedures • Selection of local team for fieldwork • Review training materials and oversee training of supervisors and enumerators • Manage and coordinate field teams and associated logistics • Monitor fieldwork implementation and progress, ensuring ensure that standard protocols are adhered to in fieldwork • Prepare weekly field progress reports • Report potential data collection issues to Survey Specialist and assist in issue resolution FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 202 Table 28: Evaluation Timeline ViM’s Final Evaluation key milestones schedule Activity Estimated date Evaluation design & preparation for data collection12 Aug 3–Nov 17, 2017 Enumerator training Nov 20-24, 2017 Quantitative data collection Nov 25-Dec 17, 2017 Qualitative data collection Jan 15-Jan 26, 2017 Quantitative data analysis Dec 18-Jan 17, 2017 Qualitative data analysis Jan 27-Feb 28, 2017 Presentation of the preliminary findings to ACDI/VOCA and Save the Children January 18, 2017 Submission of 1st final evaluation draft report to ACDI/VOCA and Save the Children March 1, 2017 Submission of Second final evaluation draft report to ACDI/VOCA, Save the Children and USAID March 19, 2017 Submission of final report to ACDI/VOCA and USAID/FFP April 6, 2018 Final PowerPoint presentation and key findings presented to USAID, ACDI/VOCA, et al. TBD Acceptance of evaluation final report by ACDI/VOCA and USAID/FFP TBD 12 Includes substantial time required to obtain in-country ethics approvals from GoBF, and discussion and revision with ViM on the sample size calculations for the household survey. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 203 XII. COMMENTS MATRIX NORC Response Matrix to Comments Received by USAID/FFP on the ViM Draft Final Evaluation Report (Submitted to ACDI/VOCA on 12 July 2018 and updated on19 July 2018) Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response General Comments 1 N/A The narrative supports ViM's strong contribution to improving the living conditions of the population, cited to be estimated at 200,000 largely disadvantaged citizens, in terms of nutrition and livelihood conditions. It could also be germane to estimate/summarize--and in the executive summary-- what percentage of the 200,000 citizens may have directly (and beyond simply attended trainings) experienced measurable enhancements due to ViM. Unfortunately it is not possible to reliably estimate or extrapolate this from the data available through this evaluation. 2 N/A Please review the report to ensure readers understand that it is a final, summative program performance evaluation, and not mis-cited as an impact evaluation because we are not expected to also cite results for counterfactuals but rather comparisons between baseline and endline. The term impact evaluation is not used, only performance evaluation. The word impact has been changed to effect when discussing the effectiveness of different interventions, but some of the indicators are referred to as impacts (IM1, IM2, etc.) so impact is still a part of the discussion in these cases. 3 N/A Is there a specific reason that the project's costs are entirely omitted? Ordinarily readers which to have some sense of level of effort, extension/staffing and resources required to provide improved conditions, even though this evaluation is not conducting a cost-effectiveness study. We added the total project cost to the ViM program description in chapter 2 and in the Executive Summary. The scope for this evaluation did not include a cost-effectiveness component of focus on cost elements. 4 N/A Overall, the VIM Burkina Faso final evaluation team did an excellent job especially in the report's nutrition sections. However, some of the quantitative aspects have presented a mix picture of VIM's achievements. What quantitative data that tends to contradict nutrition and livelihood gains--and there are some-- should be more explicitly qualified and interpreted which could better assist USAID in decision￾making and future program designs. Examples of these will be presented later below. Thank you for this comment. The evaluation team has tried to address the examples raised below to the extent possible. In general, we are not sure that we see many results that contradict nutrition or livelihoods gain in the report (noting that the econometric results do a better job of accounting for potential confounders then the straight baseline to endline comparisons). FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 204 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 5 N/A As a point of methodology, USAID was expecting data quality issues arising from self-reported data, which is common in the Sahel, and why USAID had strongly recommended that the qualitative survey should be administered after reviewing the preliminary results of the quantitative data analysis. That way, discrepancies identified could be analyzed and re-queried during the qualitative surveys. In fact, it seems as the evaluators conducted the analysis as a "quantitative plus qualitative" study rather than a "mixed methods" study, relying heavily on the quantitative findings but included rather shallow references to the qualitative work, running these lines of inquiry in parallel and then trying to marry them later, as opposed to really using qualitative research to "bookend" the quantitative analysis, which is often a best design/practice in true mixed methods research. In any case, please reviews to see how well the GDs and KIIs try to explain the discrepancies, because more explicit explanations about contradictions could enhance the report. Moreover, to the extent that some findings may have also been questioned or rejected by ViM staff, could the evaluation provide better/additional rationale to account for or explain their concerns? Thank you for this clarification on the self-reported data. With respect to timing of the qualitative data collection, the protocols and fieldwork were indeed finalized after the evaluation team had preliminary results of the baseline to endline differences from the PBS data. However, the timeline between the PBS and qualitative fielding was fairly condensed, and we did not have the results yet from the more sophisticated econometric analyses aimed to better identify contribution of specific ViM activities to selected outcomes. To have done so would have required a much longer gap before the start of qualitative fieldwork, which was not built into the overall evaluation timeframe. Given the overall timeframe, the team necessarily took a sequential approach to the mixed methods design, in which there is some feedback from the quantitative taken into account in the qualitative tools design and focus, rather than a fully iterative approach described by the reviewer. In the sequential approach that the evaluation team took (one of several common mixed methods approaches), the qualitative data is then treated as an independent data source and the qualitative results are integrated with the quantitative results in the final write-up. While we appreciate the reviewer's reference to best practices for a mixed methods approach, to implement this in practice would require a substantially longer overall timeframe for the evaluation, including a much longer gap between the end of quantitative and start of qualitative, baked into the evaluation time frame that we received. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 205 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 6 N/A More on methodology: The choice of an endogenous treatment regression model to look at the effect of ViM interventions on adoption/nonadoption of GAP (the binary outcome variable) is appropriate (since we're trying to correct for selection bias), but it would be helpful for readers who aren't familiar with this kind of probit model to interpret the coefficients that they present in the annex, and use their qualitative findings to help contextualize these results. (For example, on p. 44, they include a table that suggests that GAP training has a positive effect on adoption of strong GAP for sorghum production, but they don't reference to the magnitude of this effect (which we can see in Table 14.2-5 in the annex, p. 58). The GAP training increases the probability of strong GAP adoption in sorghum by 53% and by 29.7% in livestock, respectively. Since this is a mixed methods study, the report should be using their qualitative inquiries to help explain these results (i.e. why does participation in GAP trainings seem to change the likelihood of sorghum GAP adoption quite a bit more than improved livestock GAP adoption? They should also be referencing the confidence intervals here.) By interpreting the coefficients and CI's (with some help from the qualitative findings) we would be able to generate deeper insights. We have added additional interpretation of the coefficients related to the ViM treatment indicators and magnitudes of treatment effect to the revised report, including adding the 95% CIs. Whenever feasible, qualitative findings were used to complement the quantitative results. But given the wide variety of outcome indicators and large number of quantitative findings, in many cases, further investigation of quite fairly specific quantitative findings using additional qualitative analysis was not feasible to conduct, particularly given the tight timeline between end of quantitative data collection and start of qualitative fieldwork - we were able to draw on preliminary BL to EL differences to help shape the qualitative data collection but the more time consuming endogenous treatment results across so many outcomes were understandably not yet available before qualitative fielding began . In future, a larger window between quantitative and qualitative data collection built into the evaluation timeline can help facilitate the ability to obtain more nuanced qualitative insights on specific quantitative results (though that would add to a longer overall time frame to completion of the evaluation as a whole). 7 N/A There are similar questions about the next set of models (with the continuous outcome indicators like yields and revenue). Again it would be helpful if they can interpret the results and give some deeper explanation using the qualitative research that was done. One is left wondering why, for example, adoption of GAP has no significant effect on sorghum yields while it does have a significant effect on cowpea yields; what was going on at that time which might explain these results? Do we think this is something to do with the training or something we couldn't model for (like pest damage to a specific crop, a natural disaster that destroyed one crop but not the other), et cetera. How well were these models fit? USAID would suggest the same, deeper analysis of magnitudes Please see above response as well. We appreciate this point but also note that the analyses referenced were focused on estimating whether there was statistically significant treatment effect from ViM intervention. These analyses are not designed to explore the interplays of various other factors that could contribute to the observed results. Given the breadth of the topics covered, it was simply not feasible to do that within the available time and resources. In future, one way to address this to some extent is to build significantly more time into the evaluation time frame between the quantitative and qualitative data collection. Our team was able to draw on the preliminary BL to EL indicator change during the design and fielding of the qualitative data collection, but these more sophisticated models require substantially more time FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 206 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response of the coefficients on the other models the report includes as well, e.g. with the WASH and health variables, perceptions, etc. to complete, and those results were not available to work with prior to qualitative roll-out. 8 N/A As for the econometric analysis of women's perceptions based on ViM gender trainings, this merits a serious "warning label" at the beginning of this section to explain the limitations of these variables and this type of econometric model to look at an exceedingly complex set of norms; we also have to take into consideration the serious limitations of survey research methods, and thus the data itself, in this particular instance. For example, the model shows no significance of change in perception of domestic violence as a result of ViM gender training (controlling for the other variables), but here and with the other models they don't tell us anything about the goodness fit of the model itself (i.e. R squared). Lacking any discussion of the goodness of fit, we don't know if this model was just poorly estimated or if there is in fact no real effect, or a combination of these factors. It is appreciated the report’s attempt to be judicious judicious in their use of page space, but there are opportunities to cull unnecessary details and information and include more germane details, either here or in the Annex, to give a more complete picture of the results.) There is also the important consideration about how these results fit into the greater body of evidence on social norms and perceptions of behavior for oneself v. society (for example... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19254104 ) The evaluation team acknowledges the limitations of the econometric model of perception of women based on ViM gender training. Since modelling perceptions can be very complicated, and influenced by different behavioral factors (that are not captured by the endline survey), the evaluation team decided not to present this analysis in the revised report draft (we have dropped this from the set of econometric results presented). With respect to model fit, the evaluation team acknowledges the importance of presentation of goodness of fit, but we would point out that for the type of treatment effect estimation models used, typically R￾squared values (to assess model fit) are not reported (in general, it's standard to only report the test of overall significance of the model). For all econometric models presented in this report, the results supported the overall significance of the econometric models used, and thus were not reported. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 207 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 9 N/A USAID congratulates the Evaluation team for using econometric models to explain the relationships between the project outcome indicators and its implemented activities while controlling other variables. However, the report did not provide enough information on the validity of models used. For example, the team used the regression models to test the relationship between the stunting of under-five old children and food rations, MCHN training, and Care group. The conclusions provided are insightful but the team should at least provide the R2 of these models so readers appreciate the proportion of stunting variance explained by food rations, MCHN training, and Care group. Because regression analysis tends to deal with Attribution instead of Contribution, confidence intervals may have been better method of proving the significance of the baseline and endline values. We have included the 95% CIs in the revised report. However, we note that the R2 value is not an appropriate metric for assessing model fit for the two-stage instrumental variables models that we are using and therefore it is not reported (the R2 value has no statistical meaning in the context of the model types that we are using). 10 N/A Some key achievements in Annexes should be better highlighted in the report; even properly color-coded/better identified in the Annexes. It's not clear whether Table 6 of the Annexes were used to interpret the outcome differences between baseline and endline data. Table 1 in Annex I provides the basis for the interpretation of statistically significant differences between the endline and baseline PBS data. We have also now added a condensed version of that table directly to Chapter 4 of the report body, so that readers have the information on hand. The report summarizes key achievements in the discussion in section 4.1.1. 11 N/A It would be helpful to include a note or key with figures where they indicate significance (p values at the .10, .05, and .01 level); they seem to be indicating .01 with *** but it takes some scrolling down in the document to confirm that this is what they're using. (Also do the ones without *** mean they are not significant at all or are they just not significant at the .01 level? Are any * or ** used on the figures?) A key has now been added below each table to denote statistical significance, and all three levels of significance are shown in the tables (p< 0.10, 0.05 and 0.01). Table results with no stars are not significant at the p<0.10 level or below. We have also added a footnote to the first such results, Figure 3, which provides an explanation on this for readers. 12 N/A Importantly, the report does not cite macro-level policy developments which could not have hindered, affected or promoted VIM implementation. For example, within Nut/health sector, nationwide free healthcare for kids under 5 and pregnant lactating women may well also have enhanced access to health care services. However, this policy is not all mentioned in the report, or accounted for in the health/nut data analysis The analyses conducted for this type of a pre-post evaluation are net of any macro-level factors or policy effects that may have taken place during the project lifetime. Such macro-level processes would have affected all groups surveyed for the evaluation. Their effects cannot be disentangled from project effects under this type of an evaluation design, nor with the available survey data. We added to footnote 3, specifying that results are also net of any macro-level factors or policy effects that may have taken place FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 208 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response during the project lifetime, such as nationwide free health case for children under five or enhanced access to health care services for pregnant or lactating women. 13 N/A While not cited within one of the questions, it could still be helpful if the final evaluation's reflections to have discussed key FFP issues such as targeting (inclusion/exclusion errors), geographic coverage (per commune/village), SO integration, 'penetration rates'. the relative importance of timing for data collection between baseline and endline, and even other lessons learned from VIM's implementation?...as one example, VIM implemented some innovative activities such as 'off-farm enterprises', and "QDP" that deserve to be better analysed/discussed in this report to further understand whether and under what conditions such approaches could be helpful to promoting them within future DFSAs. Most of these issue were not included in the evaluation scope or evaluation questions, hence the data collection instruments were not designed to collect information on most of these issues in detail – although we do have some coverage on targeting and selection within villages and can incorporate it to some extent in the report. The report already has a section which speaks to the timing issue for data collection, but the evaluation team can expand this to include related evaluation design issues more broadly. For the remaining issues noted here, if they were not raised organically by respondents during data collection (for example in open-ended questions), then unfortunately the evaluation team has very limited information to draw on for these. 