April 2, 2012 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS). EVALUATION Final Report Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya Natural Resource Management Projects April 2, 2012 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS). FINAL REPORT MID-TERM EVALUATION OF USAID/KENYA NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects ii Prepared for the United States Agency for International Development, USAID Contract Number AID-RAN￾I-00-09-00015, Task Order AID-623-TO-11-00007, Performance, Analysis, Communications & Evaluation (PACE). Implemented by: Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS) 4600 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 402 Arlington, VA 22203 Phone: +1 703-465-9388 Fax: +1 703-465-9344 www.onlinedts.com Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects iii FINAL REPORT MID-TERM EVALUATION OF USAID/KENYA NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS April 2, 2012 DISCLAIMER The authors' views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The evaluation team would like to thank the people and organizations that provided logistical support, agreed to be interviewed, and wrote and edited the report. dTS provided the PACE framework, logistical backstopping, and editing support, as did McGatti services of Edinburgh. Members of the ENRM team at USAID were helpful in guiding and encouraging the Mission to examine various emphases. The staff of the Laikipia Wildlife Forum, the Northern Rangelands Trust, TIST, GBM, SECURE, ProMara, and AWF were supportive and insightful, and are gratefully acknowledged for their professionalism and help in our assessment of the progress of their USAID grants. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects iv ACRONYMS ABEO Agriculture, Business, and Environment Office of USAID Kenya ACC African Conservation Center AWF African Wildlife Forum CAAC Clean Air Action Corporation CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CBO Community-Based organization CFA Community Forestry Association CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species CLRR Community Land Rights Recognition COBRA Community Biodiversity Resource Areas CoMMS Conservancy Managed Monitoring System COP Chief of Party CORE Conservation Resources through Enterprises CRS Catholic Relief Services DRSS Department of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing DPGL Development Partners Group on Land EAWS East African Wildlife Society ENRM Environment and Natural Resource Management FCC Forest Conservation Committee FORREMS Forestry Range Rehabilitation and Environmental Management Strengthening Project GBM Green Belt Movement GEF Global Environment Facility GMP General Management Plan GoK Government of Kenya GV Green Volunteer HCDA Horticultural Crops Development Authority HM Holistic Management ICS Interim Coordinating Secretariat (of the Mau Forest Complex) ICT Information and Communication Technology ILRI International Livestock Research Institute IMS Institutional management and strengthening IP Implementing Partner ISO International Organization for Standardization KARI Kenya Agricultural Research Institute KCP Kitengela Conservation Project KEFRI Kenya Forestry Research Institute KFS Kenya Forest Service KIPI Kenya Intellectual Property Institute KIRDI Kenya Industrial Research Institute KPF Kajiado Pastoralists Forum KSh Kenyan shilling KWS Kenya Wildlife Service LOA Land Owners’ Association Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects v LRSP Land Reform Support Program LRTU Land Reform Transformation Unit LUMP Land Use Master Plan LWC Lewa Wildlife Conservancy LWF Laikipia Wildlife Forum M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MAC Market Access Center MFC Mau Forest Complex MIST Management Information System (for ranger-based monitoring) MOC Mara Outreach Center MoFW Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife MoL Ministry of Lands MoU Memorandum of Understanding NACOFA National Alliance of Community Forestry Associations NBE Nature-Based Enterprise NCST National Council of Science and Technology NEMA National Environment Management Authority NGO Non-Governmental Organization NLP National Land Policy NNP Nairobi National Park NRM Natural Resource Management NRT Northern Rangelands Trust OCC Ole Kajiado County Council PA Protected Area PAPF Protected Area Planning Framework PDA Personal Digital Assistant PDD Program Development Document PELIS Plantation Establishment Livelihood System PES Payment for Ecological Services PMP Performance Monitoring Plan PRRG Property Rights and Resource Governance Project RCMRD Regional Centre for Department of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing SCMP Sub-Catchment Management Plan SECURE Securing Rights to Land and Natural Resources for Biodiversity and Livelihoods in Kiunga￾Boni-Dodori Areas of Kenya SILC Savings and Internal Lending Communities SNV Netherlands Development Organization SO5 Strategic Objective 5 SOW Statement of Work TIST The International Small Group and Tree Planting Program TNG Tree Nursery Group TRA Threats Reduction Assessment USAID United States Agency for International Development WRUA Water Resource User Association WTO World Trade Organization WWF Worldwide Fund for Nature Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects vi CONTENTS Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................iv Contents ....................................................................................................................................vi Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter I. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 4 Purpose and Scope ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter II. Main Findings Regarding Key Evaluation QuestIons .........................................10 Chapter III. Main Findings Regarding Best Practices And Lessons Learned .......................20 IR5.1.1 Appropriate NRM Tools And Technologies Adopted ....................................................21 IR5.1.2 Integrated Community Management Plans Established ..................................................22 IR5.1.3 Improved Local Decision Making Based on Monitoring ond Analysis ........................23 IR5.1.4 Nature-Focused Business Practices Improved ..................................................................25 IR5.1.5 Awareness of Incentives for NRM Increased ....................................................................29 IR5.3.1 Improved Availability and Analysis of Data for Decision Making ................................31 IR5.4.1 Constituencies for Natural Resources Conservation Established ..................................32 IR5.1.5.1 Wildlife Policy Revised, Conservation and Management Bill Passed ............................33 IR5.1.5.3 Land Use Policy Created and Enacted ................................................................................33 IR5.1.5.5 National Biodiversity Strategy Established ........................................................................34 Chapter IV. Recommendations and Conclusions ................................................................35 Recommendations .......................................................................................................................................35 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................................38 Appendix A. Northern Rangelands Trust Support Program (NRT) .......................................40 Appendix B. Laikipia Wildlife Forum (LWF)..........................................................................46 Appendix C. Kitengela Conservation Project (AWF) ..............................................................52 Appendix D. Wildlife Conservation Program (Kenya Wildlife Service - KWS) .......................56 Appendix E. Mau Forest Conservation Program (ProMara) ..................................................60 Appendix F. Aberdares Conservation project (The Green Belt Movement – GBM) ..............67 Appendix G. The International Small Group and Tree Planting Program (TIST) ................. 71 Appendix H. Securing Rights to Land and Natural Resources for Biodiversity and Livelihoods in Kiunga-Boni-Dodori Areas of Kenya (SECURE) ....................................................................76 Appendix I. Summary of Field Data Collection Protocols ......................................................79 Appendix J. Statement of Work for Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya Natural Resources Management Projects ..............................................................................................................82 Appendix K. Persons Interviewed ...........................................................................................90 Appendix L. Documents Reviewed .........................................................................................97 Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the results of a mid-term evaluation of eight ongoing projects in the USAID/Kenya Environment and Natural Resource Management (ENRM) portfolio (see Table 1 below for a listing of the eight projects). The evaluation was conducted during the period from November 9 to December 10, 2011. The evaluation team consisted of Mark Treacy, Project Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Specialist and Team Leader; Robinson Ngethe, Ecologist; and Margaret Karuri, Business Management Specialist. The primary purpose of this evaluation was to determine what is working and why (best practices), to recommend course corrections, and to generate a forward-looking vision to advise the Agriculture, Business, and Environment Office (ABEO) on future strategic directions for its ENRM portfolio. For each of the eight projects, an assessment was conducted of progress made between 2008 and 2011, with attention given to each project’s design, implementation, monitoring, and management. The evaluation was essentially qualitative and based on a review of performance reporting, field interviews, and observations to determine each project’s overall progress, potential for achieving targeted impacts, and potential for sustainability. The report presents its findings and conclusions first as responses to eight key evaluation questions derived from the Statement of Work (SoW). It then provides best practices and lessons learned. This is organized in terms of 10 relevant intermediate results (IRs) from USAID/Kenya’s Strategic Objective 5: Improved natural resources management in targeted bio-diverse areas by and for stakeholders. A summary of the evaluation team’s conclusions with respect to three of the key evaluation questions is provided in Table 1 below. This is followed by a summary of cross-cutting conclusions and recommendations. Table 1. Summary of Evaluation Conclusions Regarding the Applicability of the Project Design, the Sustainability, and Progress Toward Meeting Project’s Objectives of Each of the Eight Evaluated Projects Project Title Implementing Partner Design Applicability Progress Toward Meeting Objectives Sustainability Northern Rangelands Trust Lewa Conservancy Highly applicable On track Positive outlook Laikipia Conservation Project Laikipia Wildlife Forum Highly applicable On track Positive outlook Kitengela Conservation Project African Wildlife Foundation Applicable for present On track Questionable Wildlife Conservation Project The Kenya Wildlife Service Applicable On track Very positive prospects Mau Forest Conservation (ProMara) ARD Relevant but implementation period too short On track Questionable Aberdares Conservation Project The Greenbelt Movement Needs clarification On track Questionable The International Small Group on Tree Planting (TIST) Institute for Environmental Innovation (I4EI) Highly applicable On track Positive outlook Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 2 Project Title Implementing Partner Design Applicability Progress Toward Meeting Objectives Sustainability Securing Rights to Land and Natural Resources for Biodiversity and Livelihoods in the Kiunga-Boni-Dodori Areas (Secure) ARD Applicable, but difficulties possibly underestimated In danger of not meeting all objectives Possible, but currently no exit strategy CROSS-CUTTING CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  Across all ENRM projects, create locally vested interests in preserving habitats and natural resources to further conservation goals. Increased collaboration should be sought with the private sector in promoting conservation and in instilling good business practices in the development of conservation enterprises.  Build the capacity of local communities to manage their ecosystems competently, and to generate additional incomes at the household level through nature-based enterprises (NBE). Excellent examples are evident in USAID’s ENRM project portfolio. These include beekeeping and honey production (demand for which is far from saturation), eco-tourism (e.g., game drives, nature walks, lodges and holiday homes in conservancies), hand and beaded crafts by women and social enterprises (e.g., hay making in schools in the Kitengela area.)  Expand the scale of already successful models such as Desert Edge and Market Access Centers (MACs) to increase the value of indigenous plants and honey as well as livestock through the value chain and the establishment of ethical trade. These create economic incentives for communities to manage their resources better and more sustainably.  In projects that seek to reduce consumption rates of woody biomass through fuel-efficient stoves, promote locally made energy-saving cook stoves which are durable, create local jobs, are popular with women, and are easy to maintain, instead of importing cook stoves from abroad.  Across all forest conservation-related projects and approaches, incorporate efforts to sustain public education and citizens’ vigilance into project design. The focus should be on immediate threats to forests and catchment conservation such as logging, encroachment, and fire. Efforts should emphasize collective mitigation by an informed public to achieve potential for greater impact.  Across projects that address joint wildlife habitat and range productivity improvement, incorporate incentives and reward systems such as the NRT livestock program and the MAC models. Though these are not fully mature, they have the potential to secure the retention of pastoralists’ livelihoods while keeping rangelands open and productive.  Improved local decision making based on monitoring and analysis takes considerable time – often beyond the duration of a project. For results to manifest in the improvement of natural systems (e.g.: rangelands, hydrological regimes, and forest cover), strengthen the governance of natural resources which is also time consuming but necessary.  More time and investments are required to bring to fruition the on-going effort in building viable NBEs across the existing NRM projects, and for clear outputs to emerge before reaching financially sustainable levels. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 3  Quantitative indicators that focus only on units of project outputs can diminish or impede the importance of steps that have been achieved during the improvement and governance of natural resource system processes. Quantitative indicators are necessary, but do not reveal the vitality of progress in isolation. A better way to construct project-level PMPs is to retain quantitative output indicators as needed for centralized decision making while also working with implementing partners (IPs) during the formulation of their projects. This will ensure that they have process monitoring indicators (e.g., a series of benchmarks and milestones) that work in parallel with the quantitative indicators.  Implementing partners should be discouraged from asserting that impact is a direct outcome of project activities when many external factors may have influenced results. To genuinely make such claims, the project implementers would need the technical monitoring means to establish causal links between afforestation and hydrological impact.  The development of whole value chains for NBEs is required for economic development and poverty reduction. All segments in a given value chain – input supply, production, value addition, and marketing – should address major constraints and opportunities faced by farmers and producers, processors, traders, and other businesses at multiple levels. Whole value chain analysis and development for NBEs and alternative livelihoods are a best practice that should be enhanced across NRM projects. Although investments are required at all levels of the value chains, feedback from the field indicates that more focus and opportunity for expansion are needed at the value addition/processing and marketing segments as ways of securing better prices and profits for the producers. By increasing the value of indigenous plants, honey, livestock, and other nature-based businesses throughout the value chain, communities are encouraged to manage their resources better and more sustainably.  Explore and promote new business models on how NBEs can be developed and managed sustainably to boost rural livelihoods and incomes while meeting the goal of conservation and environmental sustainability. At the same time, ensure that where private-sector partnerships have developed there is fair and equitable distribution of profits. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 4 CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a mid-term evaluation of eight ongoing projects in the USAID/Kenya ENRM portfolio (see Table 2 for an overview of the eight projects). This introductory chapter provides a brief statement of the purpose, scope, and methodology of the evaluation. Chapter II summarizes the evaluation findings first organized in terms of a set of key evaluation questions posed by USAID/Kenya. Chapter III provides the evaluation’s findings and conclusions with respect to lessons learned and best practices identified. These are organized in terms of 10 relevant IRs in the ENRM’s Strategic Objective 5 (SO5): “Improved natural resource management in targeted bio-diverse areas for and by stakeholders.’’ Chapter IV presents overall conclusions and recommendations based on the evaluation of the eight projects. Following the main body of the report, individual project reports are provided as Appendices A through H. Each appendix includes a brief description of the project, addresses the seven key questions in the evaluation’s SoW (Appendix I), provides best practices and lessons learned, and makes recommendations. PURPOSE AND SCOPE The primary purpose of the mid-term evaluation of USAID/Kenya’s NRM projects was to determine what is working and why (best practices), and to recommend course corrections, if any. The vision presented in the report is based on analysis of best practices and lessons learned from the eight on-going NRM projects. The overall goal of this mid-term evaluation was to assess the progress made on eight ongoing individual USAID/Kenya ENRM projects implemented between 2008 ando 2011. This evaluation:  addressed qualitative concerns about project design, implementation, monitoring, and management;  makes recommendations based on internal learning from the evaluated projects; and  generates a forward-looking vision that will advise USAID/Kenya’s ABEO on future strategic directions for its ENRM portfolio. In addition, the evaluation was to address the likelihood of each project being able to successfully implement its exit strategy by the project end date (i.e., potential for sustainability). An overview of the eight individual projects covered by the evaluation is provided in Table 1 below. As indicated in the table, seven of the projects are implemented under two USAID/Kenya Activity Approval Documents (AADs). A more complete description as well as the evaluation findings and conclusions with respect to each of the eight projects are provided in Appendices A through H of this report. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 5 Table 2. Overview of Eight Evaluated Projects Project Title Implementing Partner Total Cost Objectives Wildlife and Biodiversity Conservation AAD 1 Northern Rangelands Trust (NRT) Lewa Conservancy $3.2 M (i) Improve management systems and institutional structures of CBOs managing conservancies. (ii) Improve condition and diversity of biological resources. (iii) Increase economic benefits and improved livelihoods for Northern Rangelands pastoralist households. (iv) Increase community capacity to resolve resource-based conflicts and to improve natural resource governance in the larger NRT region. (v) Enhance sustainability of the NRT executive structure and operations. 2 Laikipia Conservation Project Laikipia Wildlife Forum $2.5M (i) Increase the capacity of Laikipia communities to manage their natural resources. (ii) Improve the quality and diversity of natural resources in Laikipia, including water availability for domestic use. (iii) Expand and diversify economic opportunities for Laikipia communities and thus provide incentives for biodiversity conservation. (iv) Develop a Laikipia-wide ecological and socioeconomic monitoring program to track changes in ecosystem health and human well-being in relation to land use and natural resource management. (v) Improve governance and transparency at community and producer-group levels. 3 Kitengela Conservation Project African Wildlife Foundation $1.6M (i) Improved institutional capacity that enables demand-driven land planning and enforcement focused on creating long-term sustainability. (ii) Site-specific natural resource management initiatives implemented outside protected areas that improve or maintain biodiversity and the condition of natural resources. (iii) Promote new sustainable financing mechanisms that focus on tourism and livestock development. (iv) Advance policy reform through piloting of a number of initiatives in support of the project area. 4 Wildlife Conservation Project The Kenya Wildlife Service $2.0M (i) To improve the management of Kenya’s protected area network by implementing park plans. (ii) Institutional management strengthening; integrated management information system; and human resources capacity building. (iii) Applied research and biodiversity monitoring capacity building. (iv) Support co-management initiatives for wildlife and biodiversity conservation. Forestry Conservation and Climate Management ADD Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 6 Project Title Implementing Partner Total Cost Objectives 5 Mau Forest Conservation (ProMara) ARD $7.0M (i) Improve land and resource tenure. (a) Support to Interim Coordinating Secretariat on Mau to Rehabilitate the Mau Forest Complex. (b) Strengthen land rights of women, particularly in women￾headed households. (ii) Contribute to restoration/protection of critical catchment, forests, and biodiversity. (iii) Contribute to improvement of livelihoods for catchment residents. (iv) Establish and operationalize the Mara Outreach Center. 6 Aberdares Conservation Project The Greenbelt Movement $560K (i) Mobilize community capability to protect public goods and restore the functions of the natural ecosystem. (ii) Promote land use change through tree planting and better management of local natural resources. (iii) Protect and restore habitats for local biodiversity and support ecologically sound community initiatives. (iv) Improve long-term economic viability of tree planting and other nature-based activities implemented by communities. 7 The International Small Group on Tree Planting (TIST) Institute for Environmental Innovation (I4EI) $7.2M (i) Enhance biodiversity conservation; reduce vulnerability to climate change and reverse deforestation. (ii) Improve rural livelihoods with secure economic benefits from carbon sequestration; increased crop yields through conservation farming and sustainable land management; sustainable and efficient use of wood fuels, and savings based micro-credit. (iii) Restore degraded riparian and catchment areas in gazetted forest lands and use carbon revenues to provide long-term income to participants. (iv) Improve capacity of KFS and I4EI to monitor the project’s effects on biodiversity, soil, and water conservation. (v) Reduce ‘pressure’ on the resources of natural forests through payments for environmental services. Enabling Environment Policy and Legislative Support 8 Securing Rights to Land and natural Resources for Biodiversity and Livelihoods in the Kiunga￾Boni-Dodori Areas (SECURE) ARD $2.1M (i) Improve land and natural resource tenure security and reduce conflict over natural assets. (ii) Improve management of protected and biologically sensitive areas. (iii) Provide lessons learned to inform the Forest Act, the draft Wildlife Bill and Policy, and Kenya’s new National Land Policy. METHODOLOGY Duration: The evaluation performance period was from November 9 to December 10, 2011. An initial kick￾off meeting was held on November 10, 2011 with USAID/Kenya to review the evaluation work plan. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 7 Subsequently, a fieldwork plan was developed, reviewed, and approved. Fieldwork started on November 13, 2011 with a visit to the Laikipia Wildlife Forum (LWF). This was followed by field visits to:  the Northern Rangelands Trust (NRT)-Lewa Conservancy;  the International Small Group and Tree Planting Program (TIST);  Green Belt Movement (GMB);  ProMara in Nakuru;  Kitengela Conservation project;  Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS); and  the Securing Rights to Land and Natural Resources for Biodiversity and Livelihoods in Kiunga-Boni￾Dodori Areas of Kenya (SECURE) project in Lamu. Of the evaluation team’s 28 working days, four were spent developing the work plan, meeting with USAID, organizing the team, and conducting a literature review. One and a half days were spent preparing for and conducting interim and final meetings with USAID. Six days were required to travel to and from the eight projects reviewed. The remaining 16.5 days were spent conducting project interviews and internal meetings, writing appendices for each project, and writing the main report. This division of time allowed two days for each of the eight projects. This timeline was challenging. An interim briefing meeting was held on November 28, 2011 with USAID/Kenya ABEO staff to present the evaluation’s initial findings. The evaluation team held debriefings with each of the projects to communicate initial findings and seek further clarification. A PowerPoint presentation of the evaluation’s field findings, including best practices and lessons learned, was made to the USAID/Kenya staff on December 8, 2011, and was attended by PACE’s Chief of Party (COP) and other staff. Evaluation team composition: The mid-term evaluation was undertaken by a three-member team consisting of: Mark Treacy, Project M&E Specialist and Team Leader; Robinson Ngethe, Ecologist; and, Margaret Karuri, Business Management Specialist. Evaluation questions and approach: According to the evaluation’s SoW, the overall goal of the evaluation was to assess the progress made by each of the eight projects toward achieving their project objectives (impacts) and to recommend improvements/course corrections for the projects, as needed. The evaluation team was to address the following questions in the evaluation process: 1. Does the initial project design (and the assumptions on which it was based) still make sense, and is the approach being used to implement still appropriate? 2. Is the project on target to achieve the intended impact? If not, what adjustments are needed? 3. What is the actual and/or potential grassroots impact on livelihoods and conservation in the areas where projects are being implemented? 4. How successful is the project in building coalitions with other actors (government, donors, others) to maximize impact and avoid duplication of effort in the implementation location(s)? 5. How effectively is the project addressing cross-cutting issues (gender, youth, and ethnic)? Provide recommendations on how to improve, as needed. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 8 6. How are research and M&E systems being used to inform and improve project implementation over time? Provide suggestions for more effective data collection and/or utilization by the partner and USAID, as appropriate. 7. What is the likelihood that the project will successfully implement its exit strategy by the project end date (i.e., potential for sustainability)? If not strong, what needs to change to improve this in the balance of the program? In addition, USAID/Kenya requested that the following themes be explored during the evaluations of certain projects. These included: 1. As part of the evaluation of the SECURE project and its engagement with the Ministry of Lands (MoL), the evaluation team was tasked with meeting with MoL officials either in Lamu or Nairobi to examine the extent and pace of policy reform for more equitable resource access and utilization. 2. In evaluating the current Kenya Wildlife Service grant, the evaluation team was asked to examine how new institutional arrangements would affect habitats and ecosystems, giving particular attention to issues related to the devolution of management responsibility and accountability related to the draft Wildlife Policy. 3. As part of the evaluations of the Northern Rangelands Trust and Laikipia Conservation Projects, the team was to assess the resource governance and progress of capacity building of newly formed Community Forest Associations, Water Resource User Associations, and other natural resource governance bodies. 4. Qualitative methods were used to gauge the eight projects’ progress in reaching their respective objectives as well as their performance related to the other evaluation questions. To elicit views from the projects’ beneficiaries and IPs, the evaluation processes were very interactive and made use of Appreciative Inquiry techniques, particularly in determining what works well and why. For each of the eight projects, the evaluation process included:  literature reviews;  introducing the evaluation team;  the project staff providing a short verbal brief to the evaluation team;  the project’s submission of a short written brief to the evaluation team;  review of the project’s M&E data consistency between recorded data and actual field findings;  field visits to project sites that address ecologic objectives - project activities were chosen to span a range of robust to less than robust to reveal the range of success and challenges;  interactive debriefing at the end of each project’s fieldwork; and  an appendix about the project written on-site. While in the field, the evaluation team employed a variety of standard interactive tools as appropriate to elicit views. The primary approach was the use of key informant interviews. These were used to capture information from individual project stakeholders, including IP staff and staff of other organizations. While verifying program activities in the field, beneficiaries were interviewed to identify NBE business constraints and opportunities. Most interviews were semi-structured, consisting of a series of broad questions to guide Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 9 the conversations. This was particularly useful in enabling the evaluation team to gain an in-depth understanding of qualitative issues. The team also led focus group discussions. These were mainly utilized with community beneficiaries, including small groups of entrepreneurs and associations involved in a cross￾section of enterprises and other project activities. Feedback was obtained on the efficiency and effectiveness of the respective projects. Questions and topics included in the data collection protocols are provided in Appendix I. Through these procedures, a critical examination of each of the eight on-going projects was carried out to address the following eight questions, which are a slight modification and extension of the seven questions in the evaluation’s SoW:  Are projects on track to achieve their stated objectives?  Are the original project designs and approaches still applicable?  Are project outputs designed to be sustainable once project support ends? In short, does a given IPs have a realistic exit strategy that is being implemented?  Are course corrections necessary to achieve their objectives and exit strategy?  How successful are projects in working with other stakeholders (e.g., government agencies and other donor-funded ventures) to increase the impact of USAID program investments?  How sensitive to and effective are the projects in bringing constructive change to matters relating to ethnic divides and class divides, youth’s productive engagement, and gender equity across all project objectives? In addition, higher order lines of inquiry were used to guide USAID/Kenya in generating a synthesis to determine whether:  Mutually supportive impacts are being achieved in sustainable livelihoods and conservation, including economic, ecologic, and institutional sustainability, and how the Mission’s ABEO can effect meaningful progress in biodiversity conservation.  Projects are creatively using M&E approaches and data that result in adaptive management, and whether IPs’ M&E systems and tools can be improved to better inform USAID. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 10 CHAPTER II. MAIN FINDINGS REGARDING KEY EVALUATION QUESTIONS This chapter presents the major findings of the evaluation, organized in terms of the eight questions derived from the evaluation’s SoW. Table 3 provides a summary of the team’s conclusions with respect to three particularly salient questions. It is followed by the evaluation team’s responses to each of the eight key evaluation questions for each of the eight projects. Table 3. Summary of Evaluation Conclusions Regarding: the Applicability of the Project Design, the Sustainability, and Progress Toward Meeting the Project’s Objectives of Each of the Eight Evaluated Projects Project Title Implementing Partner Design Applicability Progress Toward Meeting Objectives Sustainability Northern Rangelands Trust Lewa Conservancy Highly applicable On track Positive outlook Laikipia Conservation Project Laikipia Wildlife Forum Highly applicable On track Positive outlook Kitengela Conservation Project African Wildlife Foundation Applicable for present On track Questionable Wildlife Conservation Project The Kenya Wildlife Service Applicable On track Very positive prospects Mau Forest Conservation (ProMara) ARD Relevant but implementation period too short On track Questionable Aberdares Conservation Project The Greenbelt Movement Needs clarification On track Questionable The International Small Group on Tree Planting (TIST) Institute for Environmental Innovation (I4EI) Highly applicable On track Positive outlook Securing Rights to Land and natural Resources for Biodiversity and Livelihoods in the Kiunga-Boni-Dodori Areas (Secure) ARD Applicable, but difficulties possibly underestimated In danger of not meeting all objectives Possible, but currently no exit strategy IS THE PROJECT ON TRACK TO ACHIEVE ITS STATED OBJECTIVES? Northern Rangeland Trust (NRT): The Lewa Conservancy implements high quality work and is on track to meet its objectives. In most cases, it surpasses its output targets. Laikipia Conservation Project (LWF): The LWF implements quality work and is largely on track, considering the daunting challenges it faces. It will meet most of its objectives, though it will likely need longer than planned to expend its present USAID grant. The social complexities and, in some cases, enmities largely account for delays. The community aspect of the LWF’s landscape-level monitoring buildup is lagging. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 11 Kitengela Conservation Project (AWF): The project is on track to meet its stated objectives of improving income generation mechanisms for the pastoralist communities it serves. The most significant achievement is the approval and launch of the Land Use Master Plan (LUMP) in August 2011. The LUMP process was born out of a pluralistic and community-driven process, with the resultant plan covering an area of 2,500 square kilometers. The next and most challenging step will be the implementation of the LUMP, which faces resistance from large, politically connected investors in the area and those seeking to buy and sell a large parcel of open land (called “goat and sheep’’ land) for commercial purposes. AWF focuses on strengthening the Kajiado Pastoral Forum (KPF) and other community groups so they can continue to work with the Ole Kajiado County Council (OCC) and other stakeholders on community policing of the zones’ boundaries in the LUMP. The livestock value chain development is not yet fully operational. Wildlife Conservation Project (KWS): The project is generally on track to meet the stated objectives in its original design. Mau Forest Conservation (ProMara): By all accounts from the PMP and the periodic reports to USAID, the ProMara project is generally well on track to meet its objectives. However, in light of the very ambitious number and nature of the NRM activities, and given that 2012 is an election year, the remaining time frame is considered too short to realize the set objectives for young activities, most of which are barely beginning to be operational. The program has assembled a talented mix of young and experienced professionals and volunteers in NRM, land tenure and legal skills, conflict management, and alternative livelihoods to implement the program activities. In addition, the program has established good collaborative relationships with Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI), East African Wildlife Society (EAWS), Kenya Forest Service (KFS), and Ministry of Agriculture (MoA). It uses a pool of locally-based organizations and consultants to fill gaps so as to achieve timely implementation of the work plan. Aberdares Conservation Project (GBM): The project is generally on track to meet its objectives. Full restoration of ecological functions should be a highest order goal, rather than an objective, and is beyond the timeframe of a relatively short project. At the time of the NRM evaluation, the project was just starting to take steps toward improving long-term economic viability of tree planting, and a thorough rationalization of this is very much required. The International Small Group on Tree Planting (TIST): The TIST project is well on track to meet its objectives. It brings an innovative and well-structured approach to afforestation and to improving livelihoods while addressing improved NRM and biodiversity conservation objectives. Securing Rights to Land and natural Resources for Biodiversity and Livelihoods in the Kiunga-Boni-Dodori Areas (SECURE): Unless there is a decisive reversal of the present inaction by the Government of Kenya’s (GoK) MoL to actualize the project’s Component 1, the project will not meet all of its objectives. Its Component 2 of improved NRM through co-management will also be compromised. IS THE ORIGINAL DESIGN AND APPROACH STILL APPLICABLE? NRT: The original design remains highly applicable. This USAID grant concentrates on the building of sustainable governing structures, and while the NRT has made very commendable progress toward their realization, this goal will remain in place as the constituent conservancies mature. LWF: The original design is still very much applicable. It drew from the experience of its USAID-funded precedent, the FORREMS project, which benefitted LWF’s learning base. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 12 AWF: The original project design is applicable for the present, but future focus should emphasize the landmark Land Use Management Plan’s actual implementation, and strengthen the capacities of the Ole Kajiado County Council (OCC) and the Kajiado Pastoral Forum (KPF). The principal project device for effecting improved livelihoods toward conservation goals is the Market Access Center (MAC). This model, though sound, still needs to be fully actualized. KWS: The planned activities and outputs are generally making good progress. There were, however, valid concerns over delays in implementation occasioned by post-election violence and IPs’ lack of familiarity with PMPs and monitoring. The institutional management and strengthening (IMS) component’s impact on improving financial management decisions, enhancement of internet connectivity, and increase of transparency are rated very highly. So far, it has greatly contributed to rising efficiency in revenue collection in all KWS stations, from KSh 2 billion in 2006 to about KSh 4.5 billion per year at present. KWS has developed comprehensive conservation strategies for endangered carnivores such as cheetahs, lions, wild dogs, spotted hyenas, and sea turtles. ProMara: The 18-month, $7.0m ProMara program was born of an assessment report carried out between January and April 2010 through the Prosperity, Livelihoods, Conserving Ecosystem PLACE IQC and the Property Rights and Resource Governance Task Order (RRT). While the pluralistic design of the program is still relevant and aspires to address strategic and specific objectives targeting needs in the Mau, the implementation period for is considered too short to sustainably and effectively realize its short and medium￾term objectives. Furthermore, the anticipated lapse between design and approval of the successor to the current project potentially poses risks with regard to continuity as well as sustaining beneficiaries’ and other stakeholders’ continued interest. GBM: Project design reflects GBM’s template approach that it applies to most of its project-driven afforestation ventures. While its design was well intended, the clarification of some modalities - particularly the project log frame and resulting monitoring structure - would make for easier tracking of progress. In the bio-prospecting program, conservation strategies have been developed for aloe and sandalwood. All these strategies are ready to roll out country-wide. It is too early to provide any meaningful judgment on the NRM results’ impact, as the activities are still in progress. TIST: The design of the TIST project is timely and very relevant for targeted biodiverse areas of Kenya. It has adaptive management in place and is self-correcting. Its core design and approach will remain applicable for years to come. SECURE: The original design was on target to address very critical and timely issues of land and resource tenure, coupled with improved NRM that depends on both. The design was flawed by perhaps not anticipating the degree of resistance to change. However, the applicability of the project effort itself remains very much intact – the more so for having started a process that should by rights be completed. ARE THE PROJECT OUTPUTS DESIGNED TO BE SUSTAINABLE ONCE PROJECT SUPPORT ENDS? NRT: The NRT takes a highly proactive stance toward ensuring the institutional and financial sustainability of its conservancy members. As such, it is thoroughly invested in the sustainability of its USAID-funded project outputs, which are largely oriented toward governance development. The NRT, moreover, seeks to expand its conservation model across the Mara, Marsabit, Coastal, and Rift regions, and while this will be a lengthy process, it is one that is very worthwhile. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 13 LWF: LWF’s exit strategy is not based on the lifespan of the present USAID grant. Rather, it rests on achieving economic and ecologic sustainability, which is clearly a more long-term vision. This vision is deemed realistic because it is likely the only way to achieve prosperity and social harmony among the diverse stakeholders. AWF: The LUMP is at the heart of the project’s outputs. For its purpose to be deemed sustainable, it must still become fully actualized on the ground and adopted by all stakeholders. It must also enjoy the full political support of the OCC, the MoL, and its local counterparts. As such, the project would benefit from further financial and technical support until this is fully achieved. The MAC – though well set up and poised to expand business – still needs to achieve financial and operational sustainability. There is a need to clearly set performance benchmarks for realization of benefits from the Market Access Centers. Monitoring benchmarking should include indicators such as increased business sales and profitability, and increased profit margin for herdsman derived from value addition, an incentive for herdsmen to continue supplying MACs. KWS: The availability of counterpart GoK funds and the appointment of a national Carnivore Liaison Officer within KWS ensure the availability of human resources to oversee post-project efforts. These project activities are implemented on a cost-reimbursement basis. This is a further safeguard to encourage activities to be factored into the KWS’ recurrent budget. The training of all staff on the use of IMS from all conservation areas is a good investment for consistency and continuity. The IMS program has also been rolled out to some community ranches, enhancing its geographical spread and wider acceptance. The strategies for species conservation and bio-prospecting enjoy wide support for having been developed out of a long consultative process involving a broad spectrum of stakeholders in research, conservation and academia within and outside KWS. The strategies are well anchored across many national policy instruments, including Vision 2030. Overall, the strategies share components on improved governance, maximizing returns from biodiversity assets, technology transfer, and widening the scope of benefits-sharing among stakeholders. ProMara: Overall, the ProMara team and its partners have made highly commendable efforts to implement an enormous number of activities. Good communication, teamwork, long working days, high quality, and effective support and advice from partners and collaborators at all levels of implementation stand out as key assets. The ProMara’s 10 year vision is well thought out, (i.e., engaging communities to promote conservation through enterprises that are locally attractive and appropriate). Though there is no parent institution in the project design, and thus no high-level institutional sustainability goal, the project process guarantees higher adoption through CFAs, and WRUAs, and the private sector. The project has an elaborate process of strengthening CFAs and WRUAs with additional rights, information, and knowledge, and they appear well positioned to increase their leverage and earning power from the yet to-be-finalized management agreements. The organizational development process aims to achieve a critical mass that is likely to benefit more grassroots communities over the targeted 10 year period. Strengthened enterprises in dairy, honey production, commercial nurseries, and fruit production, among others, have high potential for longer-term support from public or private institutions, which will ensure their sustainability. GBM: The institutional sustainability of Tree Nursery Groups (TNGs) and their apex bodies (e.g., networks and societies), is inherently linked to their financial sustainability. Both are in question, and thus GBM’s exit strategy is equally vague. GBM understands the need for stand-alone institutionally mature TNGs (and Community Forestry Association [CFAs]), though the evaluation team could not ascertain the existence of a concrete strategy toward this end. TIST: TIST members’ contribution to ecological sustainability of the broader Mt. Kenya region is inherent in project objectives. The project is exploring ways for groups and clusters to become institutionally sustainable, Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 14 though this effort is still in its formative stages. TIST’s payment mechanism to members assures a certain measure of financial sustainability of project outputs. As such, the question of TIST’s exit strategy is not entirely relevant because its avowed intention is to expand its coverage in Kenya. The evaluation team deems TIST a worthy and exemplary vehicle for USAID Kenya to accomplish its SO5. SECURE: If community land tenure were achieved, the sustainable base of improved NRM would be reached. The project presently has no formal exit strategy, as it is hoped that a cost extension of four months will be granted. This cost extension proposal is now being prepared for submission. SECURE is mindful of strategies to enhance sustainability of some of its efforts in the region:  Synergies with the Kibodo Trust and other partners in the Lamu area who can continue to advocate for land and resource rights of indigenous communities (note however: the Mission found that Kibodo Trust is not confident of it alone being able to assert a strong enough voice to prompt the MoL into action).  Institutional strengthening of NGOs and CBOs to build their capacity as effective interlocutors to engage the GoK, the private sector, and development projects.  Promoting increased knowledge of land rights and conservation. WHAT,IF ANY,COURSE CORRECTIONS ARE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE ITS OBJECTIVES AND EXIT STRATEGY? NRT: The NRT’s governing structures have made good use of feedback from monitoring, and hence to adaptive management. In short, the NRT is making its own course corrections, and the Mission does not recommend any others. LWF: The LWF will likely seek a no-cost extension of its present grant. It will need to accelerate its efforts on the human settlement portion of its landscape monitoring systems buildup. It has taken steps in recent years to convert from a project-driven entity into one operating under a constituent member-defined program, and thus has already taken a certain course correction to achieve a long-term exit strategy. AWF: The project ended in December 2011 and can no longer benefit from course corrections. The outputs to date, however, would benefit from further financial support, particularly to bring the LUMP to fruition by actualizing it on the ground. KWS: There was concern within KWS about the sporadic influx of donor funds during project implementation to the extent that the implementation and scaling up of conservation initiatives was not perceived as guaranteed. The team leaders of the scientific investigations recommended better coordination among KWS, USAID, and other NGOs supported by USAID on species conservation work in order to enhance synergies and to avoid duplication. It was recommended that the Community Wildlife Service should be strengthened with more human resources and technical support in order to better address the human/wildlife interface. IMS: The IMS was not rolled out to some stations due to their lack of power supply. An investment in solar power, though initially expensive, has greater potential sustainability. There are currently no cables to download waypoints directly from GPS field devices to computers; so GIS applications, when used, have data entered manually albeit this is a time consuming process. ProMara: The ProMara program is admirably delivering on its performance indicators, but is unlikely to achieve its long-term objectives if measures are not taken to avoid anticipated activity delays after the remaining 10-month implementation period is over. The program needs to have a formal collaboration Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 15 (rather than just with individuals) with lead GoK public agencies such as KEFRI, KFS, and KARI to ensure a more sustainable exit strategy that guarantees institutional memory and continuity of engagement. GBM: As part of the USAID grant, the GBM has just now begun an exercise towards building a business plan, and GBM should pursue this with all deliberate speed. Though not within its scope, the Mission advised GBM to link economic viability of TNGs to that of GBM as a whole, perhaps through a device for core GBM funds to accrue. TIST: The TIST program will accomplish its objectives through its own adaptive management without any prescribed course corrections. However, in the long term, the project may achieve more impact chiefly by adopting the formulation of simple farm forestry plans for each member that is drawn up by trained NRM professionals. SECURE: USAID would further SECURE’s ability to achieve its objectives by asserting a higher-order good governance message to the GoK, thereby prompting the MoL to take decisive action as envisioned in the project concept. HOW SUCCESSFUL IS IT IN BUILDING COALITIONS WITH OTHER ACTORS (GOVERNMENT, DONORS,OTHERS) TO MAXIMIZE IMPACT AND AVOID DUPLICATION OF EFFORT IN THE IMPLEMENTATION LOCATION(S)? NRT: The NRT is skilled in attracting donor monies for its long-term objectives. It brokers individual conservancies' need for funds with would-be donors, albeit with concrete plans which help conservancies to eventually be financially sustainable. In so doing, the NRT leverages USAID funds skillfully against the interests of many other development aid actors. LWF: To implement the present USAID cooperative agreement, the LWF has formed a group of its own IPs, each with its own array of donor-supported ventures. The LWF implements its Community Forestry program itself; CFAs draw support from many development aid actors. The LWF leverages its own internal resources (core costs from members’ fees) against USAID and many other donors’ support, and is effective in balancing these monies and resultant project objectives with each other. AWF: The Kitengela Conservation Project has skillfully brought public (e.g. KWS, OCC), and local NGOs (e.g. African Conservation Center) into its USAID-supported project activities. Its partnership with KWS and AWF has helped form a general management plan (for 2010 – 2020) for the broader ecosystem. This plan is groundbreaking in that it has adapted KWS’s Protected Areas’ planning framework to the organizational setup of community conservancies in general (e.g., the same model is also being applied in the Lamu area of Kiunga Marine Reserve). KWS: KWS works closely in grant implementation with local and international institutions, including KFS, the University of Nairobi, Kenyatta University, Kenya Industrial Research Institute (KIRDI), Kenya Intellectual Property Institute (KIPI), and the National Council of Science and Technology (NCST). It has linked to NGOs like Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF), African Wildlife Fund (AWF), the African Conservation Center (ACC), and several community conservancies scattered countrywide. KWS is also in the process of realigning the wildlife policy and law to the requirements of the new constitution. The aim is to strike a balance among the interests of the various stakeholders, such as the government, community, and private sector. The resources from the grant contributed to the facilitation of a national stakeholders’ consultative workshop, which culminated in a draft wildlife bill and policy that, though there remain contentious issues, has gained wide acceptance within KWS. The realignment efforts have also Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 16 helped Kenya’s adherence to its international commitments to CITES, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the World Trade Organization (WTO). ProMara: The program may, in the long term, achieve more impact if its 10 year vision is not hampered by contractual delays and if it engages lead agencies through a structured, mutually-inclusive memorandum of understanding (MoU). It is important to have one lead agency in government as its parent counterpart and as a “one- stop shop’’ for resolving government issues encountered during the transition period to a two-tier government system. The program and its partners have, in a very short time, developed mechanisms to work collectively to manage natural resources, particularly forests. However, it is too early to judge whether this collective resolve will translate into sustainable land use patterns in this otherwise volatile and conflict-prone environment, where political risks are high. GBM: The GBM skillfully brings public, non-government, and private partners into its organizational afforestation model, and links TNGs and individuals within TNGs to other development actors to add value to the core TNG unit of social organization. TIST: The TIST reaches out opportunistically to form partnerships with state and non-state actors to add value to its USAID grant. SECURE: SECURE has brought public, non-government, and CBO partners into its activities. Its synergistic efforts together with the Kibodo Trust have especially been fruitful, as this body will remain behind to further NRM co-management goals. IS THE PROJECT SENSITIZED TO AND EFFECTIVE IN BRINGING CONSTRUCTIVE CHANGE TO MATTERS RELATING TO ETHNIC DIVIDES, CLASS DIVIDES,YOUTH’S PRODUCTIVE ENGAGEMENT, AND GENDER EQUITY ACROSSALL PROJECT OBJECTIVES? The NRT: The NRT steers its members through innovative, socially-binding means to affect profitable livestock and pasture management improvement to help resolve chronic and ethnically divisive resource access issues and outright cattle theft. It is highly sensitized to gender-appropriate development of alternative income generation. LWF: LWF understands and applies principles of pluralism and inclusivity in its capacity-building efforts across water use, bio-enterprise development, rangeland use and rehabilitation, and forest use. Chronic and strong class divides are being addressed within and between communities and private ranches. Women’s roles in sustainable NRM decision making is integral to the profitability of bio-enterprises. AWF: The KCP has applied the principles of pluralism and inclusivity in all of its capacity building efforts across land use planning, livestock value chain development, and rangeland use and rehabilitation. Chronic and strong class and economic divides and diverging political interests are being addressed in the broader frame of the LUMP. However, all stakeholders – particularly the more economically and politically powerful – are not well represented in the present platform. KWS: The grant supported the policy and legislation reform processes both before and after the promulgation of the new constitution. In 2007, an independent committee held more than 22 workshops collating views on proposed changes in wildlife policy and law. Experiential learning visits were made to Tanzania, Namibia, South Africa, and Botswana. Based on these activities draft law and policy were chalked, and remain as the main reference documents in the reform process. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 17 ProMara: There have been intense political and resource-use conflicts preceding every general election since the 1980s. Increasingly, competition for natural resources is exacerbated by the intricate ethnic (mainly the Kikuyu, Kalenjin, and Maasai) and political divides among the main political players, as they struggle for land and forest resources in the MFC, culminating in the fight for political supremacy in the area. Working closely with the provincial administration, ProMara has supported peace committees consisting of elders, security personnel, and both youth and women to mitigate threats to peace. These efforts are highly commendable but they may not be sufficient to provide the threshold intervention required to mitigate the fundamental differences and politicization among the local and national leadership. In the past, this has accentuated ethnic￾based conflicts, resulting in lack of focus on the fundamental issues driving conservation of vital natural resources. GBM: The GBM’s very foundation addresses the nexus of social inequities and imbalanced natural resource use. The groups the evaluation team visited had both women and men assert their views. TIST: The TIST works effectively with the poor and well-off alike as well as with women headed households. It presently works mostly with private landholders and, as such, indirectly works with youth. The latter working relationship is poised to expand with TIST’s recent work with CFAs on the basis of its signing an MoU with the KFS. Women make up about 40% of TIST’s small group members and are represented even more as quantifiers, trainers, TIST social entrepreneurs, and on TIST's Leadership Council. SECURE: SECURE is highly attuned to and has worked effectively with sensitivities and values of indigenous and Bejoun communities with different histories and coping strategies while acknowledging the class and power divides between the Lamu region and mainland Kenya. ARE MUTUALLY SUPPORTIVE IMPACTS BEING ACHIEVED IN SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOODS AND CONSERVATION? NRT: Profit sharing to add to conservancies’ core funds is structured into vendors’ agreements (e.g., high-end tourist facilities), and the conservancies have a vested interest in the consistency of wildlife populations to attract tourists. The improvement of rangelands health is a centerpiece for sustaining both livestock and wildlife. The NRT is well on track to fostering the interrelationship between livelihood improvement and biodiversity conservation. LWF: The LWF has done a good job of conceptualizing the links and approaches between domestication of wild resources and their sustainable wild harvesting. CFAs are deriving good incomes from sustainable tree￾establishment practices and from the collection of other forest products. AWF: The entire project model and higher order aim is to preserve open rangeland to benefit pastoralists and to preserve their traditional livelihoods, while benefitting wildlife habitat. The preservation of the broader Kitengela landscape is crucial for the viability of large wildlife that congregates in and disperses from Nairobi National Park. While impacts are starting to be made, further work is required to actualize the LUMP. KWS: The new constitution creates a fundamentally different governance structure and institutional and legal framework for land and associated public affairs management, particularly in protected areas. It also creates the National Land Commission of Kenya, whose role is described in Article 67. This imposes a structural reform to reorganize its offices to the administrative needs of the county governments, expected to be effective in 2012. The administrative standing orders of the KWS, especially law enforcement, must also be sensitive to the Bill of Rights as per the constitutional requirements. For a long time, there has been a lot of discussion on separation of the management, research, and regulatory aspects within KWS. The decentralization of services to the county governments provides an opportunity for the establishment of Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 18 county-level government protection, conservation, and management activities. Eventually, wildlife standards, rules, and regulations need to be established nationally and enforced at a county level. This is an area that USAID can help KWS elaborate and operationalize as the devolution process unfolds. ProMara: The ProMara aims to carry out activities that can contribute to improved livelihoods and sustainable sources of income for the catchment residents within the Mau. The approaches used to attain these project objectives are locally attractive and appropriate, and have potentially longer-term support mechanisms from public or private institutions. These include:  use of a pluralistic approach to program interventions combining the typical NRM aspects of conservation, co-management, and livelihoods with resource tenure, equity, conflict management, and broad-based provision of public information and education;  paying special attention to empowering disadvantaged groups in society, especially women and youth, without whom conservation and livelihood promotion will increase existing inequalities and be ineffective in producing livelihood security; and,  combining livelihood activities that promote conservation,. GBM: Apart from higher order conservation objectives, mature trees have higher economic returns. Farmers’ land benefits flow from firewood, soil conservation, fruits, fodder, and building materials. GBM plans to enter into carbon market trade, from which its members can realize additional economic incentives from tree planting. TIST: The aims of the tree-planting program are closely aligned with the objective of promoting self￾sufficiency in communities, and the means to reach both goals are mutually supportive. As well as greatly contributing to TIST's reforestation goals, local tree nursery owners are able to diversify their sources of income. The farmers who were interviewed reported that they were now earning more on tree sales than on agricultural produce per unit of land and time engagement. Without contributing financially to nurseries, the TIST business model limits its intervention to training in cost-effective, sustainable nursery operations. Although business plan development would be a constructive addition to the training program, the operation has already resulted in the present estimated stock of 4.5 million saplings. SECURE: The fabric of the project rests on attaining sustainable livelihoods – based on land and resource tenure – toward a higher biodiversity conservation goal. The base and premise of land and resource tenure not being achieved will likely seriously compromise lasting biodiversity conservation. IS THE PROJECT ENGAGED IN CREATIVE USE OF M&E APPROACHES AND DATA TO RESULT IN ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT? NRT: While its PMP is less useful for adaptive management, the NRT has developed innovative ways to monitor at the landscape level and to track the institutional maturity of its members. LWF: The LWF employs creative and holistic monitoring mechanisms that inform its management and its members of required course corrections. While rangeland monitoring is not at present consistently applied across the diverse array of members and their interests, it will improve. The largely quantitative indicators in the PMP serve little for LWF’s adaptive management; this could be improved by USAID’s adoption of more process-oriented indicators. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 19 AWF: Process monitoring would be more revealing and useful to both AWF and to USAID, as most project outputs concern the process, rather than the end results themselves, such as the development of LUMP and MAC. KWS: The KWS implements sound M&E processes and actively works toward developing new methods. As per International Organization for Standardization (ISO) norms under certification, KWS uses the balanced score card for performance monitoring, and quantitative and qualitative M&E indicators as per their PMP. Data gathered is based on real-time indicators such as number of hectares rehabilitated and number of people trained in the Management Information System for rangers (MIST). Co-funding from KWS for all the USAID-funded activities has helped build internal capacity. For example, a total of 1,177 personnel drawn from Security, Community Wildlife Service and Biodiversity Research & Monitoring divisions in all eight conservation areas have been trained in MIST. Using the Protected Area Planning Framework (PAPF), the management plan for Olerai conservancy was developed for 2010-2021. The service has also developed guidelines for Performance Management Plans (PMPs) which have been tested in PAs. PMPs for community ranches have been developed by AWF and submitted to NEMA for validation. ProMara: The ProMara aims to carry out activities that can contribute to improved livelihoods and sustainable sources of income for the catchment residents within the Mau. The approach toward the attainment of these project objectives included: i) use of a pluralistic approach to program interventions combining the “typical” NRM aspects of conservation, co-management and livelihoods with resource tenure, equity, conflict management, and broad-based provision of public information and education; ii) paying special attention to empowering disadvantaged groups in society, especially women and youth, without whom conservation and livelihood promotion will increase existing inequalities and be ineffective in producing livelihood security; and iii) combining livelihood activities that promote conservation, are locally attractive and appropriate, and have potential longer-term support mechanisms from public or private institutions. GBM: The GBM could stand some improvement in both project formulation and M&E practices. They have begun plotting geo-spatial locators of outputs. Third-party validation of afforestation outputs would lend credibility. TIST: TIST’s innovative M&E system stresses quantitative outputs (and some qualitative inputs, such as photos of groves), and is ideally suited to the largely quantity-driven nature of USAID’s PMPs. Data is uploaded by Quantifiers in near real time – e.g., trees planted by species, members by gender, hectares planted, location coordinates which later are plotted on Google Maps – all of which are reviewable in TIST’s open, transparent web portal. The entirety of this M&E system is deemed a vigorous best practice. SECURE: The project has introduced its version of the Threat Reduction Assessment (TRA) approach to monitoring biodiversity trends. The quantitative output orientation of its PMP, as with most NRM projects under review by the Mission, does not serve project adaptive management well, nor is it likely to further adaptive course correction backstopping by USAID. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 20 CHAPTER III.MAIN FINDINGS REGARDING BEST PRACTICES AND LESSONS LEARNED This chapter provides a description of best practices and lessons learned from the evaluations of the eight projects. To put these into an understandable frame, the lessons and best practices are related to 10 relevant IRs in the USAID/Kenya’s Strategic Objective 5 (SO5): “Improved natural resource management in targeted bio-diverse areas for and by stakeholders.” Figure 1 below shows the relationship between SO5 and its subsidiary IRs. The 10 IRs selected as the basis for this chapter are at the operational field level that pertain to the eight projects under review. The individual project reports provided in Appendices A through H provide additional details on best practices and lessons learned from each of the eight projects. Figure 1. ENRM Strategic Objective SO5 Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 21 IR5.1.1 APPROPRIATE NRM TOOLS AND TECHNOLOGIES ADOPTED BEST PRACTICE: PAYMENT FOR ECOLOGICAL SERVICES Payment for ecological services (PES) is a relatively new and innovative practice in Kenya. The principal PES scheme presently in practice in Kenya is international trade in carbon credits from tree growth. PES is a central function in the TIST project. TIST is also branching out into the Mara Mau region in some parts of the ProMara project area. PES schemes in carbon trading are also forming within the GBM and are in the Ngare Ndale Conservancy in the NRT in the form of tree carbon trading for watershed protection. Buyers of carbon are mainly ex-Kenyan entities in voluntary carbon markets. Sellers are principally tree growers on private and trust lands, though government lands are increasingly considered niches for tree carbon trading. TIST primarily targets small farmers who plant a small stand of trees (groves). The project is also branching out into government-owned public forests. In combination with the nascent development of community forests and developing networks of CFAs, the TIST model holds excellent promise to accomplish multiple and mutually complementary environmental objectives. These include: watershed protection; wildlife habitat and biodiversity conservation; forest and forest product benefits; and meeting immediate needs for food, fodder, fiber, and fuel. By offering annual financial incentives (paid quarterly), tree carbon-based PES can encourage a tree grower to enter into a long-term covenant and keep the tree growing instead of cutting and selling the stem at the earliest marketable size. In addition, 70% of profits made on the sale of carbon credits are paid to the grower. Incentives and carbon payments combined are relatively small compared to the market value of a mature timber tree. In summary:  Early incentive payments and carbon credits encourage tree owners to keep from cutting and thus allow environmental forest benefits to eventually manifest.  