14 N/A Recommendations: The manner in how these are framed and stated could be improved. As an example, if the evaluation is stating that a provincial level forum for pursuing CBNP would be most effective, then the recommendation could start with that as the opening sentence and suggest which actors would be involved, what types of contributions and responsibilities could they provide, and how might realistic monitoring of effort be realized, even without outside support? In the second one, is 'sustained support' entirely defined by (indefinite) training? Are there not any other indigenous incentives, reward systems or other local actors that could be invoked to encourage progressive mothers and volunteers to remain serving as relative CBNP activists..? For improving feeding practices, is there not after all this implementation time, a better understanding of what types of 'cultural factors and beliefs’ are hindering these and what might be done to overcome them? For agriculture, can the evaluation state Which commodities are 'most responsive' to improvements, and why, and conversely, which ones future efforts might consider dropping? We have tried to improve the framing of the recommendations, and also better contextualize the nature of the ViM interventions and approach within current understanding of best practices particularly for woman and child health and nutrition programs. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 209 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 15 N/A In this regard, a careful review and re framing of the recommendations could make them more helpful. This section would be the appropriate place to contextualize the findings from this evaluation against other evaluations or scholarly/grey literature on similar interventions. (We are assuming that those who prepared this evaluation did some of this background research before designing the study and doing the analysis? If so, why not reference these other works and provide recommendations that are situated not just in the empirical evidence from this specific analysis/evaluation, but the wider body of evidence in the field? How and why do the findings here fit or go against what has been found elsewhere, and what can this tell us about the technical approach/design/implementation of this specific program, and/or the context/operating environment? What extenuating circumstances might explain some of these results and how can we take that into account for the future direction of new programs?) We appreciate this feedback and have tried to improve the framing of the recommendations, and also better contextualize the nature of the ViM interventions and approach within current understanding of best practices particularly for woman and child health and nutrition programs. We appreciate and agree with the interest in situating this evaluation's findings relative to other similar programs, with an ultimate objective of understanding how particular context/operating environment/design/implementation approaches and related factors could contribute to knowledge on most effective practices, in what environments and reasons why, however we would caution on the ability to do that reliability from a review of existing literature - to do so well would be better suited to a meta-analysis of existing studies, though that is also a fairly substantial undertaking that is outside the scope of this evaluation. Specific comments: 16 14 Summary of findings and conclusions: since most readers won’t get in depth to the whole report, USAID suggests the report provides more quantitative data, especially on the outcomes/impact indicators. An illustrative comparison (%) between baseline and endline on how these indicators annually evolved over the time period, would make the summary more understandable. We have now added a condensed version of the quantitative baseline to endline results for the outcome/impact indicators directly to Chapter 4. We don't provide an illustration of annualized change as we can't assume linear change by year. The figures in chapter 4 do however provide a visual illustration of the magnitude of change for each indicator. 17 16 Please drop “USAID” from the discussion about the inaccuracies in the baseline self-reported agricultural data. USAID had already pointed out the quality of some yield data reported in the baseline report during our BL report review, which did not reflect the field realities. Thank you for this clarification. We have deleted any references to USAID from this section, as requested. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 210 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 18 20 The report noted that the percent of farmer who grow the primary staple crops in the target areas decreased at the endline. Are the reasons cited and is this decrease linked to men or women? The average number of different crops grown by farmer did not change from baseline to endline (there was a small, statistically insignificant decrease over the two survey rounds), but that masks a small decline by male farmers and a very slight increase by female farmers. But, as the report states, the percent of farmers who reported growing each of the three primary staples (maize, sorghum and millet) did decrease. The main potential reason for this discussed in the report is a potential increasing trend in cash cropping, such as for sesame and/or cowpeas, with a decreased focus on some of the more traditional staple crops. The trend is not linked specifically to male or female farmers. 19 19 Yield data - please provide the estimated yield of millet and sesame for 2017 campaign. The yields for these crops have now been added into the report in the section discussing cowpea and sorghum yields. We added a footnote (no. 24) noting that ViM considered the endline values for sesame and peanuts to be low, given their variation from GoBF national agricultural survey data for Sanmatenga in 2017, and noted that the report contains several caveats on the inherent unreliability of farmer self-reported crop yields. 20 20 Percentage of farmers who used at least FOUR sustainable agriculture ((crop/livestock and/or NRM) practices and/or technologies in the most recent season – Why does the use triplet bag for crop storage not part the list of sustainable agricultural practices? According the report (figure 4) the percent of farmers using cowpea storage increased from 48% at the baseline to 74% at the endline. Reporting for this indicator follows USAID's approved definition for this indicator. The use of triplet bags for crop storage is not part of the definition for this indicator (the storage type or method is not included under this definition for any crop type, in fact). The types of agricultural practices and technologies which are included in this indicator definition are listed in full in Annex II (indicator definitions). 21 20 According to the baseline report that FFP received, the baseline value of the indicator OC1 is 66.5%. However, VIM used 57% as the base value due to different (check that they are explained please) reasons. At the second year of the project, the achievement rate of this indicator was 20% against a target of 70%. Deviation narratives were provided by VIM and USAID responded to VIM regarding these narratives. It is worth reviewing the ViM IPTT with the indicator target deviation narratives to better appreciate the project context and reasons for such shortcomings. At baseline the denominator only included farmers who owned livestock. This was later edited to be more consistent with the underlying measure, by including farmers who had crops or livestock in the denominator. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 211 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 22 23 Percentage of farmers using improved agricultural inputs – According to the baseline report that USAID received, the baseline value of this indicator is 73.8% but this was contested by VIM that used an estimated value from the Gov Burkina Faso Ministry of Agriculture and its own annual survey report data. It will be very helpful for USAID to have disaggregated (improved seed, fertilizer, organic manure) data of this indicator (percent of farmer using improved input) at baseline and endline. We have now added disaggregated numbers to the report for chemical fertilization, improved seeds, and organic fertilization at baseline and endline. 23 23 Improved livestock practices adopted – we don’t have much information on how the livestock related indicator values were computed, but we would like to draw the evaluation team’s attention that the value of this indicator should be computed based on farmers who actually own livestock and not all surveyed farmers because there are some surveyed farmers who don’t own animals. The improved livestock practices adopted are computed using the number of surveyed farmers who own livestock (see annex II indicator definitions). 24 22 Understanding livestock dynamics, and when de-conflicting contradictory information, can be problematic: According to the report (PBS) there are a smaller percentage of smallholders who adopted improved livestock practices at endline as compared to baseline (10.2% to 3%). This quantitative finding is in contradiction with the qualitative survey finding asking about Technologies or practices households intend to use after the end of Vim Activities. According to the report (page 65- table 10) 24.6% of households said they planned to continue using improved livestock practices. From the ViM FY 2017 annual survey report, 22.2% of beneficiaries adopted three improved livestock practices against a target of 35%. More investigations are needed on livestock indicator values reported. The quantitative survey results don’t confidently reflect field realities regarding livestock activities. The main decrease was in veterinary care from 60% to 32%, which is noted could be explained by the vaccine shortage in the project area. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 212 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 25 19 According to the report “the percentage of farmers who owned livestock did not change between the two surveys rounds, where approximately 70% of households owned livestock in each round. However, the number of types of livestock owned increased slightly from 2.2 to 2.4 and the average total number of livestock units owned also increased from 10.3 to 11.5”. Are these findings entirely expected and explained? These are arguably small increases given the project's considerable inputs in enhancing livestock. This finding should also be compared and complemented by the number of livestock sold by farmer that actually significantly increased from 3.2 at baseline to 7.48 at endline (annex Table 6: Sub-indicator Breakdown). Such comparisons may well give a more complete picture of livestock activities in the target areas. Text was added in the main report to draw attention to the fact that number of livestock sold increased significantly. We agree that the increase in livestock units owned is very small. 26 24 Market linkage – Gross margins calculated should be revised. Please specify if the computed gross margin is per beneficiary or per hectare. In general, it is expressed per hectare--which is the total production (of one hectare) of the crop multiplied by the unit sale price (CFA per kg) Gross margin sales [crop] = (total income from selling [crop] – ((total kgs sold [crop]/ total kgs produced [crop])*total cost of inputs [crop]) Gross margin sales per hectare was also calculated but not used in the report due to the issues with using farmer reported field size cited in 3.3.4. 27 24 According to the report, gross margin is calculated by taking the difference between the sales income and the amount spent on input for those crops. However, it should be the gross revenue[1] minus the total cost of inputs used. Using the sales revenue supposes that all the production was sold which was not the case because the surveys were done in December, many famers had not yet sold their crops (to get better price). Part of the production is consumed or given as gifts, which are not sold—was the evaluation able to account for that? The indicator identified by the ViM team was Gross Sales Margin, and correspondingly, the survey instrument collected information on gross sales revenue. Thus, we estimated gross margin using amount sold in market (as opposed to value of production) and we did not construct an estimate of gross revenue. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 213 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 28 ? The survey period can affect the comparison of the outcome OC10 between baseline and endline. The endline survey was conducted in December at the crop harvests (low price), the majority of crops were not yet sold. The survey period can also affect the number of livestock sold. For vulnerable people small livestock are sold during the hungry season to buy food. For women, small livestock is for saving; more crop revenue means less small livestock sold. The issues with the survey timing being different is discussed in 3.3.3, but OC10 and the number of livestock sold are asked for the last agricultural season on the household survey (consistent across baseline and endline), so survey timing is not likely to be a contributing issue here (although recall bias could be) 29 27 Understanding Agricultural Credit: according to the report the percentage of farmers using agricultural credit decreased from 8% at baseline to 5% at endline--another contradictory finding as cited earlier. If the evaluation is able to better explain this, that be welcomed, otherwise we may have to strike it off as a missed opportunity. As it stands, this finding contradicts the project’s efforts to link the microfinance institutions to farmers in the target areas. Maybe farmers are getting already higher revenue, they don’t need agricultural credit or they are using other funding sources to get input. More investigation is needed for explaining this finding. Overall, the results point to an increase in the use of financial services by endline. The use of agricultural credit (as a component of that) remains small, however, both at baseline and at endline, while use of savings and warrantage increased over the project lifetime. We have no indication in the PBS or qualitative data that farmer need or interest in obtaining agricultural credit has declined, or if warrantage is replacing household credit needs. Note as well that our analyses found no significant effect of formal credit or use of warrantage on gross crop margins or HDDS. 30 ? The indicator OC13 (percentage of farmers who used financial services) – the indicator should include crop warrantage, this activity was introduced by ViM and did not exist before. Its value is zero at baseline. According to ViM’s FY 2017 annual result report 69% of beneficiary farmers had access to financial services in FY 2017 which is in line with the 66%.2 reported by the PBS report. But what relation do these findings have with those just cited about agricultural credit--is warrantage becoming more effective, and replacing credit?? The indicator OC13 does not include crop warrantage, so that it is comparable to the baseline survey question and construction of this indicator. OC13_1 does include crop warrantage, and it is used to compare beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries at endline. Agricultural credit only decreased slightly from 8% to 5%. The evaluation data does not allow us to draw conclusions on whether use of warrantage could be directly replacing household need for or interest in agricultural credit from other sources. 31 28-29 The report states “However, there was no difference in the stunting rate between ViM beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries at endline. This finding likely relates to the broad coverage of some types of food rations across households in the ViM project area, such that even if an individual child did not receive a supplemental food ration directly, according to the caregiver’s response on the household survey at endline, often they were still in a household that received a food ration We believe this reviewer comment could stem from a misinterpretation of the statement in quotations. Please keep in mind that for this particular analysis, beneficiaries are defined by whether the household received a child ration or not. To our understanding, it is indeed possible that women in what is defined here as a 'non-beneficiary household' (from the perspective of receipt of child rations) could have benefited from a woman's food ration at some point during the project lifetime. Per the overall FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 214 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response at some point, such as directly to the woman”. In spite of what caretakers are stating, there is no strong evidence that the stunting decreasing among beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries are related to the broad coverage of some types of food rations across households in the ViM project areas. The caregivers’ response—was it only one?!-- on the household survey at endline cannot be generalized, is one consideration. Furthermore, similar food ration distribution took place in similar project in Burkina Faso but the stunting rate was not reduced as in the case of ViM. Finally, ration distribution was actually stopped 15 months (September 2016) before the endline survey. More investigations are warranted to determine the different, and credible factors that contributed in under-five year children’s stunting rate decreasing in the target area (were decreases also uniform across the coverage area?). theory of change for the role of food rations to women in reducing child malnutrition indicators, it is also conceivable that improved women's health could have a knock-on effect for likelihood of child stunting in the household (irrespective of whether the child has received supplemental feeding). Our statement in the report that "even if an individual child did not receive a supplemental food ration directly, according to the caregiver’s response on the household survey at endline, often they were still in a household that received a food ration at some point, such as directly to the woman" is indeed supported by the endline household survey data (that is why we included this caveat in the presentation of this result). With respect to the child's caregiver, we also note that this person is indeed generally viewed as the best source of information for whether that particular child received a food ration through ViM. We certainly take the point that it would be useful to have additional supplemental analyses beyond the ones already conducted by this evaluation with respect to factors that contribute to stunting rate reduction. Unfortunately, that was not possible for this evaluation given the time and resource limitations (nor was it in our scope), beyond the supplemental econometric results with respect to the ViM project interventions that contributed to reducing the stunting rate that are already presented in the study. With respect to the question on whether decreases were uniform across the coverage area, given that the survey is designed as a population based survey, the evaluation team is not convinced of an added value to constructing more disaggregated stunting rates across administrative sub-units within the project coverage area. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 215 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 32 ? Using econometric models, among the explanatory variables (ViM’s interventions, child’s age and sex, mother’s education level and revenue, household’s socio economic factors) tested and taking into account ViM’s theory of change regarding child malnutrition; what are the most important determinant factors of stunting in the target area?--and are these clearly stated in the report? We make no statements on this in the report. Per our approved analyses plan and evaluation scope, the econometric modelling with respect to stunting focused on estimating the effect of specific ViM interventions (ViM training and different group participation) on stunting rates. The overarching aim of that approach was to better understand whether ViM interventions specifically contributed to any observed reduction in the stunting rate in the ViM project area, over the ViM project lifetime (this was a supplemental analysis to try to overcome some of the limitations in establishing project contributions to observed impacts that are inherent in the pre-post design of this evaluation). The evaluation scope did not task us with identifying the most important determinants of reduced stunting as a whole, and answering that question would require a different modelling approach than the one we took. Our approach does not use a single, unique model to compare the contribution of various determinants on stunting rate, and does not allow us to make statements about the most important determinants as a whole. 33 45-47 Econometric models were used to assess the relationship between the project outcome indicators and implemented activities. Vim's better stating the purpose of this modelling, as well as limitations, could be helpful, and please review to determine whether the models' results interpretation provided are too brief. The purpose of the modelling has been briefly described in each section, and the type of model used was also briefly described. In most cases, models are associated with assumptions about the relationship that guides the selection of covariates used. The evaluation team has also stated key limitations such as when certain covariates may be expected to have influence, but were not included in the model due to lack of data. 34 ? For example livestock total sale revenue model (Annex - Table 13.2) – five variables (Livestock training, farmer’s age, sex, Own car/truck/motorcycle, number of adults) with significant coefficients were presented in the table 13.2. But,only livestock training coefficient was interpreted in the report. We report the results for the main coefficient of interest for each model set and do not discuss the role of other covariates that serve as controls in the model, because the purpose of the econometric analyses was to estimate the effect of specific ViM trainings and different types of group participation on particular outcomes. We report on a total of 50 different regression models in the report - it is not feasible to also include discussion of the role of covariates that are controlled for directly in the report text for such a large number of results (and it potentially distracts readers from the main subject of discussion, which is the role of ViM interventions in attaining change on the selected outcomes), but FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 216 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response since all model results are presented in the evaluation report annex, interested readers can reference these results there directly. 35 ? Regression results: Effect of ViM Interventions on Malnutrition: Stunting and Underweight – The correlation between stunting and the Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD) should be also tested. This has now been added to the corresponding econometric results section. 36 ? Regression results: Role of ViM Interventions on Adoption of Improved Health Practices: Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD) – Please test the relationship between MAD and food ration in ViM project context. This has now been added to the corresponding econometric results section. 37 49 Stunting Decrease: it is very encouraging to see a significant decrease of stunting in VIM areas. Can the evaluation team provide the stunting rate trends in the Sanmatenga province or neighboring communes during VIM project cycle? Putting trend lines up for stunting over time on a chart for all ViM communes over time would be very helpful. We added a footnote (no. 35) to contextualize the stunting rate trend in Sanmatenga over the ViM lifetime with the most recent published data available to our knowledge (GoBF’s 2017 SMART survey, GoBF's 2016 SMART survey, also reported in the 2018 edition UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Child Malnutrition Estimates as the most recent data available for GoBF). The lowest level of disaggregation for those data are at the Region level rather than Province, so we also provide the 2016 rate for Centre-Nord Region in the same footnote. 38 56 Gender: this section is limited to the three gender specific indicators. Is it still possible to look at and explain sex￾disaggregated data related to value chains, livelihoods diversification, nut/health, and have the report better state VIM achievements regarding gender integration and the remaining gaps. We've added additional discussion on this to EQ8. We also note that each of the indicators presented in section 4.1.1 report out on sex disaggregated differences for the indicator in question (for example, see page 28 for sex-disaggregated results on value chain activities, page 29 for results with respect to use of financial services and access to pricing information, pages 30-33 for sex disaggregated results on child health and malnutrition outcomes, etc.). Sex-disaggregated findings on continued interest and FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 217 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response demand in trainings by sectors is discussed under EQ5 (for example see page 67). The discussion of Eq8 (pp 73-75), summarizes ViM achievements with respect to addressing gender gaps and women's empowerment. In addition, please see Tables 3 and 4 in the Report Annex I which presents sex-disaggregated baseline, endline, and baseline to endline results and statistical significance for all individual-level indicators covered by the evaluation. While male farmers typically had higher values than female farmers for most of the indicators assessed (Table 3), there are several indicators where female farmers improved by the same amount, as much or by a greater amount, relative to their male counterparts, from baseline to endline (Table 4) (for example, in the percentage of female farmers who use improved storage techniques for cowpeas, the percentage of female farmers who practiced value chain activities promoted by the project, or the percentage of farmers who used financial services in the most recent season). 