The relatively small incentive and carbon credit payments are not intended for ‘poverty alleviation’ or as mainstays of income for small farm forestry or tree growers. Emerging opportunities for PES for watershed protection are apparent; for example, TAWASCO Water & Sanitation Company Ltd. joined the GBM in tree planting to replace Eucalyptus spp. with indigenous trees in a reach of an upland catchment. Eucalypts transpire heavily and their fallen leaves suppress ground growth; both factors make eucalypts a poor choice for watershed protection. Though this partnership is informal and not monetized, such ventures set an example for possible future and formalized payments for watershed protection. BEST PRACTICE: HOLISTIC MANAGEMENT Holistic Management (HM) is a term coined for an integrated social, ecological, and economic approach to rangeland improvement. HM encourages herding practices that emulate the intense trampling and browsing and grazing of a concentrated wild herd, which leads to robust biological response of plant communities. Today, HM encourages adaptive applied research to investigate low-cost means of rangeland rehabilitation. It is being practiced in Laikipia, among the Samburu (a tribe ethnically close to the Maasai), under the auspices of the NRT, and in Kajiado County in the Kitengela area. In the NRT, a variety of acacia tree that suppresses grass is cut and laid over seeded areas to protect them from grazing animals. This simple practice shows good promise. HM is a best practice in that it is appropriate for community and private ranches in Kenya. It has become mainstreamed worldwide, but is still in the beginning stages in Kenya. All three projects believe that Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 22 it holds strong promise. There are broad swathes of rangeland in Kenya that could potentially benefit from this approach. BEST PRACTICE: REVIVED ECO-LITERACY Eco-literacy is the ability to “read” the natural environment and understand natural systems. Eco-literacy is important to sustainable management of natural resources. This knowledge is also termed “indigenous technical knowledge.” The revival of how to “read” the natural environment involves bringing forth the often forgotten NRM practices of traditional peoples. Two examples came from visits to the ENRM projects. The first relates to holistic management. This is actually a revival of herding practices once known and practiced – but mostly forgotten – among pastoralists across southern and eastern Africa. It was forgotten with the advent of modern ranching with its private land, fences, and fixed dwellings. Modern ranching practices are based on the assumption that an equal spreading of livestock across a given piece of land is optimal for maintaining rangeland plant communities. The second relates to the sustainable harvesting practices of the Boni forest-dwelling indigenous peoples of the northern Kenya coastal region. In this case, the SECURE project revived their knowledge of the extent of their land use by customary rights in order to establish legitimacy to their claim to title under the NLP and Constitution. Discovering and building on indigenous knowledge and customs is a best practice for several reasons: it recognizes customary values, it is intergenerational, and it revives identities in livelihoods and culture. IR5.1.2 INTEGRATED COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLANS ESTABLISHED BEST PRACTICES: COMMUNITY RIGHTS, CO-MANAGEMENT, AND BENEFIT SHARING The legislative basis for the existence of CFAs and WRUAs is provided in the Forests Act 2005 and Water Act 2002. Project activities that aim to assist in the creation of these bodies are widely adopted in the LWF, ProMara, and GBM. In all these project areas the CFAs and WRUAs are at various levels of organizational development and institutional maturity. Altogether, there are more than 350 CFAs in the country, with an average membership of 50 to 300 persons. They are legal platforms to build consensus on co-management of forest and water management, and benefit sharing. They have either developed approved management plans/agreements or they are at very formative stages in this process. Some CFAs in each of the project areas have formed regional alliances to address issues of common interest. A very cost-effective way for USAID to accomplish SO5 (i.e., “Improved NRM in targeted biodiverse areas by and for stakeholders”) is to support institutional development and negotiating and lobbying capacities for individual CFAs and WRUAs and their alliances. This measure alone would constitute a best practice, because of the multitude of positive outcomes that would ensue. These could include: development of strong partnerships within Kenyan civil society, convergence of human needs being met with improved conservation management; and new livelihood opportunities in strategic watersheds and vulnerable ecosystems. BEST PRACTICE: ADAPTATION OF PROTECTED AREA PLANNING FRAMEWORK The compilation of a general management plan (GMP) was successful by adopting the Protected Area Planning Framework (PAPF) guidelines in a process led by KWS. Contributing organizations to the GMP include the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), and the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF) for the Olerai community conservancy in the Kitengela-Isinya-Kipeto ecosystem. This is a best practice because the GMP offers a flexible template with high standards and built-in sustainable natural resource management Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 23 guidelines. State-managed Protected Areas (PAs) and private and community conservancies now have a common base from which to develop specific management plans. The process of developing a management plan for Kiunga-Marine reserve in Lamu has started, and benefits are already being seen from the adaptation of these rules. Similarly, KWS could scale up the planning process in other community conservancies throughout the country in order to help ensure that wildlife conservation and livestock development thrive simultaneously in zoned land use systems. The community conservancy planning rules could also be embedded in the new policy and law. This formalization would have to proceed carefully, because state￾managed Protected Areas and private and community conservancies have different tenure systems and settings. Ideally, there should be different guidelines for protected areas and for conservancies, because of differences of tenure and the type of interests that are at stake. BEST PRACTICE: LAND USE MANAGEMENT PLANS The Land Use Master Plan (LUMP) is a holistic and inclusive community-driven process. It fits well with the aspirations of the NLP and devolved government provisions in the constitution. It was well demonstrated in Kitengela and to a lesser extent in NRT. For this process to be effective and sustainable, it must be actualized on the ground through adoption by all stakeholders and also must enjoy the full political support of the major players. Currently, it is not fully actualized because of indifference from a minority of comparatively wealthy, powerful, and newer large landowners. The LUMP lacks “teeth” – county governments cannot yet enforce zoning norms. As a tool for addressing land-related challenges and opportunities, it is appropriate for the NRT setting and in Kajiado and Laikipia ecosystems, where different landowners converge over similar objectives and are motivated by sustainable co-mingling and utilization of livestock and wildlife. This is particularly interesting in the present transition situation, with the growing realization that counties and the national government share responsibilities on the management and regulation of natural resources. The LUMP would be well suited for scaled-up implementation in similar ecosystems1 and with similar land-use challenges such as encroachment on habitat through habitation, agriculture, fencing and subdivision, and all implemented within the frame of two-tier governance and the NLP. IR5.1.3 IMPROVED LOCAL DECISION MAKING BASED ON MONITORING OND ANALYSIS LESSON LEARNED: QUANTITATIVE INDICATORS ALONE OBSCURE PROCESSES Improving NRM and its governance are processes. Improvement typically takes a considerable amount of time. In the early 1990s, USAID adopted a set of standard quantitative indicators. While helpful for uniformity and consistency across USAID worldwide, solely focusing on quantitative measurement can unintentionally obscure the importance of NRM development as a process. Expressing results only in numbers does not illuminate the step-by-step processes that were used or that emerged through trial and error. For example, knowing the “number of hectares of natural resources showing improved biophysical conditions” says nothing of the health of a program. Failing to gauge the health of the program deprives donor and implementer alike of an opportunity to learn and improve through adaptive management. Numbers alone simplistically boil the gauging of progress down to “is it accomplished or not?’’ In contrast, process monitoring can capture an important milestone. For example, an event in the institutional development of an 1 This encompasses wildlife convergence and dispersal areas that span state, private, and communal lands Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 24 NRM local governing body may have occurred that is revealing and holds a lesson for the IPs adaptive management.2 NRM ventures (e.g., rangeland rehabilitation, water use rationalization, forest cover improvement, and livelihoods improvement through bio-enterprises) are all long term in gestation and fruition. There can be a certain dissonance between USAID’s project output orientation and its monitoring, which is primarily gauged by numbers. Tabular results of number-output driven PMP indicators do not of themselves serve to inform a given project, or its local constituent bodies, of vital data needed to reach management decisions. These PMP indicators are neither helpful for determining course correction nor for evaluating progress in achieving long￾term goals. As such, PMPs populated chiefly by numbers do not assist USAID in performing the type of intellectual backstopping that would benefit their IPs and projects. Process monitoring indicators, alongside numerical output indicators, would result in an M&E system that serves to better reveal long-term progress. BEST PRACTICE: PROCESS M&E FOR INSTITUTIONAL MATURITY AND NRM GOVERNANCE Following the discussion above, there are several ways to gauge progress in institutional maturity of bodies responsible for environmental governance. At least two methods are practiced by the projects reviewed. One indexes maturity through fields of measurement and the other posits milestones on the path to maturity. The NRT annually evaluates its conservancy members by gauging their progress along the path of institutional maturity. Their evaluation system consists of three broad domains: governance, conservation, and socio-economics. Governance maturity is tracked in fields that include registration as a trust or limited company, its Board rotation, regularity of meetings, existence of Board committees (e.g., financial and grazing) regularly meeting, Boards approving and tracking their budgets, and Boards auditing accounts. Conservation fields include mapping and reacting to poaching and wildlife killing, controlling grazing in buffer zones and core areas and rangeland condition, and mapping population trends of key wildlife species. Socio-economic fields include number of conservancy employees, revenues from ‘NRT trading’ (an NRT operation selling quality-controlled handicrafts abroad), livestock sales through NRT-established markets, and trends in tourism revenues. The LWF has experimented with using milestones as a proxy for institutional maturity. There are advantages and disadvantages to both systems. Indexing is time consuming and costly. NRT’s relatively simple (compared to elaborate databases used by some organizations) domains and fields are drawn from data it collects in the course of its member conservancies’ ordinary operations. LWF’s milestone approach is very cost effective, but not as objectively impartial as an index. The best practice for USAID would be to adopt a “middle” way: retain quantitative output indicators for centralized decision making and also work with individual IPs to include process monitoring indicators within PMPs. As more is learned throughout implementation, another best practice is to encourage IPs to revisit and adjust indicators and milestones in their systems. BEST PRACTICE: PLURALITY IN CONSULTATION AND DECISION MAKING Most small, local-level NRM governing bodies are, for the most part, ethnically and socially homogenous. This makes them simpler to run. However, when bodies are formed in less homogenous areas or with a larger 2 See Appendix D, Laikipia Wildlife Forum. Water Resource User Association members in upstream areas with heavy consumptive water use started to agree to meter their water use. This is a very important milestone. If progress were gauged only by asking ‘’is the WRUA formed or not?’’ then a learning opportunity could be lost. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 25 geographical spread (like a CFA regional alliance), targeted measures are required to engage and include members that represent interests across economic and ethnic divides. The majority of projects reviewed recognize the need to ensure plurality in representation. This plurality is a best practice. Consensual and pluralistic group processes for decision making enable the best compromises to be reached, and ultimately result in improved NRM. IR5.1.4 NATURE-FOCUSED BUSINESS PRACTICES IMPROVED LESSON LEARNED: LEVERAGING NRM-BASED ENTERPRISES FOR CONSERVATION The key lesson learned across the NRM projects is that the conservation message cannot succeed if communities do not perceive livelihood benefits accruing to them or if benefit sharing is inequitable. In the NRT, it was noted that scaling up indigenous knowledge in commercial livestock enterprises is a good entry point for pastoralist communities who do not adapt easily to change. Changing perceptions and attitudes, while building the capacity of the local communities to embrace new technologies and enterprises outside their traditional occupations, requires time and resources. Social benefits that accrue to the communities are also great motivation for conservation. For example, the NRT conservation has enhanced livelihoods through NRT-Trading orders and scholarships. In the GBM, tree planting offers members a forum for networking; training and capacity building; scholarships for their children; and linkages with other NGOs, donors, and government. Private enterprises and investors require very little persuasion to invest where good practices and sustainable management of natural resources exist. BEST PRACTICE: SCALING UP INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE WITH NEW SKILLS A best practice found in the NRM projects is the use of indigenous knowledge as a basis for introducing innovations and for empowering communities through improved business skills. The positive socio￾economic outcomes of dealing in natural resource-based products are that they:  are ideal for income diversification;  typically require little initial investment;  are often suitable for participation by women and the poorest members of communities; and,  generally generate cash income for collectors quickly. In Laikipia, Desert Edge is working with Maasai beekeepers to improve traditional beekeeping methods as a way to increase production and improve the quality of the honey. Conservation-friendly ways of building hives were introduced by using logs felled by elephants rather than freshly cut trees. Instead of cutting trees for charcoal burning, tree canopies were used to house the beehives and provide a source of pollen. Women, in particular, were targeted as they are the ones who trade in charcoal. They have now embraced beekeeping as an alternative source of livelihood and have become ardent protectors of the trees and surrounding forests that harbor their hives. Desert Edge is also equipping women’s groups with skills to improve aloe extraction as well as the quality and marketing of their products. In the business niche of nettle and herbal teas, Desert Edge uses modern technology to add value and improve quality in the harvesting and processing of nettle products. In the NRT projects, NRT-Trading works with Samburu women to enhance traditional beaded handicraft-making skills by improving products through consistent quality control, up-market designs, and sourcing of higher quality input supplies. These efforts are meant to broaden the range of products that meet international market standards. In Kitengela, AWF is working with women’s groups to introduce business skills in livestock Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 26 trading, typically a male domain in the Maasai culture. When asked why they preferred livestock trading, the women responded that it was familiar and easy to adapt to. BEST PRACTICE: BUSINESS APPROACH TO CONSERVATION A good practice found in some of the NRT projects is the business approach adopted in selecting the interventions to be funded. Business planning is widespread across the NRM projects: financial viability of the enterprise is carefully analyzed before any funding is considered. This was the case with AWF in the Kitengela area, where investments in the Livestock Market Access Centre (MAC) were preceded by a detailed business plan and model showing how the communities would benefit from the MAC. Desert Edge also considered financial viability before investing in the honey, nettle root, and herbal tea value chains. A cost-benefit analysis analogy is used to convince the communities that they can benefit more from conserving trees for hives and pollination than cutting them down for charcoal. This has worked well with the communities, especially women, who traditionally are the charcoal sellers. Desert Edge also ensures that sustainable honey extraction methods are used, which do not damage trees that harbor hives and are a source of pollen and nectar. In the ProMara, where the project was engaged in developing orchards and in beekeeping, a business approach was used to identify viable enterprises to support. In the GBM area, the process of developing business plans for different income-generating enterprises was ongoing at the time of the evaluation. In the NRT project, NRT-Trading operates as an autonomous business entity working with the communities to build viable business structures. Promoting viable and profitable conservation enterprises is a best practice to help ensure that communities adopt sound NRM practices and that enterprises are sustainable. BEST PRACTICE: VALUE CHAIN APPROACH The value chain approach to economic development and poverty reduction adopted by the NRM projects addresses major constraints and opportunities faced by farmers and producers, processors, traders, and other businesses at multiple levels along different value chains. In Kitengela, AWF established the Market Access Centers (MACs), which facilitate improved market access for the pastoralist communities, improve value￾added products, and increase access to higher value markets. By selling to the MACs, the herdsmen are assured of better prices (30% above market price) and receive a portion of the profits derived from the sale of their animals through a bonus scheme. The MAC has great potential for increasing the performance of the livestock value chain and increasing livestock market access for pastoralists. Through its training activities, the MAC will empower pastoralists with the knowledge of value addition at points along the value chain to help them leverage better prices. This link between the MAC and the community leads to improved quality of animals delivered, encourages better animal husbandry practices, and promotes the open range objective of the Kitengela project. NRT-Trading ensures that quality beads are supplied to women to produce the finished products. A similar value chain approach is used by Desert Edge in Laikipia with honey, nettle teas, and aloe Vera products. Desert Edge has addressed the honey value chain fully by supporting the communities in beehive making and establishment, setting up collection centers, processing honey, and marketing the final product while ensuring quality and both local and international brand certification. In nettle tea, the women who collect raw nettle from the forest are also engaged by Desert Edge to market it after value addition. When producers earn more from value-added products than from selling raw commodities, they have economic incentives to manage their resources better and more sustainably. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 27 BEST PRACTICE: PERFORMANCE-BASED REWARD SYSTEM FOR LIVESTOCK SALES A major challenge facing livestock keepers in northern Kenya is that livestock markets are underdeveloped and local people are unable to obtain good returns from livestock sales. To address these issues, NRT, in partnership with the Lewa Wildlife and Ol Pejeta Conservancies, is implementing the Linking Livestock Markets to Wildlife Conservation program. This program targets the annual purchase of 3,000 head of cattle at a value of USD $500,000 per year. The best practice is that NRT devised criteria by which the conservancies are awarded quotas to supply livestock to Ol Pejeta. The conservancy that is awarded the highest quota is considered to have effective governance structures, innovative range management, and good animal husbandry practices. According to NRT, trading with high-performing conservancies rewards good conservation and improves livelihoods as a result of the economic benefits. Incentives are created to uphold conservation principles. The reward system works well with the pastoralist communities. This is similar to the MAC bonus system that aims at rewarding good husbandry practices among the pastoralist communities in Kitengela. BEST PRACTICE: LOCALLY BUILT ENERGY SAVING COOK STOVES The high dependency on firewood and charcoal, which provide 80-90 percent of Kenya’s household energy in rural areas and urban centers, means that fuel wood will continue to be in high demand. The economic and ecologic benefits of using better-ventilated and more fuel-efficient stoves are enormous and have immediate impacts on resource use and conservation. Three NRM projects (ProMara, TIST, and GBM) are working with local communities to reduce the consumption of firewood through the use of energy-saving, wood￾fueled cooking stoves. In addition to contributing to conservation by reducing the consumption of firewood, the stoves have health and social benefits that accrue to women and children, who are the main users. Women reported that upper respiratory and aggravated eye problems are reduced from less smoke inhalation and contact. Across the three projects, beneficiaries of the stoves confirmed that they now consume about one-third of the quantity of firewood that they used with the traditional three-stone stoves. This has saved women from depleting their woodlots and has reduced time spent collecting firewood. Young girls who usually collect firewood can now spend more time doing school work and other activities. Women in the project areas confirmed that their cooking time has been reduced and they can now spend more time doing other chores and even engage in income-generating activities. The implementation of the Lorena stove project in the TIST project area of Mt. Kenya has faced challenges, and therefore slowed, as the mud used in their construction is not readily available in the area. Testing in the past three years has identified cracking of the combustion areas, clogged chimneys, and cracking and crumbling under the cooking pot areas. TIST is exploring options for more locally-made and durable standardized combustion chamber inserts that would improve the efficiency of the mud stoves that TIST is currently constructing. The evaluation found standardized combustion changer inserts in use in the ProMara area. As a temporary alternative, TIST imported stoves from China to distribute to its members. A better practice would be to continue adaptive research to improve the local cook stove, which is more durable and easy to maintain. This approach would create local jobs in production, installation, service, and maintenance. BEST PRACTICE: ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR The private sector has an important role to play in advancing conservation. Increasing collaboration with the private sector to improve business practices and engage industry partners to realize the benefits of conservation and good ecosystem management is a good business strategy. The evaluation found this approach being practiced by the LWF, where the bio-enterprise company, Desert Edge, has been contracted to implement a USAID grant under a project called “The Conservation Enterprise Development Program” (CEDP). CEDP is expected to have positive conservation impacts by: Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 28 1. creating value for indigenous plant products in the formal market in order to encourage their sustainable use; 2. improving practices to access ethical markets (seeking environmental and social sustainability); and, 3. raising awareness of best practices and impacts of current practices on the sustainability of the resources on which livelihoods depend. Desert Edge uses a business approach model that would enable the partner Community Forest Associations (CFAs) to generate income through bio-enterprise projects that are commercially viable. NGO approaches of working with the communities sometimes fall short of creating sustainable business models, and have instead propagated dependency. A private-sector business approach of promoting conservation enterprises offers a better and sustainable alternative. The private sector can also be a valuable conservation partner as part of their corporate social responsibility or because their activities could have impact on climate, land, and water that people rely upon for survival. It is important for the private sector to see that its role extends beyond regulatory compliance; they can contribute solutions by making conservation a company-wide strategy and goal. Within the USAID/Kenya ENRM system, the NRT and the GBM are both actively engaging the private sector. Safaricom provided grants used by NRT-Trading in advancing their work with the women’s groups in the conservancies. NRT also collaborated with Oxford University in mapping investment opportunities for scaling up income generation in the conservancies to make them economically-viable and sustainable entities. In the GBM areas, corporations such as Coca-Cola and Mt. Kenya bottling companies are actively involved in tree planting, with GBM supplying seedlings from its members’ nurseries and the companies mobilizing the communities to plant. Safaricom, Equity Bank, and others are taking a proactive role in driving the conservation vision within the Mau complex. Private sector actors can be key partners in promoting conservation and protecting natural systems. BEST PRACTICE: PROACTIVE PLANS/PROJECTIONS FOR SUSTAINABILITY Financial sustainability is one of the main challenges facing the conservancies in the NRT project area. NRT’s sustainability plan is focused on the sustainability of the partner conservancies. If the conservancies are not commercially sound and financially viable ventures, they are unlikely to meet the conservation objectives or the socio-economic needs of the communities who established them. No matter how compelling the conservation case, a venture must be commercially viable to move forward. For example, the evaluation noted that the Sera Trust Conservancy was very dependent on donor funding and support through NRT. NRT is encouraging the conservancies to develop income-generating strategies that will enable them to diversify their income streams. The decision by NRT to conduct a study in collaboration with Oxford University to analyze sustainability issues across its partner conservancies is a good practice. The study recommended more engagement in tourism facilities, increases in conservation fees, expansion of livestock programs, creation of bio-enterprise, and revenue generation from carbon and ecosystem services. The study also provided timelines depicting the period when conservancies will be financially sustainable. BEST PRACTICE: STRONG MOTIVATIONAL FORCE Throughout Kenya, the GBM has mobilized 4,000 groups across 110 constituencies working through 600 community networks to care for 6,000 tree nurseries. These nurseries have planted more than 40 million trees on private and public land, protected reserves, and sites with cultural significance and in urban centers. This is not because the movement offers good payments for seedlings raised by its members. In fact, its members are paid a token KSh 5 for every surviving tree - after planting and verification - while in other NRM projects like Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 29 ProMara, seedlings are bought for up to KSh 45 at the farm gate. What then motivates the GBM members to plant trees? What accounts for the motivation, apart from social benefits such as scholarships for children to attend school, is the sheer force of the charismatic leadership of the GBM founder, the late Wangari Maathai. Through her leadership, the GBM was able to galvanize women, in particular, to rally behind her call to plant trees to restore and conserve the environment. The GBM is a grassroots social movement led primarily by women to improve the status of women and their communities. Tree planting is the entry point which enables the GBM to mobilize women and communities for conservation efforts, self-determination, justice, equity, poverty reduction, capacity building, the development of their leadership and financial skills. It is unclear how the movement she founded will carry on without her charismatic leadership. The important lesson is that a forceful leadership can be effective when dealing with conservation issues that are sensitive and potentially explosive such as land in the Mara Mau and in coastal areas of Kenya. IR5.1.5 AWARENESS OF INCENTIVES FOR NRM INCREASED LESSON LEARNED: PERCEPTION OF NATURAL RESOURCE DEGRADATION AS A SOCIAL PROBLEM Human causes of environmental degradation are often not addressed through programs that focus on human ownership of the problem. Rather, resource degradation is more often approached through technical means, such as reforestation, off-site breeding, and fencing of rangelands. The perception that improved NRM must begin with human ownership and social solutions is shared by the LWF, the GBM, and the ProMara. Focusing on human ownership leads one to view the degradation of rangeland quality, for example, as a social problem. Widespread problems are the result of poor herd-management decisions made by people, and the solution lies in behavior change among pastoralists. For consensual corrective action to occur, a vision of a healthy and biodiverse rangeland ecosystem must first be generated. Without this, people do not know what to aim for. Herders on community ranches frequently do not believe that increasing range productivity is possible because of chronically worsening rangeland conditions. Visions of robust, biodiverse, and productive landscapes and ecosystems should be encouraged and shared by all constituent members of NRM governing bodies alike, each realizing the inter-related economic and ecological benefits. LESSON LEARNED: STABLE NRM GOVERNING ENVIRONMENT CONDUCIVE FOR INVESTMENT When consistently prudent, transparent, and responsive NRM governance results in social harmony and natural resource productivity, conditions for outside financial investment manifest and result in ventures that create jobs and income for both people and the NRM governing bodies themselves. The most telling example of stability resulting in investment is in the Kalama Conservancy of the NRT, where a foreign investor invested USD $2 million in the Saruni Lodge. The NRT, through its reputation for encouraging and assisting good NRM and conservancy governance, successfully brokered outside investment for the commercialization of locally made handicrafts. Project investments toward improved NRM governance can ultimately result in more stable returns on investment and improved revenues in the highly volatile tourism sector. BEST PRACTICE: EARLY RETURNS FROM LONG-TERM INVESTMENTS IN AFFORESTATION Economic returns from afforestation take substantial time to materialize, and even more time with slower￾growing indigenous tree species. Broader environmental benefits may appear only with wide regional Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 30 afforestation and vegetative recovery, and this may take even longer to manifest. Two instances of early returns to tree planters are seen in TIST and among CFA members who use incentive payments and Plantation Establishment Livelihood Schemes (PELIS) to generate early returns for participants. In both instances, project interventions designed to yield early returns to afforestation are viewed as a best practice. In the case of TIST, the incentive payment to prospective tree growers encourages them to plant and keep the trees in the program for the 60- year period stipulated in TIST contracts. Once in the program, growers realize more substantial benefits from related forest products such as tree fruits, fuel wood from thinning and pruning, and timber from commercial thinning or logging. PELIS is a variant of the shamba (more widely known as taungya in Myanmar) afforestation system, whereby cleared land is planted with forest trees and then intercropped with annual crops until tree shade is limiting. This benefits early tree growth by creating less competition and better soil fertility. The farmers also benefit from an annual crop planting niche otherwise not available. Early returns are high in PELIS: grosses of KSh 60,000 per half acre per quarter were reported in upland cool tropical areas near Mt. Kenya. BEST PRACTICE: INTEGRATION OFWOMEN AND YOUTH IN DECISION MAKING The majority of projects make concerted efforts to involve women and youth in decision making, benefit sharing, and project activities. Projects recognize that engaging women and youth is important for enhancing ownership of the NRM processes and activities. There was clear evidence of attitudinal change among stakeholders and partners on the role of women and youth. In the GBM, the impact of the charismatic leadership of the late Wangari Maathai in women’s group networks and her mobilizing capacity in both tree planting and whistle blowing on behalf of catchment protection is still visible. For example, more than half of the members of Karima Hill CFA are women. From Laikipia to the ProMara CFAs to the Kajiado pastoral forum and the MAC in Kitengela, youth and women are having a positive impact, well beyond counting their numbers in the various committees. The NRT has developed profitable high-value business products supported by micro financing that specifically targets women. There are also specific business or livelihood products that were tailored to suit the needs of women such as the energy-saving stoves in ProMara and TIST. The innovative, low-cost data gathering program by TIST is a value-added intervention that is developing ICT skills among youth. The impact of this effort goes beyond project activities. The involvement of youth in the Mara Outreach Center (MOC) and the integration of peace committees in the WRUAs and CFAs, coupled with a communication strategy on diverse NRM and tenure issues, have helped reduce the politicization of youth and environmental issues in the Mau catchment. These initiatives on women and youth are best practices because they increase confidence and ownership. In the case of NRM governance, it validates agency standards to involve women and youth as best practice. In the future, deliberate efforts are needed to ensure transparent management and financial systems that equitably distribute benefits to women and youth. BEST PRACTICE: NRM AS A STABILIZING FORCE FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION Mitigation against resource-use conflicts and the use of NRM interventions (be it water, pasture and/or forest) to manage threats was commonly practiced among the projects. The ProMara program has supported peace committees, developed a communications strategy, and supported CFAs to address not only forest degradation but also issues of ethnicity and political hatred through the CFAs and WRUAs. The GBM works closely with its green volunteers to regulate grazing in Mt. Kenya and the Aberdare range, and to protect hotspots like Karima Hill. NRT has used the group ranch committees and the council of elders to bring peace Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 31 to an otherwise volatile region as shown in Sare. Through the CFAs in Mt. Kenya, the LWF reduced illegal logging, fires, and helped streamline PELIS. Within the framework of the NLP and the constitution, SECURE in Lamu developed a unique Community Land Rights Recognition (CLRR) model to address land tenure-related conflicts. In Kitengela, the AWF used LUMP and the Kajiado Pastoralists Forum (KPF) to mobilize the Maasai communities to fight land grabbing in the wildlife dispersal corridor. KWS and AWF have promoted conservation of wildlife in protected areas and outside by using various strategies including habitat and land conservation, species conservation, applied research, bio-enterprise promotion, capacity building and leadership development, and policy review. These initiatives have greatly contributed to reduced human/wildlife conflict. These successful entry points to conflict management are unifying variables in an ecosystem approach and need to be strengthened. IR5.3.1 IMPROVED AVAILABILITY AND ANALYSIS OF DATA FOR DECISION MAKING BEST PRACTICE: LOW-COST BIODIVERSITY TRENDS MONITORING The NRT, LWF, and SECURE projects employ relatively cost efficient landscape-level means to monitor trends in biodiversity and vegetal cover. Their cost-effectiveness, together with revealing trends that guide adaptive management, make them best practices. The NRT and LWF use ranger-based data collection in near “real time.” The SECURE project compares before and after scenarios to gauge whether or not threats to biodiversity have occurred. This is a proxy for actual biodiversity trends, which are much more difficult and costly to measure. SECURE’s second component of improving management in protected and biologically sensitive areas is interrelated with its first component, securing tenure and mitigating conflict. Biodiversity trends had to be objectively tracked. However, short project duration and limited financial resources precluded the expensive and time-consuming approach of measuring actual biodiversity trends. This would entail establishing population density and distribution baselines of indicator species and their periodic re-measurement. Instead, the cost efficient approach of Threats Reduction Assessment (TRA) is used. The reduction of threats to biodiversity is gauged through interviews with people who live in and near the protected areas. Interviews are done twice: once as a baseline and later to see change. They explore social, economic, legal, and administrative factors. These are unique to the SECURE area; this method must be attuned to the conditions and threats of any given area. In the SECURE area, the fields of observation included illegal land allocations, illegal logging, and change in public awareness. The NRT’s conservancy-based monitoring system tracks wildlife population and rangeland condition trends through its Conservancy Managed Monitoring System (CoMMS). Game bird populations are tracked in some conservancies for hunting quotas. The LWF system is similar, although not as far along. The purpose is to generate vital periodic data that guide and inform the adaptive management of natural resources. These monitoring systems are a best practice for low-cost data collection. The data are largely collected by rangers in conservancies and trust during their patrols. Results for strategic decision making include:  spatial portrayals of wildlife distribution, abundance, and mortality;  human-wildlife conflict including attacks on livestock;  illegal activities and insecurity;  rangers’ patrol efforts; and, Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 32  livestock distribution and abundance for core conservation areas. The NRT rangeland monitoring also employs simple methods to monitor vegetal cover and condition in different grazing management zones established in five conservancies. Rangers, together with the NRT research and monitoring staff, collect the data. Over the past three years, data have demonstrated improved ground vegetation in areas where livestock grazing is controlled. The NRT and the LWF have applied standardized rangeland monitoring protocols developed in collaboration with the Mpala Research Centre, funded through the USAID-ELMT/ELSE project. These protocols will be used for future conservancy￾managed rangeland monitoring. BEST PRACTICE: PRIORITIZATION OF PROGRAMS BY CONSTITUENCIES’ MEMBERS This simple but powerful best practice was found in projects reviewed, particularly those with strong apex bodies. Apex governing bodies decide which ventures and efforts deserve priority. In contrast, many other projects have their components dictated externally. BEST PRACTICE: LOW-COST DATA COLLECTION AND UPLOADING The projects use various methods and M&E approaches, means of data collection, systems for adaptive management, and reporting to USAID. TIST’s real-time model is particularly innovative, as it stresses quantitative outputs disaggregated by sex, hectares planted, and location. The model is well suited for the project’s largely quantities-driven PMP. On the other hand, KWS, NRT, AWF, and to an extent LWF/Mpala, use ranger-based monitoring to inform management on habitat recovery, rehabilitation of vegetation, poaching, and problems with animal control. It is still not clear how data generated from these different sources are integrated and will be used to inform decision making at the national level - for example, an ecosystem’s management and policy determination. It would be helpful to involve the Regional Centre for Department of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing (RCMRD) and the Department of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing (DRSS). These entities have the capacity and national and regional ecological depository mandates to integrate data sets and undertake long￾term forecasts. Ultimately, this will help contribute to ecological health and integrity as well as proper planning, sound policy formulation, timely service delivery, and informed allocation of financial and human resources. IR5.4.1 CONSTITUENCIES FOR NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION ESTABLISHED BEST PRACTICE: COMPLEMENTARY MEMBERSHIP AND MANDATES BETWEEN CFAS AND WRUAS Water and forest issues, though functionally under different government agencies (i.e., Water Resource Management Authority and the Kenya Forest Service) are closely intertwined. Sub-catchment development plans, forest management plans, and land use management plans have a lot of overlap. In the ProMara and LWF, there were occasions in which several persons were members of both WRUAs and CFAs. This overlap enhanced synergy in resource water/forest-use conflict resolution as well as planning and program implementation. This was more of a coincidence than planned. It is, however, necessary to have focused capacity building efforts for WRUAs and CFAs to address cross-cutting issues and resolve conflicts. The CFAs do have a national alliance. The National Alliance of Community Forestry Associations (NACOFA) which consists of 351 registered CFAs, out of which 36 have developed forest management plans. These plans are awaiting approval by KFS, and only a handful of the plans have developed forest management Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 33 agreements. Implementation has largely been delayed; therefore, anticipated results are only partly accessible. There are only a few CFAs and even WRUAs with registered businesses. Furthermore, the lack of agreed￾upon public-private guidelines for cost and benefit-sharing mechanisms has caused serious constraints in formalizing community partnerships. As the country transitions into a two-tier government, USAID has an opportunity to support both the strengthening of natural resource governance and CFA/WRUA alliances into strong community voices for negotiating forest rights. BEST PRACTICE: ELECTED APEX BODIES The eight programs varied in terms of community institutions and oversight of different types of natural resources. Quasi-governmental organs like FCCs, WRUAs, and CFAs address a myriad of social, economic, and political issues. In ProMara, CFAs and WRUAs are a creation of the forest and water sectors. While the Forest Conservation Committees (FCCs) are quasi-governmental bodies subordinate to the KFS, the CFAs and WRUAs are community-based, but have legal recognition in the Forests Act and Water Act, respectively. With widening democratic space in the country, leadership positions have become very competitive. Competition is healthy, and it is apparent in community institutions like CFAs, WRUAs, and the Council of Elders in the case of NRT; the Leadership Council in TIST; and the KPF in Kajiado. When apex bodies are democratically elected, they are an excellent best practice. They are a vehicle for civil society to assert its voice in relationships with the public sector. The evaluation team strongly recommends that these community institutions and related networks be strengthened. This will give communities greater leverage in negotiating with the public sector for benefit-sharing from forests, water, wildlife, and other natural resources. Apex bodies have the added advantage of retaining the institutional memory of projects/programs’ experiences long after the duration of support grants. IR5.1.5.1 WILDLIFE POLICY REVISED, CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT BILL PASSED LESSON LEARNED: PERSISTANCE REQUIRED TO BRING POSITIVE POLICY AND LEGISLATION EFFORTS TO FRUITION A high level of pluralism was demonstrated throughout the process of developing the draft wildlife bill and policy. The USAID grant supported 22 regional and two national workshops. This is highly commendable. However, the bill has not moved in parliament because of competing interests in the wildlife sector among KWS, the private sector, and civil society. The bill must now also be aligned to the constitution. It is unlikely to be moved soon because of changes in priorities of parliamentary business. This state of affairs in the legal and policy reform is not supportive of the sustainable management of the wildlife sector. The lesson is that USAID should link sectoral (in this case ENRM) policy matters to its efforts in improving governance in Kenya. This requires persistence across the entirety of United States Government (USG) agencies. IR5.1.5.3 LAND USE POLICY CREATED AND ENACTED LESSON LEARNED: COMMUNITY LAND TENURE ASA PREREQUISITE FOR CO￾MANAGEMENT Communities will more likely engage public sector bodies for co-management of domains where their tenure status is secure and transparent. This lesson has been learned in the SECURE project area, and is implicitly known wherever community agreements are enacted; for example, between the KFS and CFAs. In the Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 34 northern coastal region of Kenya, where undefined land titles have relegated locals to de facto squatters on land on which they have enjoyed age-old customary rights, there has long been suspicion of outsiders’ control and acquisition of land and resource access. It is unconscionable for many local people to enter into co￾management with agencies that they view as perpetrators of chronic injustice. Therefore, deeded title must come first. BEST PRACTICE: COMMUNITY LAND RIGHTS RECOGNITION MODEL The Community Land Rights Recognition (CLRR) model is a SECURE project output that could ultimately redress long and chronic land title issues. At present, the model is not being employed because of vested interests. The CLRR is a MoL process whose aim is to formalize title to community land as outlined in the constitution and the NLP. The model is a clear best practice because it seeks to redress deep and chronically contentious land allocation issues by capitalizing on the NLP and the 2010 Constitution. BEST PRACTICE: SUSTAINING MOMENTUM TO MAKE THE NATIONAL LAND POLICY EFFECTIVE The 2009 National Land Policy designates all land in Kenya as public, community, or private land. The policy obligates the government to undertake a number of measures that bring Kenyans living in or near forest and wildlife reserves into processes for managing the sustainable use of those resources. Emphasis is also placed on enabling communities to derive economic, social, and cultural benefits from their use. Competing interests have limited the initiation of a legislative framework to implement the policy. It is important that the reform initiative be maintained, particularly with regard to sharing both the benefits and responsibilities between the county and national governments. IR5.1.5.5 NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY ESTABLISHED RECOMMENDATION: IMPLEMENT THE BIO-PROSPECTING STRATEGIES Through a consultative process, the KWS developed national bio-prospecting and species-specific conservation and management strategies for endangered species such as wild dog, lion, and spotted hyena. When implemented, the strategies will enhance bio-enterprise business opportunities as well as promote the conservation of endangered species. The initiatives have also strengthened Kenya’s commitment to CITES. Implementation of the strategies, however, should go beyond appointing national liaison officers with oversight of particular wildlife categories. It is also important for KWS and partners to provide leadership in the implementation of the strategies. In undertaking this whole trajectory, KWS should provide national leadership to other partners and actors; for example, NGOs and conservancies. This will help create synergies and avoid duplication. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 35 CHAPTER IV.RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS Each of the recommendations that follow is listed under their most pertinent Intermediate Result in USAID Kenya’s Strategic Objective 5. Most are project-specific recommendations, while some apply globally to ABEO’s ENRM portfolio. Following the project recommendations are broader and more general conclusions addressing time (i.e., duration of NRM projects), the whole value chain approach in NRM projects, NRM governance, monitoring, and cost effectiveness. RECOMMENDATIONS IR5.1.1 APPROPRIATE NRMTOOLS AND TECHNOLOGIES ADOPTED The TIST program would benefit if its staff, nursery growers, and members had ready access to basic silviculture and tree-nursery technical information. The TIST program would also benefit from devising simple farm forestry development plans before each afforestation venture. As a base for plans, qualified field staff would lead the landowner to the best informed decisions to address her or his long-term goals. In projects that seek to reduce consumption rates of woody biomass through fuel-efficient stoves, it is best to promote locally made energy-saving cook stoves which are durable, create local jobs, are popular with women, and are easy to maintain, instead of importing cook stoves from abroad. In the ProMara project, the ongoing training of trainers approach - especially with youth in CBO networks - should be encouraged so that skills remain locally available. IR5.1.2 INTEGRATED COMMUNITY NRM PLANS ESTABLISHED TIST could add value to its afforestation efforts by reaching out and integrating Water Resource User Associations’ (WRUA) agendas with those of tree-growing groups; for example, by coordinating tree planting locations with those identified in sub-catchment management plans (SCMP). The LWF has already recognized the inter-relationship between forest cover and hydrological response in the context of upstream forest cover affecting sustained flows to downstream users, and already seeks to have CFAs and WRUAs to create synergies. IR5.1.3 IMPROVED LOCAL DECISION MAKING BASED ON MONITORING AND ANALYSIS It takes considerable time – often beyond the duration of a project – for visible results to manifest in the improvement of natural systems (e.g., rangelands, hydrological regimes, and forest cover). Strengthening governance of natural resources is similarly time consuming. The improvement of natural systems and the improved governance of natural resources are both processes. Quantitative indicators that focus only on units of project outputs can diminish or impede the importance of steps that have been achieved during the improvement of these processes. Quantitative indicators are mandated by USAID and are necessary; however indicators alone do not reveal the vitality of progress along a process. A better way to construct project-level PMPs would be to retain quantitative output indicators as needed for centralized decision making; however, also work with individual IPs during the formulation of their project-specific PMPs to have process monitoring indicators appear in parallel with quantitative indicators. Generally, process monitoring indicators are a series of benchmarks and milestones. As more is learned over implementation, they allow IPs to adjust the indicators and milestones in their process monitoring systems. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 36 Implementing Partners should be discouraged from asserting that impact is a direct outcome of project activities when many external factors may have also contributed to and influenced results. This is especially true of environmental impact over considerable land areas such as an entire watershed. One example is the assertion of the GBM that springs have re-emerged, and river peaks and troughs have stabilized, all resulting from new afforestation. This conclusion would be misleading if the reader of such anecdotes were not familiar with watershed hydrology. To genuinely make such claims, the GBM would need the technical monitoring means to establish causal links between afforestation and hydrological impact. TIST would benefit in the long run through the recruitment of its field staff from among the large pool of unemployed forestry graduates and NRM intermediate degree holders in order to lead landowners to the best informed decisions about tree species to plant and their options for tree crops and other forest products. IR5.1.4 NATURE-FOCUSED BUSINESS PRACTICES IMPROVED Across all ENRM projects, conservation goals can be furthered by creating localized vested interests in preserving habitats and intact natural resources. Increased collaboration should be sought with the private sector in promoting conservation and in instilling good business practices in conservation enterprises development. More time and investments will be required to bring the ongoing work in building viable nature-based enterprises (NBEs) across the existing NRM projects to fruition, and for clear outputs to emerge before reaching financially sustainable levels. Build the capacity of local communities to manage their ecosystems competently, to generate additional incomes at the household level through NBEs. There are excellent examples already at hand in USAID’s ENRM project portfolio, such as beekeeping and honey production (demand for which is far from saturation), eco-tourism (e.g., game drives, nature walks, lodges and holiday homes in conservancies), hand and beaded crafts by women, and ‘social enterprises’ such as hay making in schools in the Kitengela area. Expand the scale of already successful models such as Desert Edge and MACs to increase the value of indigenous plants and honey, as well as livestock through the value chain and the establishment of ethical trade. These create economic incentives for the communities to manage their resources better and sustainably. Explore and promote new business models on how NBEs can be developed and managed sustainably to boost rural livelihoods and incomes, while meeting the goal of conservation and environmental sustainability, and ensuring that where private sector partners are joined, there is fair and equitable distribution of profits. Considering that livestock is the main source of livelihood for the communities in the NRT conservancies and in the broader Laikipia (LWF) and Kitengela (AWF) areas, there is a need to scale up the project activity of improved livestock marketing to enable the communities to earn more from livestock sales and use the income to explore and diversify alternative enterprises or investment opportunities to supplement livestock incomes. NRT should support the expansion of conservation-based business ventures (particularly ecotourism, and wildlife utilization as allowed by law), promote business management skills among participating individuals, and stimulate investments in bankable enterprises. NRT trading would do well to explore opportunities of partnering with financial intermediaries and scale-up the microcredit program to all 19 conservancies within the NRT. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 37 The ProMara project should diversify and expand livelihood opportunities (currently focused mostly on beekeeping, orchards, and tree lots) for the Mau communities to reduce overdependence and pressure on forestry resources, and hence minimize conflicts that arise over the use and sharing of common resources. IR5.1.5 AWARENESS OF INCENTIVES FOR NRM INCREASED Across all forest conservation-related projects and approaches, efforts to sustain citizen public education and vigilance should be incorporated into project design. These efforts should deal with immediate threats to forest and catchment conservation such as logging, encroachment, and fire. Efforts should focus on collective mitigation by an informed public to achieve potential for greater impact. Across projects that address joint wildlife habitat and range productivity improvement, incorporate incentives and reward systems such as the NRT Livestock program and the MAC models. Though these incentive and reward systems are not fully mature, they have the potential to secure the retention of pastoralists’ livelihoods while keeping rangelands open and productive. IR5.4.1 CONSTITUENCIES FOR NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION ESTABLISHED The ProMara would do well to draw up Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) with likely partner institutions so as to influence partners’ working methodologies and goals, and thus contribute toward sustainability of project outputs upon exit of the project. The Greenbelt Movement’s (GBM) approach to broader community development through its inducement of communities to form Tree Nursery Groups (TNG) would gain credibility if an ‘exit strategy’ of the GBM were posited; e.g., a strategy based on the achievement of a given TNG’s institutional maturity. This would entail the GBM devising milestone indicators and a certain time-bound frame for TNGs’ institutional maturity. IR5.1.5.1 WILDLIFE POLICY REVISED AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT BILL PASSED (GOK) The NRT and the LWF face the challenge of balancing their operations with devolved government and its devolved fiscal and financial functions and powers, which in turn have to be reconciled with (heretofore centralized) public agencies. It remains to be seen how a balance will be achieved between the ongoing and excellent work of both groups with that of newly devolved public agencies. The Mission’s position is that both public sector and private approaches can be mutually supportive. Both types of entities can, at the very least, benefit from examples of best practices set by others. Better yet, vibrant and stable public-private partnerships can continue to develop toward the ultimate goal – and shared vision– of ecological sustainability of habitat and economic sustainability of concerned communities. IR5.1.5.3 LAND USE POLICY CREATED AND ENACTED (GOK) The SECURE project is at a crossroads. USAID should consider continuing support, at a minimum, through the Ministry of Land’s (MoL) implementation of the Community Land Rights Recognition (CLRR) process in its pilot areas, and consider catalyzing the MoL to genuinely carry out its mandate under the National Land Policy (NLP). This would enhance the MoL’s reputation and help in redressing the deeply divisive issues that surround land tenure in Kenya. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 38 CONCLUSIONS TIME The accomplishment of improved NRM and the concomitant buildup of its governing bodies through the medium of projects are both generally beyond the duration of a given project’s life span. Examples of NRM improvement that require protracted efforts and therefore time include:  degraded rangelands’ recovery indicated by widespread robust and diverse plant communities;  restoration of disturbed hydrological regimes; and,  nature-based enterprises’ development to the stage of financial autonomy. In addition to the time it takes for the NRM improvements listed above is the time it takes for durable and meaningful NRM governing structures to be built and to mature. NRM-oriented IPs would thus be urged to take the longer-term view toward accomplishing their goals by adopting a program approach. Programs as such would conceive long-term goals and then seek internal and external funds and means to accomplish them. Donors would be urged, through the medium of discrete projects, to tailor projects’ objectives to those of IPs’ programs. THEWHOLE VALUE-CHAIN APPROACH The development of whole value chains for NBEs is required for economic development and poverty reduction. All segments in a given value chain – input supply, production, value addition, and marketing - should address major constraints and opportunities faced by farmers and producers, processors, traders and other businesses at multiple levels. Whole value chain analysis and development for NBEs and alternative livelihoods is a best practice which should be enhanced across NRM projects. Although investments are required at all levels of the value chains, feedback from the field indicates that more focus and scaling-up is needed at the value addition/processing and marketing segments as ways of securing better prices and profits for the producers. By increasing the value of indigenous plants, honey, livestock, and other nature-based businesses throughout the value chain, communities are encouraged to manage their resources better and sustainably. NRM GOVERNANCE NRM should continue to be harnessed as a socially stabilizing and unifying force; hence, the need to strengthen sustainable watershed management and biodiversity conservation in a given locale by devising synergies between the governing bodies of CFAs and WRUAs. The mandates of the two bodies can thus become complementary. This is desirable because of the role forest cover has on hydrological balance, and as a result WRUAs have forest cover at stake. It also ensures that NRM governing bodies are genuinely pluralistic and representative, are inclusive of mixed social strata and ethnicities in a given locale, and that decisions made reflect consensus and compromise. MONITORING Threats to biodiversity and range conservation are best viewed as social problems first. Humans make choices - correct or otherwise - that affect their immediate environment and the larger landscape. These choices will manifest themselves in physical, biotic, and social changes. Projects frequently advance both technical and environmental governance interventions: both seek to influence the way humans interact with the environment. Both the balancing of natural resource use and the nurturing of sustainable governing Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 39 structures, however, are processes and not ends in and of themselves. It follows that the most revealing monitoring devices would gauge the process of environmental improvement, and the process of NRM governing institutions’ development and maturity. Project management can make course corrections more easily through the making of process-oriented indicators, the capturing of data based on them, and thoughtful analysis of the data. This would enable more confident course correction than basing decisions solely on data that flows from indicators that measure only quantitative outputs. Quantities, however, are meaningful and important in some contexts. The scale of project outputs serves to at least partially inform some stakeholders of the impact: ‘how widespread has the project activity been successfully applied?’ However, it’s clear that project managers - including managers in USAID - cannot rely solely on these data sets for adaptive management or, at a meta level, for informing decisions to be made about the evolution of the larger ENRM program. It is therefore recommended that both process and quantitative indicators be applied in NRM projects side by side. Both types are mutually complementary, and together, inform project management in making needed course corrections. COST EFFECTIVENESS NRM projects benefit from the use of readily available and low-cost means and technologies. Projects that do so offer a good value for NRM investment. This is exemplified by improving data collection and its verification in the TIST through the use of low-cost devices such as personal digital assistants (PDA) that combine cameras, GPS, phones, and mini-applications (‘apps’) for recording data, which in turn is uploaded to the internet through computers in internet cafes; all this enables an ‘office-less’ field structure and thus reduces costs. Another example lies in improving the availability of data for decision making through landscape-level monitoring in the LWF and the NRT that employs existing scouts or rangers equipped with devices from which geo-spatial and quantitative data is uploaded. Creativity combined with staying abreast of technological developments can result in more effective output and better value for project investment. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 40 APPENDIX A. NORTHERN RANGELANDS TRUST SUPPORT PROGRAM (NRT) INTRODUCTION The Lewa Wildlife Conservancy (LWC), a non-profit organization, promotes the development of technical competence and the organizational maturity and financial stability of community-conservation initiatives in northern Kenya. The Northern Rangelands Trust (NRT) is a member organization that began as an outgrowth of the LWC. NRT is devoted to creating sustainable local solutions to poverty, imbalanced natural resource use, and ethnic conflict. Its membership includes community conservancies, private ranches, representatives of county councils and government ministries, and specialized GoK agencies such as KWS and KFS. Working with 19 community ranches, NRT’s oversight and facilitative strategic leadership is led by a 30-strong Council of Elders from diverse areas of northern Kenya. They are supported by a workforce of more than 500 individuals. The diversity of member interests is bridged through NRT’s central purpose of building robust community￾governed institutions as foundations for investment in wildlife conservation and community development. Community-governed institutions provide a forum for sharing successes and experience, and acts as an advisory and fund-raising body for its members. The NRT has a long-term vision to expand its organizational model to other parts of Kenya. The LWC has enjoyed a productive working partnership with USAID in the past. It is currently implementing a follow-on grant to support NRT to expand its programs of biodiversity conservation, improve NRM, improve livelihoods, strengthen CBOs, and reduce conflict. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Applicability of project’s original design The original design remains highly applicable. This USAID grant concentrates on building sustainable governing structures. While the NRT has made commendable progress toward their realization, this aim will remain in place as the constituent conservancies mature. “On track” to meet project’s stated objectives The Lewa Conservancy implements high quality work and is on track to meet its objectives. In most cases, it surpasses its output targets. Sustainability of project outputs and realism of project’s “exit strategy” The NRT is proactive in ensuring the institutional and financial sustainability of its conservancy members. As such, it is thoroughly invested in the sustainability of its USAID-funded project outputs, which largely focus on governance development. In addition, the NRT seeks to expand its conservation model across the Mara, Marsabit, Coastal, and Rift regions. This is considered to be a lengthy but worthwhile process. Course corrections to achieve objectives and exit strategy The NRT’s governing structures make good use of feedback from monitoring and adaptive management. The NRT itself is making course corrections. At this time, the evaluation team does not have any other recommendations. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 41 Synergies through coalitions with other actors to result in “value added” for having availed USAID project support The NRT is skilled in attracting donor monies toward its long-term objectives. It brokers individual conservancies’ need for funds with would-be donors. This is done within a context of concrete plans to assist financially sustainable conservancies. As such, the NRT effectively leverages USAID funds against the interests of many other development aid actors. Sensitization to and effectiveness in bringing constructive change to matters relating to ethnic divides, class divides, productive youth engagement, and gender equity Innovative socially binding efforts are used to both improve livestock profitability and pasture management and resolve ethnically divisive resource-access issues and outright cattle theft. The NRT’s alternative income￾generating activities reflect sensitivity to gender considerations. Mutually supportive impacts in sustainable livelihoods and conservation Vendor agreements, such as high-end tourist facilities, include profit-sharing mechanisms to increase conservancies’ core funds. The conservancies have a vested interest in maintaining stable wildlife populations to attract tourists. The improvement of rangelands health is a centerpiece for sustaining both livestock and wildlife. The NRT is on track to foster the interrelationship between livelihood improvement and biodiversity conservation. M&E approaches and systems for adaptive management and to inform USAID While the PMP is less useful for adaptive management, the NRT has developed innovative ways to monitor at the landscape level and to track the institutional maturity of its members. PROJECT ELEMENTS: BEST PRACTICES AND LESSONS LEARNED Building of community structures The greatest strength and best practice of NRT is in its strengthening of community structures. This is especially true of its Council of Elders and board members, who are elected from an assembly of members. Additional strengths include its regional presence, strategic positioning, and ability to address the unique needs of each community ranch through ecotourism in a way that promotes conservation and ensures the wellbeing of the local people. Most stakeholders in community ranches, from boards to community scouts, have been trained in skills including holistic management of livestock, vegetation and game monitoring, and rangeland monitoring. Further, involving community structures in decision-making processes from the outset and adhering to principles of community participation has led to ownership and independence of the member communities of the enterprise-conservation projects. In turn, this will ensure sustainable economic development in the future. Stabilizing force for conflict management The NRT is a stabilizing force for conflict management in an area prone to insecurity; this is a best practice. This force is backed by scientific approaches to conserve wildlife and biodiversity as well as to promote sustainable management of fragile grazing lands. To improve the capacity to address resource-use conflicts, power within the pastoral system has been devolved to elected community representatives. Linkages are also provided to protected area regulators like KWS and KFS and other government security institutions. The NRT is well positioned to play a pivotal role in conservation under devolved county governments in the post￾2012 implementation of the new constitutional dispensation and realignment of the draft wildlife policies and laws. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 42 Stabilizing the investment environment The NRT’s partnership strategies have resulted in funding for the commercialization of sustainable products. These include the Safaricom Foundation, the Institute Cooperation Bei Entwicklungs Projecten, and Zoos Victoria, which spearheads “The beads for wildlife campaign.” The livestock program is being supported by the Autonomous Tusk Trust. The strongest lesson learned is that improved environmental governance and social stability - stemming from NRT’s organizational and conservation model - has attracted long-term investors like the Saruni Lodge in Kalama and other partners in the private sector. Improved NRM governance ultimately results in more stable returns on investment and improved revenues in the highly volatile tourism sector. Incentives for better community-based NRM management The NRT’s “carrot and stick” approach encourages well performing community ranches like Kalama and private-sector actors (e.g., Olpajeta Ranching Company) to benefit from niche markets in livestock trade and establish small-scale enterprises. The approach also reprimands poor conservation performers like Ilng’wesi. This has been a successful tactic that enjoys community support and is an insightful lesson learned. A best practice is not only linking economic reward to wildlife protection performance, but also through the NRT's reinvestment of 25% of the mark-up on livestock sales into development activities within the communities. For example, private enterprises dedicated to expanding NRT-driven ecotourism in the area are profit motivated to invest in the conservation and sustainable management of natural resources. The NRT's goal is to build up market lodges, such as the Saruni Lodge within the Kalama Conservancy, in each of the 19 conservancies. Empowering women as economy-builders Enabling women to be substantial income generators and play a vital role in community economies is a best practice. NRT Trading (a branch of NRT) offers a collective marketing strategy with a particular focus on supporting women's groups by offering business training. At present, 600 women in five conservancies have received assistance to create and run their own enterprises. Micro-credit support has benefited 239 individuals, permitting the purchase of necessary raw materials and diversification within their enterprises. NRT Trading sells the products both locally and internationally. Business volume has leaped from a mere KSh 4,865 in 2006 to about KSh 12 million in 2011. Women's groups and their individual members, therefore, become leading agents of economic improvement in their communities. Focusing on activities viable for women has led to individual and group empowerment as well as positive effects on gender relations. NRT and M&E Both LWF and the Lewa Conservancy track outputs through project-specific PMPs. The recurrent theme across this grant’s objectives is to build and improve NRM governing structures at conservancy committee, conservancy, and NRT levels. Biodiversity conservation activities (e.g., rangeland recovery) are also tracked. As with LWF, results are expressed mainly in quantitative terms. The notable exception is the CBO organizational capacity index. The limitation of quantitative measurement is that it necessarily restricts the focus and measurement of results, and thereby unintentionally obscures the fact that the maturation of governing structures and improvement of biodiversity through restoration are processes. For more on this theme, the reader is referred to the discussion in Annex B under “LWF and M&E” which is equally applicable to the NRT grant. The NRT evaluates its current 19 members annually to track their institutional progress toward maturity in three broad fields: governance, conservation (see below under landscape-level monitoring), and socio- Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 43 economics. Their approach to measuring institutional maturity must be deemed a best practice, as it embraces three vital and inter-related dimensions based on open criteria. Criteria for tracking governance maturity include a conservancy’s registration as a trust or limited company, its Board rotation, regularity of meetings, committees of the Board (e.g., financial, grazing) in place and meeting, its budget tracking and approval, and auditing of its accounts. Conservation criteria include mapping and reacting to poaching; controlling grazing in buffer zones and core areas; rangeland condition; and mapping key wildlife species’ trends. Socio-economic criteria include employment in conservancy, revenues from NRT trading (i.e., branded handicraft sales), livestock sales through NRT established markets, and tourism revenues. NRT and monitoring at the landscape level The NRT has established conservancy-based monitoring of wildlife through its Conservancy Managed Monitoring System (CoMMS) setup and of rangeland trends. It also monitors game birds for hunting quotas for some conservancies. The purpose is to generate vital periodic data that guide and inform the adaptive management of natural resources in conservancies. These monitoring systems are inexpensive as data collection is largely performed by the (300+) conservancies’ rangers. This built-in cost effectiveness is deemed a best practice. Results require engagement and interpretation by conservancies’ senior management for their adaptive management. The NRT has a phased introduction of monitoring systems in each conservancy over a two to three-year period. This provides adequate time for adaptation and capacity building of rangers, managers, and, in some cases, boards and their committees. Key wildlife trends also yield spatial analyses of wildlife distribution, abundance, and mortality; human-wildlife conflict, including attacks on livestock; illegal activities and insecurity; rangers’ patrol efforts; and livestock distribution and abundance for core conservation areas. The NRT’s rangeland monitoring also employs simple methods to monitor vegetation cover and condition in different grazing management zones established in five conservancies. This data collection is carried out by rangers together with NRT research and monitoring staff. Over the past three years, it has been demonstrated that ground vegetation has improved in areas where livestock grazing is controlled. The NRT (and the LWF) has applied standardized rangeland monitoring protocols developed in collaboration with the Mpala Research Center (funded through USAID-ELMT/ELSE project), which will be used for future conservancy-managed rangeland monitoring. NRT’s exit strategy The NRT’s aims are long-term and span far beyond the time horizon of the present USAID grant. The USAID grant has succeeded thus far in furthering NRT’s long-term aims. Over the past three years, NRT has exceeded performance targets set in the program document with revenues generated reaching KSh 108,993,655 ($1,089,937). The NRT expects conservancies to move toward sustainability with proposed conservation fee increases, the launch of new bio-enterprises, entry into the carbon market, and new ecosystem services. The NRT's broadest aim, based on the success of its current program in north Kenya, is to replicate its structure in new geographical areas while allowing creative adaptation of programs to suit local conditions. Each replicated area would have its own not-for-profit company, board, council, and staffing, and would be institutionally and financially independent. The NRT envisions a national forum, the Kenya Rangelands Coalition, that is Kenya-wide and would lobby and advocate for support while addressing common issues. This expansionary and ambitious vision is deemed a best practice, as it leverages USAID monies toward more widespread geographical impact in the country. The NRT actively pursues the financial sustainability of its constituent conservancies beyond donor support. It has recently completed a study by Oxford University that examined present and projected income streams, Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 44 plans for their realization, and timelines for break-even of costs and revenues. In addition to expanding tourism income opportunities, the study anticipates increases in income from livestock trading and NRT trading (i.e., handicrafts sales) and projects future income streams from carbon trading, bio-enterprises, and PES. This proactive stance is deemed a best practice toward aims that will remain donor-dependent for the interim but which are carefully calculated to lead toward financial sustainability. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR VALUE ADDITION Volatility in tourism revenues and political risk The greatest risk to NRT’s work is the high dependence on donor support by the community ranches and on revenue flows based on a highly sensitive and volatile tourism industry. These risks are exacerbated by the vulnerability arising from political interference into community institutions, as has happened in the Ilng’wesi Conservancy. It could be politically risky if the NRT model becomes a contentious conservation governance issue among public agencies, such as KWS and KFS. Another risk is unclear legal and policy reform outcomes in the conservation sector to mainstream the county government framework with the national one. Delegation of credit administration The micro-credit program has successfully financed many enterprises run by individual women. The NRT's plan to expand this program to all 19 conservancies is laudable, as is the establishment of a wholesale shop in Kalama. This would prevent potential exploitation by middlemen while ensuring quality raw materials. NRT Trading might intensify the rate of trade expansion if credit administration were handed over to an intermediate financial entity. Energies could then focus on developing products, marketing, and expanding the client base. Overseas markets present the greatest potential for NRT Trading. Future sustainable enterprise schemes The cattle trading deal with Olpajeta Ranching Company, a successful exercise in incorporating a reward and penalty system for financial profit and rangeland conservation, is already functional. Plans are being made by NRT to levy a charge on users of the Ngale Ndale Forest Trust water tower. This will compensate the community for use of their resources and costs of ensuring a reliable supply of clean water. NRT intends to replicate this model in all other conservancies. Other areas of NBE being explored are plant-based products that could be used for sustainable enterprise development and the growing trade in carbon credits, into which NRT intends to tap. Toward self-funding health and education in communities Support for conservation objectives with enterprise development has already translated into tangible economic and social benefits. However, education and health services are still scarce. Communities should be encouraged to invest self-earned financial resources into the creation of local health and education facilities. Improved education would facilitate the development of skills and knowledge needed to be receptive to specialized business training. As a consequence, all improvements in local social infrastructures will allow the communities to reap essential social benefits as well as fuel long-term survival and growth of NRT conservation and enterprise schemes. Devolvement: opportunity or otherwise? The new dispensation under the current constitution implies a new relationship between the Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife (MoFW), KFS and KWS, the National Land Commission (NLC), and the county governments. The strategic imperative for community ranches is to steer a critical management path through these new and not-yet-formed relationships. It is necessary to support the newly devolved government Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 45 through the transfer of functions and decision-making power from centralized to local bodies on matters pertaining to fiscal systems and public expenditures. It is envisioned that this transfer of power will lead to the sustainability of local institutions and result in the integrity of natural resources and ecosystems, and facilitate equitable revenue collection and distribution. These new relationships will take time to develop. How the KWS weathers devolvement is key to the “staying power” of private and community conservancies. Constructively played, there is opportunity for yet stronger public-private partnerships to emerge at the county level. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 46 APPENDIX B. LAIKIPIA WILDLIFE FORUM (LWF) INTRODUCTION The Laikipia Wildlife Forum (LWF) is a membership-based organization whose highest order aim is to conserve ecosystem integrity of the broader Laikipia area and to improve people’s lives through collective action and sustainable natural resource use. LWF focuses on improving NRM governance and decision￾making skills and realizing the complementarity of income improvement and conservation. LWF also supports the development of skills for sustainable domestication and wild harvesting of local resources. Through the present USAID grant, LWF implements five essential programs that relate to river water and wetlands management, rangeland management, forest management, conservation enterprises, and landscape￾wide ecological and socioeconomic monitoring. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Applicability of project’s original design The original design is still applicable. It drew from the experience of its USAID-funded predecessor, the FORREMS project. “On track” to meet project’s stated objectives The LWF implements quality work and is largely on track even though it faces daunting challenges. It will meet most of its objectives, but will likely need longer to extend its current USAID grant. The social complexities and, in some cases, enmities largely account for delays. The human communities’ aspect of its landscape-level monitoring buildup is lagging. Sustainability of project outputs and realism of project’s “exit strategy” LWF’s “exit strategy” is not based on the lifespan of the present USAID grant. Rather, it rests on achieving economic and ecological sustainability, which is a more long-term vision. This vision is deemed realistic because it is likely the only way to achieve prosperity and social harmony among the diverse stakeholders. Course corrections to achieve objectives and exit strategy The LWF will likely seek a no-cost extension of its current grant. It will need to accelerate its efforts on the human settlement portion of its landscape monitoring systems buildup. The project has taken steps in recent years to convert from a project-driven entity into one operating under a constituent member-defined program. Certain course corrections have already been taken to achieve a long-term exit strategy. Synergies through coalitions with other actors to result in “value added” for having availed USAID project support The LWF created a group of its own IPs, each with their own array of donor-supported ventures, to implement the current USAID cooperative agreement. The LWF implements its Community Forestry program itself; CFAs draw on support from many development aid actors. The LWF leverages its own internal resources (core costs from member fees) against USAID support from other donors. It is effective in balancing these monies and resultant project objectives with each other. Sensitization to and effectiveness in bringing constructive change to matters relating to ethnic divides, class divides, youth’s productive engagement, and gender equity LWF understands and applies principles of pluralism and inclusivity in its capacity-building efforts across water use, bio-enterprise development, rangeland use and rehabilitation, and forest use. Chronic and strong Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 47 class divides are being addressed within and among community and private ranches. Women’s role in sustainable NRM decision-making is integral to the profitability of bio-enterprises. Mutually supportive impacts in sustainable livelihoods and conservation The LWF has conceptualized the links and approaches between domestication of wild resources and their sustainable wild harvesting. CFAs derive good incomes from sustainable practices for tree establishment and from collection of other forest products. M&E approaches and systems for adaptive management and to inform USAID The LWF employs creative and holistic monitoring mechanisms that inform its management and its members of required course corrections. Rangeland monitoring is not, at present, consistently applied across the diverse array of members and their interests, but this situation will improve. The largely quantitative indicators in the PMP serve little for LWF’s adaptive management; this could be improved by USAID’s adoption of more process-oriented indicators. PROJECT ELEMENTS: BEST PRACTICES AND LESSONS LEARNED LWF and M&E The LWF tracks the results of groups who are responsible for implementing various parts of the USAID grant, using the framework of its specific PMP to guide data collection and analysis. The indicators have results expressed mainly in quantitative terms, an exception being CBO organizational capacity indices. A lesson learned is that quantitative measurement obscures development as a process, suggesting that numbers are ends in themselves. This has important ramifications. Results expressed only in numbers do not reveal the step-by-step processes that were employed or that emerged through trial and error. As such, important knowledge about real best practices, which are almost invariably process-oriented, is often lost. The LWF is not a typical NGO. It is a membership organization consisting of an array of stakeholders. Its programs have been defined by LWF members, and existing programs reflects members’ concerns, sensibilities, and priorities. The LWF, over its young organizational history, has shifted from implementing projects to orienting itself as a program. The LWF developed its own monitoring framework and process, independent of the PMP used for its present USAID grant, and uses indicators expressed as processes. Rangeland rehabilitation, water-use rationalization, forest-cover improvement, and livelihoods improvement through bio-enterprises are all considered by LWF to be long-term in nature and not project specific. As such, the LWF seeks to attract donor monies to promote activities toward the long-term objectives of its programs. There is a dissonance between USAID’s project output-oriented monitoring, which is largely expressed in numbers and LWF’s own program objective-oriented monitoring, which is expressed by indicating the location and stage the program arrived at in a given process. For example, in the water and the WRUA development program, the very fact that upstream catchment farmers with high consumptive water use are now willing to meter their use is a highly significant achievement in a process that ultimately seeks to harmonize upstream farmers and downstream ranchers’ water use. Another example is the very recent willingness of private ranchers to allow community ranch herders access to their land in the wet season – now having understood through persistent LWF efforts that community ranches once rested for a growing season will better respond to intensive ‘bunching’ herding in the dry season. And thus, measurements toward number-output driven PMP indicators do not, in themselves, serve to inform the LWF or its members on how to reach management decisions; they do not inform course correction of its USAID grant implementation, and nor do they show progress in its longer-term LWF Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 48 programs. It is argued in the main body of this report that USAID would do well to incorporate more process-monitoring indicators in parallel with numerical indicators in its NRM project-level PMPs. PIONEERING FORESTRY PROGRAM INSTRUMENTAL IN IMPLEMENTING GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION The CFAs provided local communities with active roles in the management of forest resources. There was clear evidence of the strength of the partnerships between the nine CFAs (of which, four are supported by USAID) and KFS, culminating in the much sought-after approval of forest management plans and agreements. The LFW-supported CFAs are in the forefront of nationwide conservation activities3 and have been able to provide a wealth of useful practical experience to KFS and other stakeholders, as well as being pivotal in improving forest governance in the country. LWF has had an active role in the implementation of the Forests Act of 2005 which provides, among other elements, an effective mechanism by which communities can engage in Participatory Forest Management. This is achieved through the medium of Plantation Establishment Livelihood System4 (PELIS), with the aim of cost-effective forest establishment which guarantees the equitable sharing of benefits accruing from the forest. The dual benefits of contributing actively to conservation legislation and the protection of the rights of communities render the CFA program a best practice. LWF’s Landscape Monitoring Program is still in its formative stage for its human aspects (water use and the well-being of human communities), with systems currently much better established for forest cover and rangeland condition monitoring. Its purpose is to feed process-oriented information (socioeconomic and natural resource trends) to its constituent members so that they may make informed management decisions about the nexus of human settlements’ impact and natural resource management. The LWF’s members are much more socially and ethnically diverse than, for example, members of the Northern Rangelands Trust. The LWF faces challenges in taking the Landscape Monitoring Program’s monitoring outputs to the next level, whereby data is consistently collected by individual members and, when it is, shared among members. The LWF is actively seeking to correct this course by raising awareness of the importance of monitoring for the benefit of herds, wildlife, and ultimately, the betterment of livelihoods. A lesson learned is that process monitoring is better suited to gauging the progress and incremental maturity of social processes that underpin natural resource improvement objectives. Organizational maturity indices that posit steps, or stages at the outset, are far more wieldy and measurable than those which create elaborate databases with many fields. The CBO organizational capacity indices are a step in the right direction, though it is vital to ensure that an effective community feedback system is in place to channel information back to the source where it can be acted upon. A best practice – partially incorporated into LWF’s present PMP through CBOs’ organizational capacity indices – would be to request that IPs in ENRM, who seek to influence social processes and NRM governance list detailed steps that reveal progress toward sound governance. These steps should then be periodically reviewed and changed as more is learned by an IP. These types of process monitoring indicators should then be inserted into PMPs, backed up, and explained in annexed explanatory sheets. 3 Management plans and agreements have been approved for Gathiuru, Rumuruti, Lariak, and Sharmanek. 4 PELIS as observed on the foothills of Mt. Kenya involves inter-planting tree saplings among annual potato crops. Farmers who harvest potato and planted trees benefit from less competition, soil moisture, and maintain soil fertility. Potato is harvested for several years, at which time trees are well established and farmers shift to new plots. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 49 LWF’s bottom-up prioritization of its member’s programs, and only then seeking donor support to further them along, is deemed by the Mission to be an excellent best practice. LWF AND WRUAS The Mission deems the formation and development of WRUA as representative and legal corporate bodies to be a sound approach to resolving upstream versus downstream water rights disputes. A best practice employed by the LWF’s implementing partner, Rural Focus, is to lead constituent would-be members to informed decisions, and thus induce them to write their own constitutions and sub-catchment management plans. The temptation would be to dictate the terms for expediency; this is not done. The grant has resulted in improved management and governance of WRUAs, leading to their registration either as trusts or societies. Many outputs have contributed to reduce conflict between upstream and downstream water users: the development of sub-catchment management plans, physically demarcating riparian boundaries, acceptance of water metering, improved water harvesting and other infrastructures, the policing of water extraction, and compliance with EIA guidelines provided by NEMA. By all accounts, within the water use domains of WRUAs that have matured, fewer disputes have erupted and beneficial results have been noted. For example, more than 20% of the members of small-scale water irrigation schemes becoming receptive to the use of meters, leading to improved water management arising from a community-supported water rationing program. However, it is observed that considerable time is required for a WRUA to mature. Many have only begun to exercise and assert their legitimacy after having been initially developed by SNV and then nurtured by other project-oriented donors (e.g., the Global Environment Facility [GEF]). For the realization of their ‘Sub Catchment Management Plans’ (SCMP), the USAID seed money for pilot activities is deemed to be a sound approach. The financial sustainability of WRUAs, however, remains in question. WRUAs have daunting tasks of vegetal cover re-establishment in riparian areas, meeting recurrent costs including river scouts’ salaries, and payment of full-time managers. All these functions require funding, and user-fee structures at present do not cover all costs. LWA AND RANGELAND MANAGEMENT Holistic Management (i.e., the system pioneered by Alan Savory in Zimbabwe and which has become mainstreamed in many parts of the world, including Kenya) is applied at the technical-NRM core of LWF’s approach. It is holistic in the sense of embracing ecological, social, and economic parameters. It certainly can be deemed a best practice. At its center is the system of bunching herds to graze and trample intensively for a period of days in a defined area and then shifting to the next area. This emulates the behavior of wild ruminants and induces a robust response in forbs and grasses. It is necessarily social in the Laikipia area context in that there absolutely must be a consensus of all herders to affect it as a few detractors will spoil the system. This approach is not new. Traditional African herders have practiced this for years, but it has been largely displaced by modernity (e.g., equal and permanent grazing across broad areas). Its practice now amounts to a revival. A corresponding and strong lesson learned is that despoiled rangelands are not considered to be an NRM problem; rather, they are a social problem. The present and widespread problems are the result of wrong herding management decisions. There are two concomitant lessons learned. First, in order for consensual action to be taken, a vision of a healthy and biodiverse rangeland ecosystem must be generated. Moreover, this vision must be shared by private ranchers and community ranch herders alike, each realizing the inter-related economic and ecologic benefits of improved habitat for wildlife and domestic livestock. It is also necessary to Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 50 better define how attitudinal change to challenges that impact natural resources should be determined and monitored, and how feedback is to be provided. For example, the experience of FORREMS, with the fencing off of severely degraded sites to be used as prototypes in order to gauge the success of range rehabilitation, suffered due to limitations on range condition dynamics and grazing processes. Furthermore, the length of time it will take in any given area for rangelands to recover cannot be ignored. Decades of wrong choices will not be easily reversed and redressed with the result of more robust and biodiverse rangelands in the span of a project life of three years. The three-year lifetime of the present USAID grant is a relatively short time to draw conclusions from in-depth monitoring of ecosystem integrity. However, LWF has committed to a 10 year term within which to effect rehabilitation through a holistic process which interlocks social and conservation objectives. One Rendille elder pointed out that “Erosion begins in the mind and spreads to the land.’’ The reverse is also true: conservation begins in the mind and spreads to the land. Neither of these processes, however, occurs overnight. NATURE-BASED ENTERPRISES The business model adopted by the Conservation Enterprise Development Program (CEDP), implemented by the private limited company Desert Edge, promotes viable and profitable conservation enterprises. The model is considered a best practice as it guarantees enterprise sustainability while ensuring adherence to conservation goals whereby communities are led to perceive the preservation of natural resources as directly related to income. CEDP/Desert Edge has also established an efficient internal quality control which guarantees equity and fairness in payments to farmers. The program seeks to employ members fully through value chains. For example, in the case of nettle herb tea women supply raw material, and also are employed in drying, packaging, and marketing finished products. The establishment of demonstration plots to conserve and preserve some of the unique and rare species is a good means of sustaining specific indigenous medicinal plants, as well as testing sustainable wild harvesting protocols. The trial plots will also demonstrate best practice to the communities who will be contracted to propagate these species. Commercializing natural resources in general and forest-based products specifically is in itself considered a best practice. Investment required by the collectors is low; no land is required by the participants; women and the poorest members of communities are not excluded from participating; and the goods-payment turnaround is rapid. The objective of the program – to expand and diversify economic opportunity for Laikipia communities and to induce incentives for biodiversity conservation – is on a slow but steady course, underscoring the validity of the original design and approach, while moving toward full sustainability. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR VALUE ADDITION LWA’s organizational model It is worthwhile to comment on LWA’s approach to effecting partnerships to implement the present USAID grant. There are two views. One perspective is that it is of great merit to outsource functions to specialized groups (e.g., Rural Focus for WRUAs’ support and Mpala for wildlife conservation activities and the erection of biodiversity trend monitoring systems). This enables specialized groups to take up equally specialized task sets, and allows LWF to not build up specialized staff only to struggle later for their support once grant monies lapse. The other view is that this model deprives the parent group of a certain buildup of its own institutional memory. Outsourcing also could broach a conflict of interest when done to for-profit entities if those with controlling interests in a for-profit group perform operational or programmatic functions for the parent group. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 51 Gestation time for enterprises Time is a factor in the sphere of nature-based enterprises. Businesses based on natural resources not only require patience and endurance for expected results, but are vulnerable to natural obstacles such as negative climatic events, as witnessed in a bee migration due to drought and later due to heavy rains, both of which adversely affected the program.5 Although impossible to intervene in the course of nature, it is important to limit negative impact from obstacles created by human intervention, such as poor CFA governance in some of the CFAs, making the cost of doing business with them overly expensive. For-profit ventures, such as those promoted by CEDP, struggle against the handout mentality of some programs which fosters dependency and reluctance to embrace unsubsidized models. It is recommended that Desert Edge devote, at least, two more years to accompany on-going projects to fruition, allowing clearly observable results to emerge. 5 Honey production is through semi-domestication of wild populations of bees. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 52 APPENDIX C. KITENGELA CONSERVATION PROJECT (KCP) INTRODUCTION The main goal of the Kitengela Conservation Program (KCP), implemented by the African Wildlife Foundation, is to secure open rangeland in the wider Kitengela wildlife dispersal area, known as the Kaputei. This is critical for the survival of viable wildlife populations in the Nairobi National Park (NNP) and its dispersal area as well as to the local pastoral community that primarily relies on livestock keeping for its livelihood. KCP contributes to the achievement of USAID SO5 “Improved Natural Resource Management in Targeted Bio-diverse Resource Areas” by addressing the increasing threat to the biodiversity of the Kitengela ecosystem, which includes the globally and nationally important NNP. To achieve this objective, the project works to strengthen institutional, management, and policy structures associated with the Kaputei ecosystem. The project develops income-generating opportunities to help residents of Kaputei derive long-term benefits from maintaining open, unobstructed, and productive rangelands. In the past, lack of support and lack of sector development strategies has hampered growth of livestock enterprises. The project promotes traditional businesses such as livestock production and marketing alongside newer income-generating schemes and investment opportunities for the pastoral communities. Maasai pastoralists are keen to maintain and prosper from open rangelands. It is increasingly recognized that selling land results in short-term gains and long-term losses, aptly characterized as “selling wealth to buy poverty.” By organizing communities into Land Owner Associations (LOA), the project seeks to capitalize on the complementarily of livestock production and wildlife population-maintenance objectives by maintaining open and productive rangelands. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Applicability of project’s original design The original project design is currently applicable. However, future focus should emphasize implementing the landmark Land Use Management Plan and strengthening the capacities of the Ole Kajiado County Council (OCC) and the Kajiado Pastoral Forum’s (KPF). The principal project device for improving livelihoods through conservation goals is the Market Access Center (MAC). This model still needs to be fully implemented. “On track” to meet project’s stated objectives The project is on track to meet its stated objectives of improving income-generating mechanisms for pastoralist communities. The most significant achievement is the approval and launch of the Land Use Master Plan (LUMP) in August 2011. The LUMP process was born out of a pluralistic and community-driven process. The plan covers an area of 2500 km2 . The next and most challenging step will be implementation. The LUMP faces resistance from large, politically connected investors and those seeking to buy and sell a large parcel of open land (called “goat and sheep’’ land) for commercial purposes. AWF focuses on strengthening the KPF and other community groups so they can continue to work with the OCC and other stakeholders on community policing of the zones’ boundaries in the LUMP. Livestock value chain development is not yet fully operational. Sustainability of project outputs and realism of project’s “exit strategy” The LUMP is at the heart of the project’s outputs. To be sustainable, the LUMP must still become fully implemented on the ground and adopted by all stakeholders. It must also enjoy the full political support of the OCC and the MoL, and its local counterparts. As such, the project would benefit from further financial and technical support until the LUMP is fully realized. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 53 The MAC, though well set up and poised to expand business, still needs to achieve financial and operational sustainability. To realize the benefits of the MACs, clear performance benchmarks are required. Benchmarks should include indicators such as increased volume of business and profitability, and increased profit margin from value addition. This continually motivates herdsmen to remain reliable livestock suppliers to the MAC. Course corrections to achieve objectives and exit strategy The project ends in December 2011, and will not benefit from course corrections. The outputs to date would, however, profit from further financial support. Additional support is needed to bring the LUMP to fruition. Synergies through coalitions with other actors to result in “value addition” to USAID project support The KCP has skillfully engaged public (e.g., KWS and OCC) and non-government (e.g., ACC and local NGOs) entities in its USAID-supported project activities. Its partnership with KWS and AWF, it helped form a general 2010-2020 management plan for the broader ecosystem. This groundbreaking plan adapted KWS’ Protected Areas’ planning framework to the general organizational setup of community conservancies. The same model is also being applied in the Lamu area of Kiunga Marine Reserve. Sensitization to and effectiveness in bringing constructive change to matters relating to ethnic divides, class divides, youth’s productive engagement, and gender equity The KCP has applied the principles of pluralism and inclusivity in all its capacity-building efforts across land use planning, livestock value chain development, and rangeland use and rehabilitation. Chronic and strong class and economic divides and diverging political interests are being addressed within the broader framework of the LUMP. However, not all stakeholders are well represented in the present platform. Mutually supportive impacts in sustainable livelihoods and conservation The project aims to preserve open rangeland space to benefit pastoralists and preserve their traditional livelihoods, while benefitting wildlife habitat. The preservation of the broader Kitengela landscape is crucial for the viability of large wildlife, which congregates in and disperses from NNP. Further work is required to actualize the LUMP. M&E approaches and systems for adaptive management and to inform USAID Most project outputs concern processes; for example, the development of LUMP and MAC. Therefore, process monitoring would be more revealing and useful to both AWF and to USAID. PROJECT ELEMENTS, BEST PRACTICES,AND LESSONS LEARNED Community vigilance Having built consensus community-by-community for the LUMP, and now having the LUMP’s legitimacy formally endorsed by the MoL, community members themselves are policing the boundaries of the LUMP’s zones. In addition, community members are apprising landowners of agriculture limits and other rules that pertain to a given zone. This level of commitment and vigilance is a best practice worthy of emulation elsewhere in Kenya. Empowerment and access to high levels of government The KCP has empowered community elders to approach high-level central government officials, up to the Minister of Lands and the Prime Minister. This best practice has helped draw national attention to an area close to Nairobi, brought awareness to high political leadership, and inspired and empowered heretofore “powerless” pastoralists to take action. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 54 Conceptual integration of project approach The project’s success is a lesson learned deserving emulation in other pastoralist regions of Kenya. Combining land-use zoning with tangible financial rewards has enhanced stakeholders’ understanding of the interrelationship between open and intact wildlife habitat and pastoralists’ livelihoods. This success is reflected in the principal project outputs: the LUMP and the MAC. The MAC itself is designed to reward men and women herders with profit sharing from value addition of animals sold to the MAC; thus, encouraging them to retain their pastoralist livelihood – and not sell their land – which requires open, unfenced space. Building on traditional livelihoods A best practice found in KCP, and several other ENRM projects reviewed, is that of complementing existing livelihoods with more forward-looking tools. The value of herding has been supplemented by teaching bookkeeping skills, holistic management, and business planning for women herders. The Kule Dairy Co￾operative Enterprise consists primarily of women members, who are often responsible for handling milk production and marketing. Women use proceeds from the sale of milk to support their family’s financial needs. Through the co-operative, the project’s goal is to enhance productivity and profitability in a sustainable way. Training for the dairy members and management is now complete. AWF plans to install a higher￾capacity milk cooling tank to support the dairy co-operative. Working “against the grain” A hard lesson learned is the time it has taken to build a painstaking consensus for the LUMP. The KCP has had to work ‘against the grain’ of vested and powerful economic and political interests. It has been at this centrally important task since 2000, and has become accelerated with the taking on of a USAID grant. Nonetheless the Mission deems the LUMP as an excellent best practice that has direct relevance to areas in Kenya such as Maasai Mara and Amboseli. National and local pride An emerging lesson learned is that to keep NNP from being reduced to a ‘zoo,’ there is a national pride argument for keeping the broader Kitengela region open. The Maasai are known for their pride in their traditional values and livelihoods. Harnessing human capital by employing talented and resourceful local people has proven to be a best practice. Promotion of sustainable financing mechanisms: livestock value chain development The MAC business model is an innovative strategy deemed a best practice by providing an array of services to pastoralist Maasai communities. If successful, the model will go a long way toward minimizing the marketing and pricing constraints that hinder Maasai pastoralist communities from obtaining fair market value for their livestock. The MAC will also be a one-stop shop where pastoralists will be able to access market information, sell their animals, and obtain credit to meet their financing requirements. Profit sharing to herders from value addition of meat is another innovation designed to secure steady input supplies of meat animals. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR VALUE ADDITION Inclusive platform to represent all classes of landowners The present consistency of the KPF is not broad-based and inclusive enough to address interest groups across all class and ethnic divides. Two groups that are not well represented are non-Maasai from Nairobi and elsewhere, and the private sector. A cross-cutting forum is needed to discuss and resolve land use issues in conformity with the LUMP. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 55 Land price competition The project’s close proximity to Nairobi creates a challenge for promoting alternative livelihoods. Increasing urban sprawl has resulted in high demand for land and increasing land fragmentation. Rising prices have prompted Maasai owners to sell their land. Implementation bottlenecks of the LUMP The project has faced structural, procedural, and political challenges during its implementation. Land prices due to expanding urbanization have far outstripped immediate the economic value of wildlife habitat conservation. The incomplete implementation of the NLP has hampered the zoning’s legitimacy. This is exacerbated by the default common understanding of the sanctity of private title. The OCC currently lacks capacity to implement and enforce the LUMP and work in concert with NEMA. Incentives and easements: works in progress Currently, there is no legal framework for voluntary environmental easements, and the NEMA framework for enforced easements is inadequate. The project has experimented with the latter, but it is unclear if the framework provides lasting and replicable solutions to offset wildlife habitat conservation against urbanization and land price increases. The KCP, together with the KWS-NNP, installed an annual incentive of USD $4 per acre for landowners to voluntarily not fence their parcels within designated zones. It remains to be seen whether or not this device can be effective and whether or not the monetary incentive is enough. Large expectations: MAC as central to improved livelihoods Some 600 households benefit from improved market access in livestock trading in the two MAC meat markets (33% in Kitengela and 66% in Keekonyokie). AWF also conducted livestock development training for 100 pastoralists, including 25 women, from the three triangles focusing on sales and purchases entry, and the use of transaction security systems to enhance traceability of livestock and related products. They were also trained on cold storage, value addition, and packaging of livestock products in order to diversify market access. In the future, trainings will be carried out by the MAC. With improved incomes and continued relevance, the MAC would be sustainable in the long run. However, it is unclear if the management team will be able to maintain and sustain the vision of the MAC as a high-quality “up-market” outlet. The MAC model is costly and may not be easily replicated by pastoralist communities elsewhere. The concept of selling meat by special cuts is also new to the communities; only time will tell if they can sustain it. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 56 APPENDIX D. WILDLIFE CONSERVATION PROGRAM (KENYA WILDLIFE SERVICE - KWS) INTRODUCTION Support to the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) by USAID has a long history, dating back to independence. In the past decade, this support was executed through the Community Biodiversity Resource Areas (COBRA) and Conservation Resources through Enterprises (CORE) projects. Since 2006 the support to KWS through the current $2m grant has focused on protected areas (PA) (including fire management), institutional management and strengthening (IMS), applied research, and biodiversity conservation (including endangered species conservation, strengthening of Kenya’s CITES secretariat, bio-prospecting, community wildlife service development, and the development of the sandalwood conservation strategy). The protected area, wildlife and habitat management of the southern conservation area includes habitat restoration and improvement of the range management in Amboseli National Park, where a modern gate has been constructed and is almost completed. Other activities include invasive species management (e.g., Lantana camara, Datura stranomium and Solanum incum) and plant management. The IMS program involves the upgrading of the magnetic strip ‘Safaricard’ system connectivity from the previous provider UUNET to the Safaricom network, where the system is operational in Nairobi, Aberdare, Lake Nakuru, Amboseli, Tsavo West and East, Mombasa Marine, and Malindi National Parks. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Applicability of project’s original design is “on track” to meet stated objectives The planned activities and outputs are generally making good progress. There were, however, valid concerns about delays in implementation occasioned by post-election violence and IPs’ lack of familiarity with PMPs and monitoring. The IMS component’s impact on improving financial management decisions, enhancement of internet connectivity, and increase of transparency is rated very highly. So far, it has greatly contributed to rising efficiency in revenue collection in all KWS stations: an increase from KSh 2 billion in 2006 to about KSh 4.5 billion per year at present. KWS has developed comprehensive conservation strategies for endangered carnivores such as cheetah, lions, wild dog, spotted hyena, and sea turtle. In the bio-prospecting program, conservation strategies have been developed for aloe and sandalwood. All these strategies are ready for roll-out throughout the country. It is too early to provide any meaningful judgment on the NRM results impact, as the activities are still in progress. Sustainability of project outputs and realism of project’s “exit strategy” The availability of counterpart GoK funds and the appointment of a national carnivore liaison officer within KWS ensure the availability of human resources to oversee post-project efforts. These project activities are implemented on a cost-reimbursement basis; this is a further safeguard to encourage activities to be factored into the KWS’ recurrent budget. The training of all staff on the use of IMS from all conservation areas is a good investment for consistency and continuity. The IMS program has also been rolled out to some community ranches, and this enhances its geographical spread and wider acceptance. The strategies for species’ conservation and bio-prospecting enjoy wide support for having been developed out of a long and consultative process involving a broad spectrum of stakeholders in research, conservation, and academia within and outside KWS. The strategies are well anchored across many national policy instruments, including Vision 2030. Overall, the strategies share components on improved governance, maximizing returns from biodiversity assets, technology transfer, and widening the scope of benefit sharing among stakeholders. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 57 Course corrections to achieve objectives and exit strategy There was concern within KWS about the sporadic influx of donor funds during project implementation to the extent that the implementation and scaling up of conservation initiatives was not perceived as guaranteed. The team leaders of the scientific investigations recommended better coordination among KWS, USAID, and other NGOs supported by USAID on species conservation work in order to enhance synergies and avoid duplication. It was recommended that the Community Wildlife Service should be strengthened with more human resources and technical support in order to better address the human/wildlife interface. The IMS was not rolled out to some stations due to their lack of power supply. An investment in solar power, though initially expensive, has a higher sustainable potential. There are currently no cables to download waypoints directly from GPS field devices to computers, so GIS applications, when used, have data entered manually, which is time consuming. Synergies through coalitions with other actors to result in “value addition” to USAID project support KWS works closely in grant implementation with local and international institutions, including KFS, the University of Nairobi, Kenyatta University, Kenya Industrial Research Institute (KIRDI), Kenya Intellectual Property Institute (KIPI), and the National Council of Science and Technology (NCST). It has worked with NGOs like World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), African Wildlife Fund (AWF), the African Conservation Center (ACC), and several community conservancies scattered countrywide. KWS is also in the process of realigning the wildlife policy and law to the requirements of the new constitution. The aim is to strike a balance between the interests of the various stakeholders (i.e., government, community, and the private sector). The resources from the grant contributed to the facilitation of a national stakeholders’ consultative workshop, which culminated in a draft wildlife bill and policy, which has wide acceptance within KWS, although there are still contentious issues. The realignment efforts have also helped Kenya’s adherence to its international commitments to CITES, CBD, and WTO. Sensitization to and effectiveness in bringing constructive change to matters relating to Wildlife Law and Reform The grant supported the policy and legislation reform processes both before and after the promulgation of the new constitution. In 2007, an independent committee held more than 22 workshops, collating views on proposed changes in wildlife policy and law. Experiential learning visits were made to Tanzania, Namibia, South Africa, and Botswana. Based on these activities, draft law and policy were chalked and remain as the main reference documents in the reform process. The new constitution creates a fundamentally different governance structure, and institutional and legal framework for land and associated public affairs management, particularly in protected areas. It also creates the National Land Commission of Kenya whose role is described in Article 67. This imposes a structural reform to reorganize its offices to the administrative needs of the county governments, expected to be effective in 2012. The administrative standing orders of the KWS, especially law enforcement, must also be sensitive to the Bill of Rights as per the constitutional requirements. For a long time there has been a lot of discussion on separation of the management, research, and regulatory aspects within KWS. The decentralization of services to the county governments provides an opportunity for the establishment of county government-level protection, conservation, and management activities. Eventually, wildlife standards, rules, and regulations need to be established nationally and enforced at a county level. This is an area that USAID can help KWS elaborate and operationalize as the devolvement process unfolds. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 58 M&E approaches and systems for adaptive management to inform USAID The KWS implements good monitoring and evaluation, and actively works toward developing new means. As per International Organization for Standardization (ISO) norms under certification, KWS uses the balance score card for performance monitoring, and quantitative and qualitative M&E indicators as per their PMP. Most data is based on real-time indicators such as the number of hectares rehabilitated and number of people trained in the Management Information System (for rangers) (MIST). Co-funding from KWS for all the USAID-funded activities has helped build internal capacity. For example, a total of 1,177 personnel drawn from Security, Community Wildlife Service, and Biodiversity Research & Monitoring divisions in all the eight conservation areas have been trained in MIST. Using the Protected Area Planning Framework (PAPF), the management plan for Olerai conservancy was developed for 2010-2021. The service has also developed guidelines for Performance Management Plans which have been tested in PAs. PMPs for community ranches have been developed by AWF and submitted to NEMA for validation. PROGRAM ELEMENTS - BEST PRACTICES AND LESSONS LEARNED - CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR VALUE ADDITION Contribution toward law and policy review establishment and guidelines for devolved governance The pluralism employed through consultations during the process of developing the draft wildlife bill and policy is a best practice. Although still not passed, the bill’s drafting is at a very advanced stage and realigning it to the constitution has been a much easier task due to the process having been started before the new constitution’s launch. The KWS has also played an active role in the redefining the land tenure policy (community and private) as per the National Land Policy (NLP). The lesson learned here is to stress the importance of maintaining continuity in reform initiatives regarding benefits and responsibilities shared between county and national governments. Since 2009 the country has had a new National Land Policy. The purpose of this Policy is to resolve the myriad of land tenure problems throughout the country. The policy obligates the government to undertake a number of measures that bring Kenyans living in or near forest and wildlife reserves into decision-making processes for managing the sustainable use of those resources. It also obligates the government to reach out to the same people through ways that enable communities to derive economic, social, and cultural benefits from their use. This is a big challenge for KWS as it tries to pave the way for land tenure transition that is cognizant of the guidelines in the NLP land classification (public, community, and private). KWS must promulgate the recognition that wildlife management offers profitable land-use options for communities and landowners under devolved government. Improvement of the management information system through use of the Safaricard The development of the Safaricard is a best practice worthy of emulation countrywide, including within community conservancies. The lesson learned is that infrastructure should be improved with solar power in areas not covered by the main electrical grid. Another lesson learned is that in order to enhance multitasking and add value to the MIST initiative, Personal Digital Assistants (PDA) should be an added accessory for Rangers. Compliance and domestication in international protocols Through the development of strategies for species conservation and bio-prospecting, and strengthening of CITES, KWS has provided leadership to conservation agencies in the country by enhancing the best practice of compliance with international protocols and conventions (e.g., the Convention on Biodiversity [CBD]). Throughout this effort, the best practice has been the formation of an active national bio-prospecting Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 59 monitoring and evaluation committee. This has representation across a diverse range of stakeholders, and will provide leadership for the implementation of the strategy within and outside PAs. It further enables the regulation and monitoring of bio-prospecting through validation and audit systems of prior information consent, certificates of origin, contractual agreements, patents, and licenses. This will provide a road map for the formation of a bio-prospecting authority in the country. A best practice that has emerged from the development of strategies for bio-prospecting and endangered species conservation is the development of a bio-informatics system. This includes a central database on all inventoried taxa in the country, including the documented traditional knowledge associated with bio￾prospecting and species conservation. Improved rangeland ecosystem monitoring and management A best practice has been the development of an invasive species’ (Solanum incum, Datura stranomium, Sena didymobotria, and Sena occidenatalis) control management plan, which involved the development of a range of monitoring means, design, and mapping of restoration plots, and construction of enclosures in the Amboseli National Park. Participatory Protected Area Planning Framework (PAPF) guidelines in community conservancies and nature reserves – the case of Olerai, Kiunga-Boni A best practice is the compilation of a general management plan (GMP) using the PAPF6 guidelines through a process led by KWS. The GMP will help ensure that wildlife conservation and livestock development coexist through zoned land-use planning. The lesson learned is that formalization of the PAPF guidelines into a general management plan template will allow for their application in management plans in other community conservancies, such as in the Kiunga-Marine reserve in Lamu, which has already started the process. Land use plans and easements The current policy and law has no framework for implementing voluntary easements for biodiversity conservation. As a best practice, KWS has proposed various interventions to further land easements for biodiversity conservation; some are proposed in the Olerai general management plan. The proposed Kenya Land Conservation Trust (KLCT) is an option which should be pursued under the new NLP to expand options of conserving wildlife outside PAs. 6 Developed in 2006, PAPF is the current management planning standard for Kenya’s protected areas and their ecosystems. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 60 APPENDIX E. MAU FOREST CONSERVATION PROGRAM (PROMARA) INTRODUCTION The Mau Forest complex (MFC) supports more than four million people downstream of the critical watersheds it spans. Key economic sectors in the region are agriculture and tourism, with an estimated market value of more than KSh 20 billion per year. The Mau catchment has an estimated potential hydropower generation of more than 500 megawatts, more than 40 percent of the total electrical generating capacity of Kenya today. An estimated 35,000 jobs in the tea sector and the livelihoods of 50,000 small farmers, supporting some 430,000 dependents, benefit from the ecological services provided by the MFC. It is one of the most important water towers in the country, an immensely important strategic catchment area, and the source of numerous major rivers that feed into Kenya as well as Lake Victoria to the south and west. Due to its ecological, economic, and trans-boundary significance, it has received intense political attention. Since the onset of colonialism and settler agricultural activities, the Mau complex has experienced continuous and rapid large-scale forest loss over many years. The main threat to the MFC has been associated with deforestation for agriculture and by activities of communities residing in and around the complex, including firewood collection, overstocking livestock, encroachment, illegal logging for timber, and charcoal production. Surrounding communities also depend on the complex for a wide range of fruits, vegetables, and medicinal plants. Conflicts among communities within the Mau are associated with ethnicity and the utilization of forest resources. The MFC has experienced an overall excision and encroachment of 61,600 and 54,700 ha. The ProMara Program emerged from the political process which culminated in the Mau Task Force Report (MTF) and the formation of an intergovernmental task force that created the Interim Coordinating Secretariat (ICS) in 2009. The program’s aim is “for a concerted and well-coordinated, people-centered conservation in the management of private – public land and natural resource in the Mara Mau, for improved catchment conservation and prosperous, sustainable livelihoods.” The program foresaw the need for new and improved agricultural practices that are compatible with the conservation of water resources, so as to increase farm production, contribute to food security, and lessen pressures on forests. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Applicability of project’s original design The 18-month, $7.0m ProMara program was born out of an assessment report carried out in January-April 2010 through the Prosperity, Livelihoods, Conserving Ecosystem PLACE IQC and the Property Rights and Resource Governance Task Order (RRT).While the pluralistic design of the program is still relevant and aspires to address strategic and specific objectives targeting needs in the Mau, the implementation period for such a complex ecosystem is considered too short to sustainably and effectively achieve its short and medium-term objectives. Furthermore, the anticipated inter-phase between design and approval of the successor to the current project potentially poses risks to continuity as well as sustaining beneficiaries’ and other stakeholders’ continued interest. “On track” to meet project’s stated objectives By all accounts, from the PMP and the periodic reports to USAID, the ProMara project is generally well on track to meet its objectives. However, in light of the very ambitious number and nature of the NRM activities, and given that 2012 is an election year, the remaining time frame is considered too short to realize set Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 61 objectives for young activities, most of which are barely beginning to be operational. The program has assembled a highly talented mix of young and experienced professionals and volunteers in NRM, land tenure and legal skills, conflict management, and alternative livelihoods to implement the program activities. In addition, the program has established good collaborative relationships with KARI, KEFRI, EAWS, KFS, and MoA, and uses a pool of locally based organizations and consultants to fill gaps so as to achieve timely implementation of the work plan. Sustainability of project outputs and realism of project’s “exit strategy” Overall, the ProMara team and its partners have made highly commendable efforts to implement an enormous amount of activities. Good communication, teamwork, long working days, high quality, and effective support and advice from partners and collaborators at all levels of implementation stand out as key assets. The ProMara’s ten-year vision is well thought out (i.e., engaging with communities to promote conservation through enterprises that are locally attractive and appropriate). Although there is no parent institution in the project design, and thus no high-level institutional sustainability goal, the project process guarantees higher adoption through CFAs and WRUAs and the private sector. The project has an elaborate process of strengthening CFAs and WRUAs with additional rights, information, and knowledge and they look well positioned to increase their leverage and earning power from the yet to-be-finalized management agreements. The organizational development process aims to achieve a critical mass that is likely to benefit more grassroots communities over the targeted ten-year period. Strengthened enterprises in dairy, honey production, commercial nurseries, and fruit production, among others, have high potential for longer-term support from public or private institutions, which will ensure their sustainability. Course corrections to achieve objectives and exit strategy The ProMara program is delivering on its performance indicators, but is unlikely to achieve its long-term objectives if measures are not taken to avoid anticipated activity delays after the remaining ten-month implementation period is over. The program needs to have a formal collaboration (rather than just with individuals) with lead GoK public agencies such as KEFRI, KFS, and KARI to ensure a more sustainable exit strategy that guarantees institutional memory and continuity of engagement. Synergies through coalitions with other actors to result in “value addition” to USAID project support In the long term, the program may achieve more impact if its ten-year vision is not hampered by contractual delays and it engages lead agencies through mutually structured, inclusive memoranda of understanding. It is important to have one lead agency in government as its parent counterpart and “one-stop shop’’ for resolving government issues encountered during the transition period to a two-tier government system. The program and its partners have, in a very short time, developed mechanisms to work collectively to manage natural resources, particularly forests. However, it is too early to judge whether this collective resolve will translate into sustainable land-use patterns in this otherwise volatile and conflict-prone environment, where the political risks are high. Sensitization to and effectiveness in bringing constructive change to matters relating to ethnic divides, class divides, youth’s productive engagement, and gender equity There have been intense political and resource-use conflicts preceding every general election since the 1980s. Increasingly, competition for natural resources is exacerbated by the intricate ethnic (mainly the Kikuyu, Kalenjin, and Maasai) and political divides among the main political players, as they struggle for land and forests resources in the MFC, culminating in the fight for political supremacy in the area. Working closely with the provincial administration, ProMara has supported peace committees consisting of elders, security Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 62 personnel, and both youth and women to mitigate against threats to peace. These efforts are highly commendable, but they may not be sufficient to provide the threshold intervention required to mitigate against the fundamental differences and over-politicization of the local and national leadership. In the past, this has accentuated ethnic-based conflicts, resulting in lack of focus on the fundamental issues driving conservation of vital natural resources. Mutually supportive impacts in sustainable livelihoods and conservation The ProMara aims to implement activities that can contribute to improved livelihoods and sustainable sources of income for the catchment residents within the Mau. The approach toward the attainment of these project objectives included: i) use of a pluralistic approach to program interventions combining the “typical” NRM aspects of conservation, co-management and livelihoods with resource tenure, equity, conflict management, and broad-based provision of public information and education; ii) paying special attention to empowering disadvantaged groups in society, especially women and youth, without whom conservation and livelihood promotion will increase existing inequalities and be ineffective in producing livelihood security; and iii) combining livelihood activities that promote conservation, are locally attractive and appropriate, and have potential longer-term support mechanisms from public or private institutions. M&E approaches and systems for adaptive management and to inform USAID ProMara uses quantitative and qualitative M&E indicators as per its PMP. Data is based on quantifiers such as trees planted by species, members by gender, hectares planted, and location coordinates which are later plotted using GIS. One of the lessons learned is that some aspects like property rights, obligations, and equitable management of land and forests for environmental goods and services (e.g., biodiversity, soil fertility, climate change mitigation, and adaptation) were much more difficult to define during the short implementation period that the project has been operational. PROJECT ELEMENTS: BEST PRACTICES AND LESSONS LEARNED Best Practice: peace initiatives and governance Peace is a prerequisite to any development process. The program appreciates this, and is working with strengthened peace committees in the inter-ethnic districts of Kuresoi, Molo, and Narok North. These areas have, for a long time, repetitively experienced conflicts prior to general elections, which are mainly driven by ethnicity, competition for political power, and differentiated access to, and control of, natural resources, especially water and forests. The presence of functional peace committees is in itself a best practice, and has cross-sectoral representation, with participants from all ethnic groups and religions, including women and youth. These multi-sectoral peace initiatives have been integrated into the security management of the districts. Recent times have witnessed a reduction in stock theft and forest destruction, resulting in enhanced ethnic harmony among the Kalenjin, Kikuyu, and Maasai. There has been increased consciousness and awareness of security threats among ordinary wananchi (citizens) as well as participatory mapping of the hot spots, such as Kibaara, Sirikwa, Chepkabudi, Kipngatich extension, Kamwaura, and Muchorwe, among others. This has led to homegrown, community-based, security early warning systems. The program has subcontracted the implementation of the legal awareness and literacy activities. Best Practice: Contribution toward restoration/protection of critical forests, catchment, and biodiversity establishment and strengthening of CFA’s and WRUA’s). The 2005 Forest Act establishes ten Forest Conservancies in the country, each of which has a Forest Conservation Committee (FCC). As a best practice, ProMara has, through training, helped strengthen the Mau Conservancy FCC, resulting in improved implementation of its forest governance mandate. At the Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 63 national level, the program facilitated a consultative forum for all the FCCs in order to assist them to better understand and define their modus operandi in forest governance, their relationships with KFS and its Board, and future roles in the devolved governance structure as provided in the new constitution. Although the benefits of these efforts are not yet evident, it is hoped that they will help improve the relationship among KFS, communities, and the private sector, especially in the equitable access and benefit-sharing of forest plantations, which is currently unsustainable and skewed in favor of large-scale operators. The final roles of FCCs will become more clear once the Forests Act is repealed to align with the expectations of a devolved two-tier government. Best Practice: Promotion of alternative livelihoods to reduce pressure on the forest: ProMara’s collaboration with national institutions like KARI, Baraka Agricultural College and HCDA is itself a best practice. It applies several interventions like tree nurseries, woodlot establishment, beekeeping, fruit orchards, and improved Napier grass to individuals and groups. These are expected to widen the livelihood opportunities in the catchment. This is in addition to the promotion of wood energy-saving cooking stoves that aim to reduce pressure in the forest arising from use of firewood. While these interventions are highly commendable and supported by beneficiaries, they must be complimented by sustained public education and vigilance that will deal with immediate threats to forest and catchment conservation like logging, encroachment, and fires. The key findings on alternative livelihood options in the Mau Complex undertaken under the ProMara project include: Tree nursery establishment and management: To alleviate pressure on the natural forests, ProMara is promoting intensive on-farm forestry through the planting of exotic and agro-forestry tree species to reduce natural forest degradation and dependence on forest products. A total of 1250 youths (15 groups) have been trained at the Baraka institute in tree nursery establishment and management skills, including record keeping, seed identification and collection, bed establishment, and seedling marketing. For communities around the Mau, tree planting has not been part of their culture. The project develops business plans for tree nurseries in an effort to change perceptions of the youth toward tree planting and in operating tree nurseries as profitable ventures. The youth CBO has also planted 2000 seedlings for woodlots in three schools facilitated by ProMara. Fruit trees establishment: The program has initiated a drive to have farmers take up orchard establishment as an alternative perennial land use that could generate higher returns per unit area compared to crops currently grown. Following sensitization meetings, field demonstrations, and visits to other established farmers, more than 1100 farmers have planted the improved fruit tree seedlings. The program has supported farmers in buying between 50 and 500 seedlings to plant on their farms. Five groups have been trained in grafting so they can start producing temperate fruits locally. The evaluation visited some of the 12 schools where the program has developed demonstration sites. The plan is to eventually link the farmers to markets and develop value addition processes in the future. Beekeeping: For the communities around the Mau, particularly the Ogiek who reside in the forests, beekeeping has been part of their traditional livelihood. To diversify beekeeping activities away from the forest areas, 36 youth (12 female) from all locations surrounding the Mau forest have received artisan training of trainers (ToT) in modern beehive making. The youth also have plans to engage in honey harvesting, hive maintenance, and product diversification. The program has also conducted field days in all the locations to sensitize and educate the residents of the value of beekeeping. Although the Forestry Act allows the community through the CFA to establish hives within the forest, the increased establishment of hives outside the forest reserve areas will go a long way in preserving the forests and reducing conflict. At the time of Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 64 evaluation, a total of 300 hives had been established among community members in the Silibwet and Kamwaura areas, recording over 60% colonization of the new hives. Livestock fodder establishment: Livestock keeping is a major source of livelihood for the Mau communities, and grazing rights within and outside the forest area have been a major source of conflict. To minimize this, the project is promoting on-farm Napier and feed production. The community selected 16 farmers where Napier clone banks (‘bulking’) would be propagated. ProMara provided planting materials while the Ministry of Livestock provided the technical service and the community provided the labor, although extension services need to be strengthened. More than 20 acres of land is now under the improved new Kakamega 1 and 2 Napier varieties that can withstand frost, are high yielding, and spread easily. Farmers have also received training in silage production. In line with this, ProMara is supporting the multi-purpose co￾operative. While it is still in the formative stages, the co-operative will be able to link the community to the market and also dealers who can supply them with farm inputs. Currently, they are involved in collecting dairy farmers’ milk and delivering it to Brookside dairies in Ol Nguruone. Cooking stoves: The high dependency on firewood and charcoal, which provides 80-90 percent of household energy in rural areas, means that fuel wood will continue to be in high demand. ProMara is working with local communities to reduce the consumption of firewood through the use of the economy cooking stove. Feedback showed that the energy-saving stoves yielded substantial savings in wood fuel and freed more time for women, so they can engage in other income-generating activities. In a cost-sharing measure, ProMara distributes the stoves while the women pay the installation cost of Ksh250 - 500. This is done by experts trained by ProMara. Use of improved stoves has an immediate impact on conservation with less wood fuel demanded by households. These stoves use about 1/3 of the fuel used by the traditional three￾stone stove. Their impact on the welfare of women is enormous and direct, and should be promoted across the USAID NRM project areas. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR VALUE ADDITION TO THE PROMARA PROGRAM To conserve forests, the issue of livelihoods for the adjacent communities has to be addressed. The communities want their rights defined, and access to and sustainable use of forestry resources and revenue￾sharing mechanisms developed. The threats identified to conservation and value addition include access to land and forests, political incitement, access to grazing land, and deforestation. How these are resolved will provide useful lessons learned on value addition interventions for the program. Some of the threats and challenges include:  Suspicion and lack of trust among ethnic groups and among the communities and other commercial interest groups have posed serious challenges and slowed down the implementation of ProMara activities. Development cannot be undertaken in an environment where communities have very little trust in each other. Too much energy, effort, and resources are directed to conflict management and/or resolution.  High birth rates, a large youth population, and poverty put pressure on forestry resources to support livelihoods.  Cultural practices hinder gender mainstreaming and women’s empowerment in some of the Mau communities.  Divisive ethnic interests are based on land tenure, history of occupation, utilization and livelihoods patterns, and NRM impact. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 65  While commercial loggers, tea factories, and politically connected land grabbers see profit motives in the Mau, the affected community sees limited value from land leased or owned by these entities. This disconnect makes it difficult to develop a harmonious approach to conservation in the Mau. Future opportunities for livelihoods to be promoted include: Ecotourism: ProMara has not done much work in exploring the possibility of ecotourism in the Mau Forests Complex. ProMara is linking with other organizations such as PACT that are working with the youth in developing opportunities in ecotourism. For example, one of the CFAs is proposing the establishment of an athletic training camp in one of the forests. Value addition: During meetings with the CFAs, one issue that came up was that of value addition, especially with Irish potatoes, a major crop of the communities living within the Mau complex. Value addition would enable them to preserve potatoes (e.g., crisps) in a way that fetches the farmer a better price. Value addition for honey products also needs to be considered. Carbon credits: To encourage more on-farm tree planting, ProMara is promoting the TIST model, where farmers will be paid for carbon credits (see Appendix G, this report). Herbal medicinal value chain: ProMara has yet to develop a strategy by which the indigenous knowledge of herbal medicines’ value chains within the Mau can be harnessed to support livelihoods among the communities, especially for the Ogiek people, who depend solely on the forests for their livelihoods. Best Practice: Promoting enterprises that are locally attractive and appropriate Conflict in the Mau is over the use and sharing of resources. The ProMara model of engaging with communities to promote conservation through enterprises that are locally attractive and appropriate ensures their sustainability. Enterprises such as dairy, honey production, commercial nurseries, and fruit production have potential for longer-term support from public or private institutions, which will ensure their sustainability. Diversifying livelihood opportunities for the Mau communities will reduce the overdependence and pressure on land and forestry resources. As on-farm activities grow, however, ProMara needs to explore and expand opportunities for value addition and markets to ensure that the communities are able to derive decent livelihoods from these activities. Best Practice: Training of Trainers (ToT) The ProMara approach of training women and youth through their CBO networks in collaboration with Baraka Institute is a good practice. This ensures that skills will remain locally available long after the project. Best Practice: The Mara Outreach Center (MOC) The establishment of the MARA outreach center is a particularly innovative intervention that not only brings program services closer to the people but also encourages youth and women to fully embrace program activities through information and communication technology (ICT) and community-dialogue platforms. The MOC has hosted several training and capacity-building activities, thus reducing costs. It is centrally located and well equipped with relevant resource materials, and has plans of opening sub-MOCs in the hinterland. While the establishment is highly commendable, lessons learned elsewhere from similar projects should be taken into account. First, that sustainability is crucial and therefore, in the long run, MOC should be ensconced within a national institution and future activities should be aware of the fact that youth empowerment is a much greater challenge and requires a holistic approach. Youths interviewed indicated interest in income that reduces their dependence on their parents. The program should consider partnering Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 66 the MoC with credible institutions nationally and internationally that have successfully addressed youth empowerment in an innovative manner. Kenya Forest Policy and the KFS By establishing and strengthening CFAs through the development of forestry management plans and agreements to implement them, ProMara has enhanced the implementation of the 2005 Forests Act. Cross￾cutting issues have been addressed through formation of a CFA alliance, which has helped bring communities together around forests. Some of the outstanding issues identified include benefit sharing of plantation forests, establishment of ecotourism facilities, and supporting community scouts to protect the forest. Biodiversity conservation The overall impact of the program is supportive of the short and long-term of goal protecting the biodiversity of this critical ecosystem. The program has collated the biodiversity threats, which will be addressed once the CFAs and WRUAs are fully operational. The initiatives on alternative livelihoods are also expected to reduce biodiversity threats, which in itself is a best practice. Adoption of farm forestry plans The development of the CFA framework, though still at the formative stage, is in itself a best practice. The CFA have worked to form an alliance to address cross-cutting issues. The program has also worked to strengthen the roles and operation of the Mau FCC and others in the country. While this effort is commendable, it is still too early determine the impact of these efforts. Human resources ProMara has assembled a highly skilled team that balances professional and ethnic interests, and is considered equal to the task of implementing the program. This is a best practice. Any skills gaps are filled by collaborators from KEFRI, KARI, Baraka, and KFS, among others, on an ad-hoc basis. For sustainability, it would be helpful to draw up an MoU with these institutions to guarantee sustainability beyond the life of the program. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 67 APPENDIX F. ABERDARES CONSERVATION PROJECT (THE GREEN BELT MOVEMENT – GBM) INTRODUCTION The Green Belt Movement’s (GBM) Aberdares Conservation Project is a project-driven set of activities with tree nursery groups (TNG) as the underlying unit of social organization and centerpiece of community-based collective action. It is an active grassroots social enterprise, led mainly by women, to improve the status of women as well as natural resource management. Motivational workshops give rise to TNGs, who then host green volunteers (GV). GVs plant tree seedlings raised in TNG nurseries and are reimbursed by the GBM at 5KSh for each planted tree after verification of survival. GVs plant trees on private land and increasingly on public forest lands. TNGs also form a base from which the GBM introduces other income-generating activities. The GBM sees tree planting as a platform to train and support its members to start kitchen gardens, rain water harvesting, soil conservation, crop diversification, and recently, nature-based enterprises. TNGs are often linked to other development actors, and TNG members are part of comparatively new community forestry schemes on gazette forest land. A minimum of five TNGs may form a “network,” which may register as a CBO. The GBM aspires to bring together several CBOs to register as a society, which the GBM aspires to configure as a business entity. The GBM brokers projects for TNGs and financially supports them for an undefined period until they become institutionally mature. With the shift to afforestation on public lands, the GBM did not change its basic (5 KSh) incentive structure. Data from the GBM itself show that it cost TNG KSh 43 in seedlings and labor and GBM KSh 23 per tree planted. The amount of KSh 5 paid by the GBM is meager in comparison. According to the GBM, keeping this figure at KSh 5 has enabled them to undertake mass tree-planting at low cost. The GBM capacity-building program focuses on supporting income-generating activities, primarily for women, that build skills in food security, food processing, marketing, beekeeping, and tree planting. To date, the GBM has done little in this area, as it is awaiting the completion of the ongoing business plan. The plan is expected to generate a list of possible enterprises that can be promoted within the GBM’s operational framework. The study is also expected to prepare a road map on how the GBM can develop market access strategies for different groups to implement honey production, fruit products, and ecotourism. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Applicability of project’s original design Project design reflects the GBM’s template approach in that it applies to most of its project-driven afforestation ventures. While design was well intended, it would be easier to track progress if the project log frame and resulting monitoring structure were further clarified. “On track” to meet project’s stated objectives The project is generally on track to meet its objectives. Full restoration of ecological functions should be a highest order goal, not an objective; it is beyond the timeframe of a relatively short project. At the time of the NRM evaluation, the project was just starting to undertake steps toward improving long-term economic viability of tree planting. A thorough rationalization of this is very much still required. Sustainability of project outputs and realism of project’s “exit strategy” The test of the sustainability of project outputs has more to do with the durability of local institutions than afforestation. The institutional sustainability of TNGs and their apex bodies (e.g., networks and societies) is Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 68 inherently linked to their financial sustainability. Both are in question, and thus the GBM’s exit strategy is equally vague. The GBM well understands the need for institutionally mature, stand-alone TNGs (and CFAs). However, a concrete strategy toward this end is not clear. Course corrections to achieve objectives and exit strategy As part of the USAID grant, GBM recently commenced an exercise to develop a business plan. GBM should pursue this with deliberate speed. The evaluation team advised GBM to link the economic viability of TNGs to that of GBM as a whole, perhaps through a device for core GBM funds to accrue. Synergies through coalitions with other actors to result in “value added” for having availed USAID project support The GBM skillfully brings together public, non-government, and private partners into its organizational afforestation model. It also links TNGs and individuals within TNGs to other development actors to add value to the core TNG unit of social organization. Sensitization to and effectiveness in bringing constructive change to matters relating to ethnic divides, class divides, youth’s productive engagement, and gender equity The GBM’s very foundation addresses the nexus of social inequities and imbalanced natural resource use. Both men and women asserted their views within the groups the evaluation team visited. Mutually supportive impacts in sustainable livelihoods and conservation Apart from higher order conservation objectives, grown trees have economic returns. Recognizing that the benefits from farmers’ land flow from firewood, soil conservation, fruits, fodder, and building materials, the GBM plans to enter the carbon market trade so that its members can receive economic incentives to plant trees. M&E approaches and systems for adaptive management and to inform USAID Improvements are needed in both project formulation and M&E practices. The GBM has started plotting geo-spatial locators of outputs. Third-party validation of afforestation outputs would increase credibility. PROJECT ELEMENTS: BEST PRACTICES AND LESSONS LEARNED Motivational force The GBM’s momentum is driven by the charismatic impulse of its founder. Staff and members alike also share this motivational force, characterized by broader environmental and human values. That this force carries the “movement” must be deemed a best practice, one that is perhaps unique in the country. The GBM succeeds in mobilizing some of the more remote and socio-economically disadvantaged segments of society. Multi-partnerships The GBM is opportunistic and resourceful. It has succeeded in bringing together a plethora of public, non￾government, and private partners ranging from specialized agencies like the Kenya Forest Service to town councils, churches, schools, and water authorities. This orchestration of resources and partnerships is an active best practice. Social benefits of the GBM GBM members plant trees primarily because of the social benefits derived: networking; training and capacity building; scholarships (bursaries) for their children; and linkages with other NGOs, donors, and the government. TNGs receive their token payment from the GBM in a large lump sum. This generates Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 69 investment capital and enables members to undertake other income-generating activities; for example, dairy, poultry, shops, and processing. Nurseries sell plants at market prices to other stakeholders, including individuals, county councils, the private sector, and institutions. The GBM also provides in-kind lending to its networks to start income-generating activities; for example, beehives, harvesting accessories, ovens, and vegetable driers. Loans in capital goods are paid back in the form of tree seedlings. TNGs also engage in many other activities that are self-driven, such as revolving capital accumulation and award (“merry go round”), and exchanging seeds. This strategy is meant to encourage mass tree-planting. The lesson learned is that TNGs and the core business of afforestation offer a social platform from which many economic activities can take place. Violent conflict In the Aberdares, large livestock for dairy and small meat necessitate access to grazing land; this commodity becomes increasingly scarce in the dry season. Conflicts over grazing access arise. In some instances, the GBM has succeeded in reducing violent conflict in forests managed by CFAs through promotion of cut-and￾carry ground fodder collection, which is a valuable lesson learned. Continuity of TNGs During the evaluation, some TNGs expressed their intent to remain together as a functional group after the GBM withdraws its active support. These groups have been supported by the GBM for 15 and 16 years, respectively. Other TNGs expressed that they would remain intact, but with activities at a much lower level. The lesson learned is that under the GBM’s organizational-afforestation model, it takes a relatively long time to achieve viable institutional maturity. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR VALUE ADDITION Paradigm shift toward economic rationalization of tree production and planting, and financial sustainability There are a number of inter-related factors that stem from the GBM seemingly not having rooted the program and TNGs in sound financial sustainability practices: No monetization of tree planting value chain. Economic rationalization of self-sustaining fair market value for tree seedlings, their planting, and protection has not been incorporated across the fabric of the program. However, the natural tendency of TNGs’ members to splinter into individual self-interested factions is demonstrated in the fact that within nurseries each member manages his/her own small patch of seedlings. Lack of financial sustainability of the TNGs could undermine the foundation of the program. Disparity in seedling pricing: TNGs are free to grow exotic or indigenous tree plants and may sell to any customer; however, there is wide disparity of payment rates to TNGs. The GBM pays TNGs a stipend of KSh 5 per tree for the entire chain of seedling production, planting, and survival. TNGs often do not receive payments for the trees until two years later. In contrast, the KFS paid one TNG KSh 25 per seedling immediately at the nursery gate. TNG members openly complained of the two-year time lag for payment. Oversupply of growing stock: There is presently a wide gap between the quantity of stock grown (very high) and the GBM’s ‘demand’ (comparatively low). There is a large surplus, and nurseries were observed to have substantial stocks of over-mature plants. This is wasteful and could undermine confidence. On the positive side, the GBM is in the process of developing a business plan for TNGs and their apex societies. The evaluation team advised the GBM to take this opportunity to address economic rationalization of tree production in addition to adopting business models to create income-generating activities. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 70 Toward improved M&E Third-party validation: The GBM would benefit from the credibility gained through third-party validations of recorded numbers of trees planted and survived. According to the GBM, overall, some 47 million and nearly 1 million trees in the present USAID-funded grant have been planted and survived. While the GBM is now conducting an internally organized full count validation, the principle of “additionality” will be hard to realize in the absence of recorded baseline data. The appreciation and application of this principle will become important as the GBM embarks on carbon marketing. Measurable environmental indicators: Integrity and clarity of monitoring indicators and data - and its interpretation - could be better achieved by distinguishing anecdotal results from science-based determination of causal links that arise from tree planting – e.g., improved filtration, re-emergence of springs, restoration of first or second-order streams’ balanced hydrographs, and water quality. Donors would be advised not to populate PMPs with indicators that suggest changes in hydrological regimes without ascertaining that a grant recipient has the means to genuinely gauge and objectively establish causal links. Institutional maturity: Institutional maturity benchmarking of TNGs and their apex bodies would enable the GBM to track a broad and central theme of GBM’s purpose. Some groups were observed to have been supported by the GBM for 15 and 16 years without an expressed “exit strategy.” A certain time-bound frame for institutional maturity would subject both the GBM and a TNG to more rigor. Rational log frames: In the GBM’s project proposal and other narrative outputs, there are jumbles of run￾on lists from which the reader cannot distinguish input from output from result from impact. More clarity is needed in the construction of their monitoring framework, the attribution of discrete activities to discrete objectives, and the resulting higher order results and impacts. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 71 APPENDIX G. THE INTERNATIONAL SMALL GROUP AND TREE PLANTING PROGRAM (TIST) INTRODUCTION The International Small Group and Tree Planting Program has been working since 2004 in the broader Mt. Kenya region in afforestation and sustainable agriculture. TIST, moreover, creates a communication and administrative structure that also addresses health (including HIV/AIDS), education, and nutrition issues. TIST expects to provide long-term revenue through sales of carbon credits. TIST is a robust sustainable development effort of the Institute for Environmental Innovation (I4EI) and Clean Air Action Corporation (CAAC). It works with smallholder and subsistence farmer groups of 6-12 members to plant trees in order to improve livelihoods and address local, regional, and global environmental issues such as deforestation, biodiversity loss, and adaptation and vulnerability to climate change. TIST is designed to harness a new revenue stream from the international voluntary carbon market through which to provide long-term income for farmers by payment for ecological services (PES), and which seeks to be self-funding. Working with more than 7,155 registered groups consisting of about 51,593 members, the grant has enabled TIST to enhance biodiversity conservation through landscape-level afforestation. The total tree count as of 2010 was at 5.84 million, of which 477,221 (8%) are indigenous. More than 100 different woody perennial species planted across the landscape include Grevillea robusta, Eucalyptus spp., Juniperus procera, Azediratchta indica,Croton megalocarpus, Olea Africana, Casuarinas equistifolia and Jacaranda mimosifolia. TIST embraces low-cost business practices in a horizontal organizational structure. TIST in Kenya has a fairly young leadership council consisting of nine members, of which four are women, of various professional backgrounds. A lean organizational structure is a major strength. The USAID-funded program in Kenya aims to:  reduce vulnerability to climate change through adaptation using sustainable woodlots and improved agricultural techniques;  address the need for clean energy by adopting more fuel efficient cooking stoves;  improve rural livelihoods with i) secure economic benefits from carbon sequestration, ii) increased crop yields through conservation farming and sustainable land management and iii) sustainable and efficient use of wood fuels;  improve methods of monitoring the project’s effects on biodiversity, soil, and water conservation; and  reduce pressure on natural forests through payments for ecological services (PES). SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Applicability of project’s original design The design of the TIST project is timely and very relevant for targeted biodiverse areas of Kenya. It has adaptive management in place and is self-correcting. Its core design and approach will remain applicable for some years to come. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 72 “On track” to meet project’s stated objectives The TIST project is well on track to meet its objectives. It brings an innovative and well-structured approach to afforestation and to improving livelihoods while addressing improved NRM and biodiversity conservation objectives. Sustainability of project outputs and realism of project’s “exit strategy” TIST members’ contribution to ecological sustainability of the broader Mt. Kenya region is inherent in project objectives. The project is exploring ways for groups and clusters to become institutionally sustainable, though this effort is still in its formative stages. TIST’s payment mechanism to members assures a certain measure of financial sustainability of project outputs. The question of TIST’s exit strategy is not entirely relevant because its stated intention is to expand its coverage in Kenya. As such, the Mission deems TIST a very worthy and exemplary vehicle for USAID Kenya to accomplish its SO 5. Course corrections to achieve objectives and exit strategy The TIST program will accomplish its objectives through its own adaptive management, without any prescribed course corrections. The project, however, in the long term, may achieve more impact by chiefly adopting the formulation of simple farm forestry plans for each member and which are drawn up by trained NRM professionals. Synergies through coalitions with other actors to result in “value addition” to USAID project support The TIST reaches out opportunistically to form partnerships with state and non-state actors to add value to its USAID grant. Sensitization to and effectiveness in bringing constructive change to matters relating to ethnic divides, class divides, youth’s productive engagement, and gender equity The TIST works with the poor and well-off alike as well as with woman-run households. It presently works mostly with private landholders and, as such, indirectly works with youth. The latter working relationship is poised to expand with TIST’s recent embarking into CFAs on the basis of its signing an MOU with the KFS. Women make up about 40% of TIST small group members and are represented even more as Quantifiers, Trainers, TIST Social Entrepreneurs, and on TIST's Leadership Council. Mutually supportive impacts in sustainable livelihoods and conservation The aims of the tree-planting program are closely aligned with the objective of promoting self-sufficiency in communities, and the means to reach both goals are mutually supportive. As well as greatly contributing to TIST's reforestation goals, local tree nursery owners are able to diversify their sources of income, and the farmers who were interviewed reported that they were now earning more on tree sales than on agricultural produce per unit of land and time engagement. Without contributing financially to nurseries, the TIST business model limits its intervention to training in cost-effective, sustainable nursery operations, and although business plan development would be a constructive addition to the training program, the operation has already successfully resulted in the present estimated stock of 4.5 million saplings. M&E approaches and systems for adaptive management and to inform USAID TIST’s innovative M&E system stresses quantitative outputs (and some qualitative inputs, such as photos of groves), and is ideally suited to the largely quantities-driven nature of USAID’s PMP. Data is uploaded by Quantifiers in near ‘real time’: e.g., trees planted by species, members by gender, hectares planted, location coordinates which later are plotted on Google Maps – all of which are examinable in TIST’s open, transparent web portal. The entirety of this M&E system is deemed a vigorous best practice. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 73 PROJECT ELEMENTS: BEST PRACTICES AND LESSONS LEARNED Cost efficiency The TIST business model has, at its core, along with its guiding principles of honesty and accuracy, the standard of cost efficiency and effectiveness, which is diligently followed through all its field operations. The adherence to its principles is observable, for example, in its decision to not maintain permanent field offices nor vehicles, nor to publish glossy PR materials. This maintenance of low operational costs enables TIST to leverage its $7 million USAID grant against a projected $13 million from eventual profits that flow from tree carbon stocks. The Mission deems this cost efficiency as a very robust best practice. Farmers themselves invest in their forest groves with very little financial capital; e.g., outlays only for forest tree seedlings. For the remainder of their forest grove planting and tending, they invest only their time (so-called ‘sweat equity’). Sustainable incentive payments to augment forest and environmental values TIST awards a very modest stipend for each tree planted by a member. This presently amounts to KSh 1.6 for exotic species per quarter and an additional KSh 1 for indigenous species, which generally grow more slowly. Incentive payments are drawn from CAAC’s own pool of corporate funds, themselves to be renewed when profits from carbon profits materialize. The purpose of this stipend incentive is to attract a farmer to commit to tree planting. Later – once measurable carbon stocks accumulate – and once TIST amalgamates many groves into a program development document (PDD), the combined carbon is marketed and payments are effected through MPESA, a phone-based money transfer platform, to groups and thence to members. Neither the stipend nor the carbon payments represent very substantial payments. However, they purposely tip the balance to influence a given tree grower to first plant, and then to have his/her trees remain in the program for the given 30-year minimum (or 60 years, as TIST exacts) contract period. The real and more substantial benefits are forest product and environmentally related: e.g., tree fruits, fuel wood from thinnings and prunings, poles from commercial thinnings, timber from commercial thinnings or at harvest, wind breaks, and aesthetics. The danger is that a farmer would withdraw his/her trees due to premature clear￾cutting, for example, because of short-term financial necessity that might outweigh the much smaller but longer term carbon financial gain. Nonetheless, TIST’s incentive payments are deemed a best practice that further global environmental interests and forest product development interests of individual tree growers. Leveraging of CAAC’s own funds CAAC’s business model to implement the TIST is not dependent on donor funds. Rather, CAAC has its own pool of corporate funds to begin paying the initial stipends. This is deemed a best practice as it enables TIST to leverage donor monies, which it then uses to buffer risks through more intensive trainings and seminars, and to advance the program much more quickly over a much broader geographical area. Creative use of available technology TIST has erected a simple but effective means to upload its field monitoring data cost efficiently through hand held ‘palm’ devices (‘smart’ phones with digital cameras), and ways to make payments to members who build on the already innovative platform of MPESA. This also enables wide geographic coverage through platforms which are easy to understand and navigate, and are already available in Kenya. The program makes use of the same palm devices to send out information related to tree growing to its staff, and thus manages a mostly paperless work environment. The entirety of these simple and inexpensive IT means are a very creative best practice that is worthy of emulation in rural areas. Once uploaded, data becomes openly available on TIST’s web page, in conformance with TIST’s guiding principles of transparency and accuracy. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 74 Improved stoves – efficiency, sustainability, and health In substitution of the traditional three-stone stove, 135 TIST households have adopted stoves made from locally available clay on the Lorena Rocket model. User feedback confirmed that the utilization of improved stoves consumed half the amount of wood required to fuel an open fire. The cooking stoves are made using mud from Western and Central Kenya and are then built by local stove-builders. Not only do they reduce wood consumption notably and are produced within the region and are sustainable, but they also contribute to reducing health risks associated with living in a smoke-saturated environment. The multiple benefits offered by the installation of improved stoves unequivocally defines their adoption as a best practice, and promotion of their adoption in greater numbers of households is highly recommended. Kenya Forest Policy and the KFS TIST’s promotion of tree planting is helping Kenya’s goal of realizing 10% tree cover as mandated by its Constitution and Forest Policy. TIST has succeeded in formalizing a signed MOU with the KFS that specifies the percentage of carbon payments for trees planted on gazetted forests to tree planters, KFS, and the given CFA. The fact that this apportioning is formalized is a best practice in the broader environment in which presently the forest financial (and in kind) benefit splits between KFS (and County Councils and other holders of forest) and CFAs are individually negotiated for a given forest. Biodiversity conservation Over 100 species of trees and woody plants overall are promoted to be grown in the more than 2,000 private nurseries from which TIST-participating farmers purchase their tree seedlings; this diversity is of itself a best practice. The program awards a higher incentive payment for indigenous tree species, and even more for indigenous trees planted within riparian zones (100 m. from the high-water mark). About 50% of trees planted are reported to be indigenous species, which is very notable against the backdrop of the well-known quicker growth of contentious exotic species. Micro-credit and financial autonomy Agreements between the Catholic Relief Fund and TIST have yet to be rendered operational; however, once initiated, the scheme will train TIST members in the technical aspects of CRS Savings and Internal Lending Communities (SILC), who will then pass on their knowledge to fellow cluster members. The training program will cover SILC formation, finance, and fund management. This formula will permit members to exploit their own limited financial resources to full potential – as savings accumulate, the pooled capital will increase, allowing for micro loans to be granted by the group to individual members. An emergency fund for events such as illness of the family income-generator can also be set up. Implementation of the scheme (foreseen for November – December of the current year) will draw on the combined strengths of both TIST and CRS. Monitored by CRS, the scheme is definable as a best practice in that it supplies the knowledge base for the creation of autonomous intra-community funding and finance management. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR VALUE ADDITION TO THE TIST PROGRAM Adoption of farm forestry plans The Mission observed some – but far from all – groves which appeared to have basic silvicultural issues. The TIST program would benefit from the making of simple farm forestry development plans for each afforestation venture. These would begin with an evaluation of a given owner’s land - e.g., site fertility, soil regime, light availability, disease prevalence, and riparian considerations - and the available planting niches. This, done together with the owner, would take in consideration the owner’s goals of tree planting (e.g., fuel- Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 75 wood, timber, tree fruits, and wind breaks). These goals would determine choice of species, planting configurations, and future management choices. Human resources Forestry plans and their follow-up require skilled human resources. The TIST program makes efforts to train its staff and member farmers, and this is very commendable. However, Kenya has a wealth of unemployed forestry graduates and NRM intermediate degree holders, and this type of staff, preferably locally hired, could in the future form the core of an innovative cadre of professionals in the private sector; a direction that Kenya is likely to take with the devolution of forest management to the county level soon to come. Technical forestry resources for staff and nursery growers TIST’s newsletter is of high quality and it offers articles on tree planting and benefits. The program occasionally acquires bulletins and printed documents from other development actors, and this keeps TIST’s costs down. Despite this, the program would benefit if its staff, nursery growers, and even members had access to basic silviculture and nursery technical information. This need not be in hard copy but could take advantage of TIST’s existing and innovative software platform. This information could be made available on the palm devices, could offer species-wise silviculture (e.g., light demanding vs. shade tolerant, site, disease issues, and management [e.g., coppice, pruning, timber bole development]) and tree propagation (e.g., seed recalcitrance, seed treatment, seed storage and longevity, vegetative propagation, nursery disease) information. Integration of WRUAs and tree growers Water Resource User Associations aim to develop Sub-Catchment Management Plans (SCMP) that include riparian and watershed protection plantings. WRUA members often are also CFA members. Since TIST’s members plant mostly on private land at the present (though the program is reaching out to gazetted forest lands) TIST could add value by reaching out to WRUAs to coordinate tree planting locations with SCMPs. “Indigenizing” TIST and peripheral functions I4EI already takes measures to shift CAAC’s operations to Kenya. Kenya has a wealth of human resources in ICT and NRM and could be poised to be a regional leader in PES ventures. This is very commendable and should be encouraged while respecting CAAC’s for-profit configuration – a structure that allows it to expend its own funds for initial incentive stipends, as it did while starting in Tanzania. Third-party verification and validation functions should equally be encouraged as start-ups in Kenya; however, TIST in its present form may not be able to do this. It must hire third parties for validation and thus training Kenyan third parties would be a conflict of interest. USAID would do well to award another group, such as the Katoomba Group, a mandate to develop this. Risk of early withdrawal from the program The 30-year minimum criterion for a tree grower contract is driven by CDM protocols. These were not written with fast-growing trees in mind. Some of the species that TIST-participating farmers have been choosing mature into saw timber stems on good sites much more quickly than thirty years (e.g., Eucalyptus spp. and Grevillea robusta). TIST is a young program in Kenya and there is an inherent risk to CAAC’s business model if growers clear cut before their contract period matures. This represents a potential challenge to the program’s financial sustainability. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 76 APPENDIX H. SECURING RIGHTS TO LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES FOR BIODIVERSITY AND LIVELIHOODS IN KIUNGA￾BONI-DODORI AREAS OF KENYA (SECURE) INTRODUCTION The SECURE project aims to pilot principles of Kenya’s new National Land Policy (NLP) by promoting efficient, sustainable, and equitable land use in the broader Lamu northern coastal region of Kenya. It is implemented by the Land Reform Transformation Unit (LRTU) of the GoK Ministry of Lands (MoL), with technical facilitation by Tetra Tech ARD. SECURE works in collaboration with the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS), Kenya Forest Service (KFS), civil society organizations (CSOs), and targeted pilot communities. SECURE is part of USAID’s global Property Rights and Resource Governance (PRRG) Project, and is in support of the MoL’s Land Reform Support Program (LRSP II), itself an initiative with the Development Partners Group on Land (DPGL) of which USAID is a partner. The SECURE project contributes to the LRSP II by undertaking a land tenure demonstration intervention on the northeast coast. The SECURE Project also contributes to the land reform section of Reform Agenda 4 of the Kenya National Accord and Reconciliation Act. The project began in September 2009 with an 18-month duration, and has had a two-month, no-cost extension and a 12-month cost extension. It is currently planned to end on April 30, 2012. The project’s three inter-related objectives are to:  Improve land and natural resource tenure security and reduce conflict over natural assets;  improve management of protected and biologically sensitive areas; and  disseminate lessons learned to inform the implementation of Kenya’s National Land Policy (NLP) and the development of other relevant policies and laws. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Applicability of project’s original design The original design was on key to address very critical and timely issues of land and resource tenure, coupled with improved NRM that depends on both. The design was flawed by perhaps not anticipating the degree of resistance to change; however, the applicability of the project effort itself remains very much intact – the more so for having started a process that should by rights be completed. “On track” to meet project’s stated objectives Unless there is a decisive reversal of the present inaction by the GoK MoL to actualize the project’s Component 1, the project will not meet all its objectives. Its Component 2 of improved NRM through co￾management will also be compromised. Sustainability of project outputs and realism of project’s “exit strategy” If community land tenure were achieved, the sustainable base of improved NRM would be reached. The project presently has no formal exit strategy, as it is hoped that a four-month cost extension will be granted. This cost extension proposal is now being prepared for submission. SECURE is mindful of strategies to enhance sustainability of some of its efforts in the region: Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 77 1. Synergies with the Kibodo Trust and other partners in the Lamu area who can continue to advocate for land and resource rights of indigenous communities (note however: the Mission found that Kibodo Trust is not confident of it alone being able to assert a strong enough voice to prompt the MoL into action) 2. Institutional strengthening of NGOs and CBOs to build their capacity as effective interlocutors to engage the GoK, the private sector, and development projects 3. Promoting increased knowledge of land rights and conservation Course corrections to achieve objectives and exit strategy USAID would further SECURE’s ability to achieve its objectives by asserting a higher order good governance message to the GoK, thereby prompting the MoL to take decisive action as envisioned in the project concept. Synergies through coalitions with other actors to result in “value added” for having availed USAID project support SECURE has skillfully brought public, non-government, and CBO partners into its activities. Its synergistic efforts together with the Kibodo Trust have especially been fruitful, as this body will remain to further NRM co-management aims. Sensitization to and effectiveness in bringing constructive change to matters relating to ethnic divides, class divides, youth’s productive engagement, and gender equity SECURE is highly attuned to and has worked effectively with sensitivities and values of indigenous and Bejoun communities with different histories and coping strategies while acknowledging the class and power divides between the Lamu region and mainland Kenya. Mutually supportive impacts in sustainable livelihoods and conservation The fabric of the project rests on attaining sustainable livelihoods – based on land and resource tenure – toward a higher biodiversity conservation goal. The base and premise of land and resource tenure not being achieved will likely seriously compromise lasting biodiversity conservation. M&E approaches and systems for adaptive management and to inform USAID The project has introduced its version of the ‘Threat Reduction Assessment’ (TRA) approach to monitoring biodiversity trends. The quantitative output orientation of its PMP, as with most NRM projects under review by the Mission, does not serve project adaptive management well, nor is it likely to further adaptive course correction backstopping by USAID. PROJECT ELEMENTS: BEST PRACTICES AND LESSONS LEARNED Cutting-edge means to redress chronically divisive land issues The Community Land Rights Recognition (CLRR) model is a major milestone of the project. It is a process by which district (i.e., county in the future) MoL staff may go about formalizing the transfer of title of heretofore government land to community land as per the Constitution and the NLP. The CLRR was created with thorough and exhaustive consultations and discussions with groups at various levels, ranging from community, government agencies, MoL, CSOs, CBOs, and other interested parties. The model is ‘cutting edge’ and a clear best practice in that it seeks to redress deep and chronically contentious land allocation issues by capitalizing on the progressive NLP and the 2010 Constitution – themselves historically significant. The model has undergone an independent legal analysis which has concluded it is within the law. A next step of a budgeted CLRR implementation plan is complete, and the on-the-ground process is matched by the Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 78 project’s output of a community-level guide that local people may use to constructively engage the MoL during the CLRR steps. Monitoring change in biodiversity Pilot communities, MoL, and project TA staff alike are all cognizant of the fact that co-management agreements between legal corporate community-level bodies and GoK agencies must first be underpinned by community-level security of land tenure. In advance of tenure clarity, the project has nonetheless begun preparations to assist communities and GoK agencies toward eventual agreements (e.g., in Reserve management plans and community forestry agreements). The project’s second component of improving management in protected and biologically sensitive areas is interrelated with its first component, that of securing tenure and mitigating conflict. Biodiversity (improvement) change has to be objectively measured; however, project time and resources precluded the ‘classical’ approach. Instead, the project opted to gauge the reduction of threats to biodiversity through developing participatory fields of investigation that consider social, economic, legal, and administrative factors (e.g., illegal land allocations, illegal logging, and change in public awareness). This cost-effective and participatory best practice, called Threats Reduction Assessment (TRA), like the CLRR model, can be replicated elsewhere in Kenya by fine tuning the fields of observation to local conditions. Tenure underpins co-management A steadfast lesson learned is that land tenure security is a pre-condition for community co-management of adjacent protected areas. Furthermore, the management of land and natural resources on newly designated community lands will require the co-management of government agencies and/or NGOs. Long-term commitment The work of the SECURE Project requires long-term support and commitment, directed mainly at transforming institutions and bringing to life new systems for assigning resource rights and responsibilities among communities, resource agencies, and other stakeholders, in a rights devolution framework. The Mission deems this lesson learned a worthy and practical goal, and strongly recommends that this be a focus of USAID investment over the coming years. USG diplomacy to catalyze the GoK A related lesson learned is that the MoL itself will not act to implement SECURE’s goals; the MoL’s recalcitrance requires a strong push, the type originating from the highest level the U.S. Mission can muster to its counterpart GoK level. The LRTU does not enjoy support within the MoL, nor has it authority over district/county level MoL functionaries. The northern Kenya coast is a politically sensitive region and now - the project having raised awareness and expectations – has become a certain cutting-edge ‘test case’ at a historically important moment. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR VALUE ADDITION The challenges to SECURE’s efforts are well documented in its revised SOW and periodic reports. The land allocation and speculation situation, against the backdrop of historical injustices and illegalities, will likely worsen as the construction of the Lamu Port looms nearer. Vested interests within the GoK profit from delays in actualizing the intent of the NLP, or worse, will continue to profit from its translation into ineffective legislation. The clearest opportunity for SECURE is beyond its own remit (i.e., that USAID continue its support at the very least through its implementing the CLRR process in its pilot areas, coupled with catalyzing the MoL to carry out its mandate under the NLP). Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 79 APPENDIX I. SUMMARY OF FIELD DATA COLLECTION PROTOCOLS The questions below illustrate the lines of investigation and types of questions asked in the field during key informant and focus group discussions. Design of enterprise ventures and types of enterprises:  Determine the origin of the initiative/enterprise, year, ownership structure, number of persons involved, and operational framework.  Who are the target beneficiaries/users of the services offered by the enterprise, and how does this relate to issues of markets, quality, etc.?  Was the business model well-articulated within the project itself? Is there a written business plan?  What linkages does the business/enterprise have with the area of conservancy within which it operates?  Is the business model well understood by the grantee/vendor (business person)?  What is the level of investment involved, and have the capital items been depreciated in the business plan?  Is the grantee/vendor managing the business well? Is the business profitable?  Has the project benefited from any other source of financing other than the USAID-funded project current being evaluated?  How – if at all – does the enterprise offset pressures on natural resources, either directly or indirectly? Training and skills development:  Determine the skills development for community members, grantee/vendors in every aspect of enterprise development, such as business skills, technology and enterprise operations, since the community members provide the social capital for sustainability of the respective enterprises.  What is the presence of competent technical staff to support enterprise development and technical skills transfer?  What collaboration/linkages are in place with relevant government departments? Governance and gender:  What kind of governance structures have been put in place to assure proper management and accountability for the grants and benefit of the targeted communities/grantees?  Does the type of enterprise discriminate against or favor one gender over the other? Microcredit:  Has the enterprise/community experienced problems with access to finance? What are the weaknesses/strengths of the present system, if any?  Determine the efficiency of the credit delivery mechanism put in place, as well as its structure, terms and conditions as they relate to the attainment of the overall project goals.  Establish the sustainability of the credit systems in terms of institutional and management abilities. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 80 Outputs and impacts:  Are there social benefits that you can attribute to the enterprise/business?  Has the enterprise contributed to the increase of incomes within the community? How? Explain.  What has been the impact of the project on the improvement of the livelihood of the targeted community/grantee and how has it affected lives and the community.  In your view, what aspects of this collaboration have worked well and why? Are there aspects of this collaboration that have not worked well and why?  Would you suggest ways in which the program can be adjusted/re-oriented to better address the needs of the business community in the conservancy area?  What political, social, cultural, and economic obstacles exist that affect the activity?  How best do you think the program can in improve its interventions in relation to these aspects in the future? Sustainability of NRM enterprises:  Review aspects of the enterprise execution (that contributed to its success/failure).  Review aspects of the enterprise formulation/design process that have contributed to its success/failure.  Is there any other complementary funding/co-financing received by the enterprises from other sources?  Any recommendations/suggestions for future initiatives? Deforestation and biodiversity (generic questions for most projects):  What kind of strategies do you use to address deforestation/reforestation and biodiversity loss?  What criteria do you use to identify sites for reforestation and how do you identify beneficiaries?  What are the main causes of deforestation and what interventions are you using to address them?  What are the main threats to biodiversity conservation?  What kind of species are priorities for addressing deforestation, and how is vulnerability to reduced biodiversity mitigated?  What are the best practices and main lessons learned in reducing deforestation and addressing biodiversity loss?  How has national forestry/conservation policies impacted afforestation and biodiversity conservation? What could have been done better? Particular to TIST  How have riparian buffers been identified?  Have payments been made already to local sellers of carbon? If yes, how successful and extensive have these results been? If not, what is the ‘road map’ for accessing carbon payments by beneficiaries, and where is the project currently on this ‘road map’?  Do constraints in accessing carbon benefits affect the adoption of reforestation? Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 81 Particular to NRT  Where is the balance between conservation, livestock improvement, water infrastructure establishment, and range rehabilitation? What strategies do you have to mitigate human/conservation conflicts?  NRT-brokered conservation agreements: How does the project address dissent within the communities and how has this impacted conservation programs? What would the project do to recommend change? For local institutions’ sustainability  Has the project induced the formation of pluralistic governing bodies in local institutions?  Do associations/community groups meet regularly? Do they have their own self-set agendas?  Do associations/community groups have an impact on decisions about their agenda? Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 82 APPENDIX J. STATEMENT OF WORK FOR MID-TERM EVALUATION OF USAID/KENYA NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROJECTS PURPOSE The goal of this mid-term evaluation is to examine eight ongoing projects in the USAID/Kenya Environment and Natural Resource Management (ENRM) portfolio to determine what is working and why (best practices), and to recommend course corrections, as needed, to achieve overall project goals. This effort will evaluate individual project progress from 2008 to 2011, and will consider project design, implementation, monitoring, and management. This qualitative evaluation will include a review of performance reporting as well as field work to determine overall progress achieved to date, and to gauge potential for achieving targeted impacts. The exercise will also address the likelihood of each project being able to successfully implement its exit strategy by the project end date (i.e., potential for sustainability). The overall deliverable will be a comprehensive evaluation report, with supporting individual project reports, which will inform IPs’ management during the balance of these projects, and will inform the future direction of USAID/Kenya’s NRM Program. BACKGROUND Strategic goal USAID’s global environmental goals cite the loss of biodiversity as a global environmental threat, and highlight the linkages between biodiversity conservation, sound natural resource management, and sustainable economic growth. Global climate change and Management of Tropical Forest continue to feature as USAID initiatives of importance. USAID/Kenya ENRM program activities aim to: facilitate policy and legal reforms in the conservation sector; diversify rural economies through sustainable nature-based enterprises and, build institutional capacity at the government, civil society organization (CSO) and community based organization (CBO) levels for improved accountability and NRM. The program revolves round developing proper incentives and effective structures whereby communities and government entities can conserve tropical forests, biodiversity and manage climate change. The USAID/Kenya program is expected contribute to the achievement of these goals, which will ultimately contribute to US Government foreign policy interests. Results framework context The ENRM Program has a Strategic Objective and Intermediate Results that are specific development outcomes directly attributable to USAID investments and that can be achieved in two – five years. The current ENRM Results Framework consists of the Strategic Objective statement and statements for three (3) Intermediate Results. Generally, the Strategic focus of SO5 is congruent with the broad concept of Program Area 4.8: Environment under “Foreign Assistance Framework (“F”) – i.e., “Ensure that the environment and the natural resources upon which human lives and livelihoods depend are managed in ways that sustain productivity and growth as well as a healthy population.” Further, achieving Strategic Objective 5 and its Intermediate Results will deliver the end state envisaged for Program Element 4.8.1: Natural Resources and Biodiversity –“Conserve biodiversity and manage natural resources in ways that maintain their long-term viability and preserve their potential to meet the needs of present and future generations. Activities include combating illegal and corrupt exploitation of natural resources and the Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 83 control of invasive species. Programs in this element should be integrated with the Agriculture Area under Economic Growth and Conflict Mitigation and Reconciliation Area under the Peace and Security Objective, when applicable and appropriate.” In addition, as a climate change focus country Kenya was required to add Program Element 4.8.2: Clean Productive Environment (CPE) – “Improve sustainability of a productive and clean environment by reducing risks to the health of the workforce and the population in general, communities and ecosystems from environmental pollution and other environmental risks associated with industrial and agricultural production, urbanization, energy use, transport, and other human activity.” This broadening of the SO Results Framework to incorporate CPE 4.8.2 was necessary due to: 1. increased emphasis on supporting activities for adapting to climate change; 2. knowledge that ENRM would be receive allocations earmarked for direct investments toward a “clean productive environment;” and, 3. acceptance of a Global Development Alliance (GDA) agreement to promote and pay for environmental services—agroforestry for carbon sequestration—with the aim of future financing from carbon trading. PROJECTS TO BE EVALUATED The eight activities proposed for review are covered under the following two USAID/Kenya Activity Approval Documents (AADs): 1) Wildlife and Biodiversity Conservation AAD (2006) The Wildlife Management AAD supports considerable advancement in wildlife and biodiversity management in Kenya and is focused on the following:  Building the capacity of CBOs and strengthening governance systems;  Nature-based business development and support;  Strategic support to focused and prioritized interventions in the Kenya Wildlife Service’s (KWS) corporate strategy and,  Facilitation of an enabling policy/legal environment and institutional framework. Activities that fall under the wildlife and biodiversity component include: Project Title Implementer Total Cost Objectives 1. Northern Rangelands Trust Lewa Conservancy $3.2 M Improve management systems and institutional structures of CBOs managing conservancies; Improve condition and diversity of biological resources; Increase economic benefits and improved livelihoods for Northern Rangelands pastoralist households; Increase community capacity to resolve resource-based conflicts and to improve natural resource governance in the larger NRT region; and Enhance sustainability of the NRT executive structure and operations. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 84 Project Title Implementer Total Cost Objectives 2. Laikipia Conservation Project Laikipia Wildlife Forum $2.5 M Increase the capacity of Laikipia communities to manage their natural resources; Improve the quality and diversity of natural resources in Laikipia, including water availability for domestic use; Expand and diversify economic opportunities for Laikipia communities and thus provide incentives for biodiversity conservation; Develop a Laikipia-wide ecological and socioeconomic monitoring program to track change in ecosystem health and human well￾being in relation to land use and natural resource management; Improve governance and transparency at community and producer group levels. 3. Kitengela Conservation Project African Wildlife Foundation $1.6 M Improved institutional capacity that enables demand-driven land planning and enforcement focused on creating long-term sustainability; Site-specific natural resource management initiatives implemented outside protected areas that improve or maintain biodiversity and the condition of natural resources; Promote new sustainable financing mechanisms - focused on tourism and livestock development , and Advance policy reform through piloting of a number of initiatives, in support of the project area. 4. Wildlife Conservation Project The Kenya Wildlife Service $2.0M To improve the management of Kenya’s protected area network by implementing park plans Institutional management strengthening Integrated Management Information System Human resources capacity building Applied research and biodiversity monitoring capacity building Support co-management initiatives for wildlife and biodiversity conservation 2) Forestry Conservation and Climate Change Management AAD (2003) The forest management AAD is focused on achieving the following results:  Capacity building support for targeted forest management institutions;  Implementation of participatory forestry management plans;  Diversification of forest-based businesses; and  Implementation of the Government of Kenya (GOK) Environmental Management and Coordination Act. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 85 Activities that fall under the forestry management/climate change component include: Project Title Implementer Total Cost Objectives 1. Mau Forest Conservation (ProMara) ARD $7.0 M Improve land and resource tenure Support to Interim Coordinating Secretariat on Mau to Rehabilitate the Mau Forest Complex Strengthen land rights of women, particularly in women-headed households Contribute toward restoration/protection of critical catchment, forests and biodiversity Contribute toward improvement of livelihoods for catchment residents Establish and operationalize the Mara Outreach Center 2. Aberdares Conservation Project The Greenbelt Movement $560K Mobilize community capability to protect public goods and restore the functions of the natural ecosystem; Promote land use change through tree planting and better management of the local natural resources; Protect and restore habitats for local biodiversity and support ecologically sound community initiatives. Improve long-term economic viability of tree planting and other nature-based activities implemented by communities. 3. The International Small Group on Tree Planting (TIST) Institute for Environmental Innovation (I4EI) $7.2 M Enhance biodiversity conservation; reduce vulnerability to climate change and reverse deforestation; improve rural livelihoods with: secure economic benefits from carbon sequestration; increased crop yields through conservation farming and sustainable land management; sustainable and efficient use of wood fuels, and savings based micro-credit; Restore degraded riparian and catchment areas in gazetted forest lands and use carbon revenues to provide long-term income to participants; Improve capacity of KFS and I4EI to monitor the project’s effects on biodiversity, soil and water conservation; and Reduce ‘pressure’ on the resources of natural forests through payments for environmental services. 3) Enabling Environment Policy and Legislation Reform Support USAID/Kenya has been on the forefront of supporting specific activities aimed at improving the enabling environment for conservation and development. In this context the SECURE project was developed to facilitate the finalization of the Kenya National Land Policy and develop a set of interventions to test specific policy principles in support of community-based conservation and co-management. The specific objectives of the SECURE project are highlighted below: Project Implementer Total Cost Objectives 1. Securing Land Tenure for Biodiversity and livelihoods ARD $2.1 M Improve land and natural resource tenure security and reduce conflict over natural assets; Improve management of protected and biologically sensitive areas; and Provide lessons learned to inform the Forest Act, the draft Wildlife Bill and Policy, and Kenya’s new National Land Policy. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 86 The full technical details of these projects are available for reference. Through these activities, the USAID/K/ENRM program contributes to 13 different indicators under the Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP). EVALUATION QUESTIONS The overall goal of the evaluation is to assess the progress made toward achieving the project objectives (impacts) and recommend improvements / course corrections for the projects, as needed. The team will consider the following in the evaluation process: 1. Does the initial project design (and the assumptions on which it was based) still make sense, and is the approached being used to implement still appropriate? 2. Is the project on target to achieve the intended impact? If not, what adjustments are needed to do so? 3. What is the actual and/or potential grassroots impact on livelihoods and conservation in the areas where projects are being implemented? 4. How successful is the project in building coalitions with other actors (government, donors, others) to maximize impact and avoid duplication of effort in the implementation location(s)? 5. How effectively is the project addressing cross-cutting issues (gender, youth, ethnic)? Provide recommendations on how to improve, as needed. 6. How are research and monitoring and evaluation systems being used to inform and improve project implementation over time? Provide suggestions for more effective data collection and/or utilization by the partner and USAID, as appropriate. 7. What is the likelihood that the project will successfully implement its exit strategy by the project end date (i.e., potential for sustainability)? If not strong, what needs to change to improve this in the balance of the program? REQUIRED EXPERTISE (TEAM COMPOSITION AND QUALIFICATION) This evaluation requires a team with broad experience and expertise in a number of different areas, and should include: i) Project Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist/Team Leader (Expatriate or Kenyan National)  MSc /MA in NRM or related field and well-versed in natural resource management as well as project development issues;  Ten years practical experience in design and evaluation of development programs;  Demonstrated ability to assess performance and apply both qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods;  Excellent interpersonal skills and strong leadership capability;  Ability to present complex NRM ideas to a wide variety of audiences;  Experience in field-based, USAID-funded development activities. Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 87 ii) Ecologist (preferably an Expatriate with broad experience)  Master’s degree in ecology or closely related field;  Experience in natural resources management program design;  Ten years’ experience working on conservation management;  Knowledge of natural resources planning and management best practices;  Experience in analysis of the development, diffusion and adoption of NRM technologies in the context of community based natural resource management in developing countries, iii) Business Management Specialist (preferably a Kenyan National)  MA/MBA/Finance or business-related field;  Experience working on community level activities/businesses in a related field of Public/Private Partnership;  Proven ability to link NRM and nature-focused business at the community level;  Technical knowledge of the concepts and principles of, and constraints to nature-focused business development at the community level;  Good understanding of financial sector (micro and macro) operations in Kenya. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Technical Directions during the performance of this SOW will be provided by the Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR), N. Helene Carlson, in consultation with Mr. Charles Oluchina and Dr. Azharul Mazumder, USAID/Kenya/NRM. Initial briefing with the Evaluation Team will be conducted at USAID/Kenya. PACE and the Evaluation Team will be expected to prepare a work plan and present this to USAID during the first week of work. 1. Literature review: The review team shall be expected to refer to the following list of documents that is comprehensive, but not necessarily exhaustive. a USAID/NRM strategy b Forestry/Wildlife Programs Activity Approval Documents c NRM Program Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) d Respective project descriptions/ Statements of Work e Current partners’ annual work plans f Partner organization performance reports 2. Consultation with USAID, partners and other Donors: Discussion sessions with Mission management, partner staff and other organizations will be held. The reviewers shall be expected to consult regularly with the USAID/COTR and NRM Team Leader and other donors implementing similar activities in Kenya. 3. Consultation with beneficiaries: The reviewers shall be expected to visit and verify program activities in the field and consult widely with beneficiaries, tour operators and private sector operators on wildlife business Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 88 constraints and opportunities. The input from the beneficiaries shall be used to draw up recommendations. TERMS OF PERFORMANCE: The following are the terms of performance: 1. Duty station is Nairobi and five other biodiversity hot spots in Kenya: Kitengela/Kajiado, Lamu; Samburu-Laikipia; Mt. Kenya, and Nakuru. 2. Six-day work week is authorized without premium pay. 3. The performance period is o/a November 2011 through December 2011. All team members must be committed to work full time on this SOW for the entire performance period, and proposed team members must be approved by the COTR. 4. Logistic support: PACE shall be responsible for all logistic support required by the reviewing team including field visit, office space, furniture, office equipment, secretarial services, photocopying and telephone services and local travel within Kenya, etc. Reports and Deliverables PACE shall be expected to deliver the following: 1. Workplan: A detailed workplan, developed in consultation with USAID, is due ten days after the approval of the Work Order. 2. Briefings: Briefings shall be held once a week, or as agreed to in the Work Plan, at USAID/Kenya’s office. 3. Interview notes and documents gathered: The consultants will be expected to hold extensive consultations with USAID partners and stakeholders. They shall make briefs of these meetings, workshops, and focused discussions. The proceedings shall be turned over to USAID/Kenya along with any relevant documents and reports gathered during the review. 4. Presentations: The Evaluation Team will be expected to make one presentation to USAID management and one for each implementing partner on report findings before departing Kenya. 5. Draft Overall Evaluation Report: Submitted to COTR for review and comment prior to the departure of the Evaluation Team from Kenya. 6. Final Evaluation Report: Final, USAID-branded Evaluation Report incorporating comments from USAID/Kenya within one week of receipt of comments. Final Report to include twenty (20) bound, color printed copies of the report; both Microsoft Word and 508 compliant Portable Document Format (pdf) electronic documents; and, one electronic PowerPoint presentation of findings, conclusions and recommendations. The report should include the following sections: 1. Executive Summary (5 pages maximum length) 2. Main body (25pages) a Details of overall findings b Projects’ sustainability projections Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 89 c Major lessons learned and best practices d Conclusions and recommendations 3. Annexes a Eight Individual Project Reports (five pages each) b Assessment SOW and Methodology c List documents reviewed, organizations and persons contacted, workshops held Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 90 APPENDIX K. PERSONS INTERVIEWED Name Organization Designation Tel Email November 14, 2011 Tom Traexler Rural Focus Director 733679125 Christinie Muuthia Rural Focus Community Trainer 733679125 Josephat Musyima Laikipia Wildlife Forum Community Conservation Program Manager community@laikipia.org Susan Wren Desert Edge Director and Technical Adviser susie@biotrade.co.ke Dephine King Laikipia Wildlife Forum Monitoring & Evaluation 723555160 research@laikipia.org Richard Hutfield Obufield LTD Range Rehabilitation 723506331 rhutfield@obufield.com November 15, 2011 Mosses Githiria Gathiuru CFA Chairman 720175604 mitigithiria@gmail.com Joseph Nzumbi Gathiuru CFA Secretary 729791598 josephnzumbi@yahoo.com Robert Myall Nanyuki Water Resources Users Association Chairman 735783419 John Kenyon Mogwoni Ranch Director November 16, 2011 Andrew Lentoijon NRT Administrator 722249599 andrew.lentoijoni@nrt-kenya.org Tom Lalampaa NRT Community Development Manager 723468874 tom@nrt-kenya.org Emmanuel Kochale NRT Regional Coordinator Nderitu Kimondo NRT Finance David Selakan NRT Grant Administration /Fund Raising Celina Butali NRT Enterprise & Product Development Officer 721549008 celina@nrt-kenya.org Husseini Leparmarai Sera Community Ranch Chairman 724954029 Wilson Lamburi Sera Community Ranch Board Member Reuben Lendira Sera Community Ranch Conservancy Manager 720201433 Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 91 Name Organization Designation Tel Email Alex Lenaipa Sera Community Ranch Accountant 714054550 November 17, 2011 John Lemasa Kalama Community Conservancy Community Conservation Manager 721586370 Titus Letaapo Regional Coordinator, Ngare Ndare 726300956 Del Saruni Lodge Sophie Saruni Lodge November 18, 2011 Charles E. Williams Clean Air Action Corporation Vice-President 918-747-8749 charliewilliams@cleanairaction.com Farmer Peter Hinga TIST 724259797 peterhinga@tist.org November 19, 2011 Charles Ibeere TIST 720474209 charlesibeere@tist.org Margaret Wangech TIST-Muguna DTA 'a' self Help Farmer Wachira, Mutero TIST-Nguthiru Farmer Karicho TIST-Kabendera Farmer John Maina TIST-Evergreen Farmer November 22, 2011 Njogu Kahare GBM Program Officer 721164232 nkahare@geenmovement.org Joyce M. Murethi GBM Extension Officer, Tetu 725507920 joynyam@hotmail.org Benson Mathenge GBM Extension Officer, Othaya 721965382 mathengeben@yahoo.com Harun Wanjala GBM Staff 714815315 hrwanjala@yahoo.com Teresa Ngatia GBM Nyeri 721436439 Priscilla Ng'endo Ngacha GBM Extension Officer, Nyeri town 725311868 prisingendo@yahoo.co.uk Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 92 Name Organization Designation Tel Email Fredrick Gakuru GBM Chairman, Mutathini Sub location Hensal Wangui GBM Secretary John Ngumi GBM Treasurer Joakim Wachira GBM Chairman, Kiguongo Josephine Njoki GBM Secretary Zachary Gathura GBM Chairman, Giteng'ero Robert Gatheri GBM Chairman, Karibaini Lydiah Muthoni GBM Secretary Jerioth Njeri GBM Goodhope Mercy Gathuku GBM Goodhope Nichalas Mutugi GBM Gaithuri Central SHG Gerald Ndung'u GBM Secretary, Gaithuri Susan Wakarima GBM Treasurer Samuel Mwangi GBM Vice Chairman, Gaithuri James Guthega KFS Forester, Zaina John Muthui CFA Zaina CFA, Secretary Nyeri County Network Corporal Ndwiga KFS Zaina Forest Station November 23, 2011 Jane Nungari GBM Nutrition Millers 0724 664 733,0721399136 beajanutrimillers@yahoo.com janenungari@yahoo.com Lucy Waruguru GBM Karima, Green Rangers Alice Wahome GBM Karima, Green Rangers James Kuria Othaya Town Council Town Clerk 0722 420250 Alice Wamuyu GBM Green Rangers-Food Security Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 93 Name Organization Designation Tel Email Lucy Waruguru Tree Planting Miriam Rithu River BANKS Jane Mukua Forest Ranger Peter Muriithi Vice -Chairman CFA Peter Mwangi CFA Chairman Grace Macharia Forest Ranger S. Peter Mwangi Karima CFA Chairman 722420250 November 24, 2011 Thomas Too ProMara Community Facilitator 720690548 Soipan Tuya ProMara Land Law and Gender Specialist 700923377 stuya@ard-promara.com Praxides Nekesa ProMara Gender Specialist& M&E Coordinator 717090201 pnekesa@ard-promara.com Jackline Wainaina ProMara Accountant 717090201 jwainaina@ard-promara.com Fabian Musila M. ProMara Natural Resources Enterprise Specialist 727893967 fmusila@ard-promara.com Juliet Soila Sankale ProMara Mau Outreach Center 722991725 jiiankale@ard-promara.com Koech Charles ProMara Mau Outreach Center 722928630 ckoech@ard-promara.com Nelson Parsimes Kimiti ProMara 7202782029 nparsimei@ard-promara.com Eddah Chemaita ProMara Community Facilitator 722460640 echemaita@ard-promara.com Tanui ProMara Farmer, Lelaimbei November 25, 2011 Deborah Espinosa Landesa Rural Development Institute Senior Attorney Land Tenure Specialist #NAME? deborah@landesa.org Amos Bii Landesa Rural Development Institute CFA member-BACOFA 720000245 Joseph Kariki Landesa Rural Development Institute Kiptunga CFA member 726916360 Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 94 Name Organization Designation Tel Email Arkkeen Yebei Landesa Rural Development Institute Kiptunga CFA member 729361076 David Bargetuny Landesa Rural Development Institute Kiptunga CFA member 722101146 Joel Ng'elelei Landesa Rural Development Institute Kiptunga CFA member 724927966 Jackson Warionga Landesa Rural Development Institute Kiptunga CFA member 71077888 Samson Mbaraka Landesa Rural Development Institute Kiptunga CFA member 725087212 November 29, 2011 Daudi Sumba AWF Director 720074037 Dsumba@awf.org Ogeli Makui AWF Projects Officer 721563926 Omakui@awfke.org Joseph Ole Tuleto KINAPA 722465446 James Ntulele Chairman Goat &Sheep Mlole Sisika KPF 721602556 Peris Ruteti Paranae Women Group 723884446 Eunice Kuyo Paranae Women Group Tirente Mveshia Paranae Women Group Simanga Samoire Paranae Women Group Nameita Kamakia Paranae Women Group Lydia Kikon Paranae Women Group Seriah Lesi Paranae Women Group 724596780 parseinah@yahoo.com Hamilton Ole Parseina KPF Koneyai Trupet Osutua Women Group Agnes Nageiyo KPF 724596780 Esther Kimiti DISPOTO-E-MAA 722447944 enairesiai@yahoo.co.uk Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 95 Name Organization Designation Tel Email Eunice Papu Empiri Nekai 722447944 Jane Tajers Empiri Nekai 729651420 Jane Sankaire Empiri Nekai 710192271 Esther Koipitat Empiri Nekai 729866640 Moses Leir KPF Youth representative 721229760 mosesir@gmail.com Loise Nashepai Metno Enkasiti Primary School Head Teacher nashepailoloise@yahoo.com Michael Kibue AgriTrade Co. Ltd Director, Knowledge Management &Market Value Chains 727613311 sardilivestock06@yahoo.com November 30, 2011 Wilfred Ondung'o Keekonykie Slaughter house Chairman Fredrick Kirumba Keekonykie Slaughter house Peter Wanderi Keekonykie Slaughter house Monicah Muthemba Keekonykie Slaughter house Isaac Nemutu D/AC/Field School 724536721 Maesya Livestock Consultant/MAC Jonathan K. Kotemu Naserian Primary School Head teacher November 31, 2011 Jack Marubu KWS Community Enterprise Officer 720802420 jackmarubu@kws.go.ke Dr. Charles Musyoki KWS Senior Scientist 722826911 cmusyoki@kws.go.ke Maurice Adek KWS Senior Accountant 720382371 madek@kws.go.ke Robinson Kagonia KWS IT Manager 722765580 kagonia@kws.go.ke Apollo Kariuki KWS Senior Resource Planner 722779293 apollok@kws.go.ke Samuel Andanye KWS Head Ecological Monitoring 722572615 sandanje@kws.go.ke December 2, 2011 Stephen Manegene Ministry of Forestry &Wildlife Director, Wildlife Conservation 722628919 Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 96 Name Organization Designation Tel Email Munira K.Bashir KWS Assistant Director & Head Community Wildlife Service 722461412 munira@kws.go.ke Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 97 APPENDIX L. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED USAID/Kenya USAID/Kenya Strategic Objective 5 (SO5) Wildlife Management & Conservation Program 06/12/2002 USAID/Kenya Strategic Objective 5 (SO5) Forestry/Range Rehab. & Environmental Management Strengthening Initiative Statement of Work ( SOW) for Mid-term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya Natural Resources Management Project LWF October 2009 to October 2012 Performance Monitoring Plan for LWF: Improving NRM and Biodiversity Conservation in Laikipia Desert Edge Company Limited, 2010 Internal Control System (ICS) Manual for Hive Products LWF/AWF (Conservation Enterprises Development Program) Oct 2010 – Sept 2011 Developing Sustainable Wild Harvest Protocols for Cape Chestnut Seed Pilot Project NTR-Desert Edge Company Ltd Laikipia Wildlife Foundation Development of new and/or scale up of existing Aloe based business in Laikipia January 2010 Performance Monitoring Plan for LWF, October 2009 to October 2012 Prepared for United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Mission to Kenya under Contract/ Grant Number: AID 623-A-09-00002 Laikipia Wildlife Forum LWF Forest management Program LWF, October 2011 Semi Annual Progress Report on Improving Natural Resource Management and Biodiversity Conservation in Laikipia April to September 2011 Oreteti: Holistic Land Management Rangeland Rehabilitation and Management Program (RRMP) NRT 12/31/2010 Sustainable Income Generation for rural communities Northern Rangelands Trust NRT Support Program Phase II Follow-on – USAID Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 98 Others: USAID Presentation_NRT overview (Ian) 2011 NRT Ecological Monitoring Presentation May11 USAID Presentation-Finance NRT conservation leverage tables 2008 – 2010 NRT growth strategy - board presentation NRT Support Program Phase II-USAID-November 2011 Performance indicators USAID-Year 3_v DS USAID NRT Program Description-Jun08-CO&RB (2) TIST USAID TIST Program Description Mobilizing Small Groups to Enhance Biodiversity and Provide Environmental Services GBM September 2006 Funding Proposal for the Green Belt Movement Oct-Dec 2010 Community based resource management-Eastern Abardares Program Green Belt Movement Semi Annual Progress Report Community Based Resource Management Easter Aberdares Program ProMara November 2011 ProMara Program brief for Evaluation Team Kitengela October 2010 – March 2011 Technical Report Including Financial Report African Wildlife Foundation Kajiado Pastoralist Forum LUMP: Kitengela/Isinya/Kipeto Integrated Development Plan KWS 2006-2010 WILDLIFE CONSERVATION PROGRAM Work Plan Kenya Wildlife Service (Wildlife Sector & FORREMS Projects) SECURE September, 2011 Ministry of Lands Community Land Rights Recognition (CLRR) Model Mid-Term Evaluation of USAID/Kenya NRM Projects 99 March 2011 – February 2012 Securing Rights to Land and Natural Resources for Biodiversity and Livelihood in Kiunga-Boni-Dodori Areas of Kenya Kenya SECURE Project