39 7- Related to an earlier remark about testing new approaches, did the evaluation team collect data on the effectiveness on 'QDP' activity (qualite definie par le partenariat)? This activity was supposed to improve the relationships between health care providers and community with the aim to improve access to health services. Since the current DFAPs have relatively few activities to improve health quality services, it would be very useful for lthe evaluation team to share what information it may have collected about this approach, and how effective it was or not. A focus on the QDP activity was not mentioned in the evaluation team's scope, nor highlighted by USAID or ViM teams during the evaluation design phase or data collection planning. As a result the data collection instruments are not designed to explicitly gather information on this activity. The evaluation team will review any organic mentions of QDP in the qualitative data and if there is available information to draw on it will be included in the report. 40 79 Related to sustainability and exit strategies, whether and which types of service providers are expected to continue providing services after the end of VIM, the response was not well elaborated in ways that FFP or others could use the findings for future efforts. To improve this, the evaluation team should specify for each SO, who are the services providers (private, NGO, state), based on VIM exit strategy plan, and secondly discuss the motivation and capacities of these actors to continue to contribute to ViM programming, or not. As it stands, the reader cannot dissociate who are the We added additional information on the break-down of KIIs across service provider or other categories to a footnote in the report text, and included more details on those break-downs directly in the text for the EQ as well. FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 218 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response service providers the respondents are referring to, and for which activities 41 83 SILC--the finding on SILC is the least likely to be continued after end of VIM, is contradictory to what we have seen/heard in the region. Could the team elaborate further on the reasons given by respondents why SILC will collapse after VIM? The report does not state that respondents indicated that SILCs would collapse after the ViM project. But, fewer survey respondents said d that they intended to continue to participate in SILC trainings or SILC groups than for several of the other activities that they were asked about. The reasons for this are unclear, but could suggest perceived lower effectiveness or capacity to continue without support, possibility that SILCs did not have a great a reach across the project zone (and survey sample) as several of the other activities that were asked about, and/or respondents apparent expectation that the most likely source of continued training or support for SILCs would need to come from government. Strong concerns over SILC functioning or sustainability were not raised through the qualitative data, so we cannot comment on this in more detail. 42 89 Advancing and leveraging partnership with USG investments: Did the evaluation team get the opportunity to interview VIM, Regis AG/ER, WFP staff on this question? Interviews would have been more informative than desk review for learning about this key question. Importantly, VIM's one-year extension justification was based on fostering stronger partnership with others RISE actors. The report should state whether such investments in programming collaboration were beneficial for VIM's target groups, or not, and/or how such collaborative relations become more beneficial in the future. The evaluation team did not have the opportunity to discuss on this directly with Regis AG/ER or ViM staff. While the report discusses planned collaboration and increasing transfer of some activities to RISE partners as part of the project's exit strategy, the qualitative fieldwork for this evaluation was conducted in early 2018 before such transfers would reasonably have been completed, thus unfortunately we aren't able to comment on whether ultimate goals for these collaborations were achieved or how they may be made more beneficial in future. Save the children comment FINAL REPORT ANNEXES – VICTORY AGAINST MALNUTRITION (ViM) FINAL EVALUATION 219 Comment # Page # USAID Comment NORC response 43 27 The evaluation states that “there was no difference in the stunting rate between ViM beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries at endline.” However, this contradicts the econometric analysis findings in the last paragraph of pg. vi and on pg. 53- 54, which state that the variables used to determine beneficiary status were receipt of food rations and MCHN training, and that both of these were in fact correlated with a statistically significant difference in stunting. Could you raise this issue with the NORC team, since it sounds like they are doing one last round of edits? Specifically, we would request that NORC delete the sentence saying there was no difference in stunting (if it was left there in error), or else revise the sentence to further explain what they mean as it relates to the other econometric results. This sentence is not in error, and has been retained. We believe this comment stems from a misunderstanding over the difference between the "naïve" comparison of the stunting rate for beneficiary/non-beneficiary at endline (which does not control for other observable and unobservable differences and self-selection bias, and under this approach there is no difference in the stunting rate), and the results from the supplemental econometric analysis. The supplemental econometric models correct for these confounding factors, and once these are corrected for we find that these ViM interventions are associated with a decline in the stunting rate.