GEF SGP PROJECT PROPOSAL

TEMPLATE AND GUIDELINES

[TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO]

November 30th, 2012

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROJECT PROPOSAL COVER SHEET ----------------------------------------------------------- III

SECTION A. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1

1.0 PROJECT PROPOSAL OUTLINE AND CONTENT --------------------------------------- 1

1.1 PROJECT SUMMARY -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1

1.2 ORGANIZATIONAL BACKGROUND AND CAPACITY TO IMPLEMENT THE PROJECT ----------- 3

1.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS --------------------------------------------------- 4

1.4 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ACTIVITIES --------------------------------------------------------------- 8

1.5 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND TIME FRAME --------------------------------------------------------- 4

1.6 PLAN TO ENSURE COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION --------------------------------------------------- 4

1.7 RISKS TO SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION ---------------------------------------------------------- 6

1.8 MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN AND INDICATORS ---------------------------------------- 6

SUMMATIVE EVALUATION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 8

EMPOWERMENT -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8

1.9 SUSTAINABILITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 8

2.0 PROJECT BUDGET INFORMATION SHEET --------------------------------------------- 10

SECTION C ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 10

2.1 PROJECT FUNDING SUMMARY ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 10

2.4 BANK DETAILS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 11

iii

PROJECT PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

Project No. ________________ (For Official Use. Do not write anything here)

Project Title: Building Small Scale Farmers’ Capacity to Implement Sustainable Farming

Practices in Trinidad’s Northern Range

Applicant

Name of Organization: THE CROPPER FOUNDATION

Mailing Address: BUILDING 7 FERNANDES INDUSTRIAL CENTRE, LAVENTILLE,

TRINIDAD

Physical Address: BUILDING 7 FERNANDES INDUSTRIAL CENTRE, LAVENTILLE,

TRINIDAD

Telephone: 868-626-2628

Fax: 868-626-2564 E-Mail: kgarcia@thecropperfoundation.org

Principal Officer: KEISHA GARCIA, PRESIDENT

Project Contact: KEISHA GARCIA, PRESIDENT

Project

GEF SGP Classification

Thematic/Focal Area (Tick one) Project Category (Tick one)

Conservation of Biodiversity √ Demonstration Project Climate Change Capacity Development Project √ Land Degradation and Sustainable

Forest Management Applied Research/Policy Analysis

International Waters Information/Networking/Policy Dialogue

Persistent Organic Pollutants(POPs) Multi-focal*

* Proposal addresses more than one focal area Proposed Starting Date: March 2013

Proposed Project Duration: 18 months

Finances

Total GEF SGP Request: [local currency] TT$893,130.00 (US$ 138,684.78)

Total from Other Sources: [Local currency] TT$504,150.00 (US$ 78,284.16)

Total project cost : [Local currency] TT$1,397,280.00 (US$ 216,968.94)

Exchange Rate : US$1.00 = TT$6.44

Section A.

1.0 PROJECT PROPOSAL OUTLINE AND CONTENT

1.1 Project Summary

This project is designed to address the issue of land degradation which is considered a focal area within the context of the UNDP Global Environment Facility Small Grants Programme (GEF-SGP). The project is developed as part of a larger initiative being implemented by The Cropper Foundation and its partners that seeks to build capacity of small-scale subsistence farmers within the Northern Range to implement sustainable farming practices (SFPs), explore opportunities for improving livelihoods and food security, and reduce the negative environmental impacts of unsustainable hillside farming. The project will draw on lessons and experiences of a recently-concluded project in the Maracas and Caura watersheds of the Northern Range (titled ‘Implementing Sustainable Farming Practices in Trinidad’s Northern Range Communities - EcoAgriCulture’) and will seek to:

1. Undertake a baseline assessment of farming conditions in three Northern Range watersheds1 (Santa Cruz, Lopinot and Aripo Valleys)

2. Design a strategy (intervention strategy) for engaging farmers, building capacity and providing technical support for the implementation of SFPs in the selected watersheds

3. Design and implement a pilot approach for enhancing community governance arrangements in the selected watersheds

4. Implement SFPs in one of the selected watersheds. In meeting its objectives, the project will address the following environmental issues in the use of unsustainable land clearing practices by farming communities on hillsides, such as slash and burn, which can increase soil erosion and water runoff, thereby exacerbating flooding in low-lying areas at the foothills of the Northern Range:

• The lack of soil stabilization techniques in farming practices which result in soil erosion and nutrient depletion

• The unregulated input of inorganic chemicals (fertilizers, pesticides), which affects water quality in key watersheds in the Northern Range

• The reduction of biodiversity on farms due to pesticides and mono cropping techniques • Need for better information on linkages between agricultural activities and the

environment in order to support decision and policy-making at the local and national levels

The main activities of the project are:

1. A Baseline Assessment of farming conditions in the three target farming communities; 2. Participatory design of strategies for implementing sustainable farming practices in the

farming communities; 3. Capacity development in community governance in the farming communities; and

1 In 2007, The Cropper Foundation undertook an ecosystem vulnerability assessment of watersheds in the Northern Range in order to prioritize and select watersheds in which to execute a project for implementing sustainable farming practices in farming communities. The assessment identified the Santa Cruz, Tacarigua/ Arouca (Lopinot), and Arima watersheds among others, as most vulnerable, and to date these watersheds are still characterized as having high ecosystem vulnerability. It is on this basis that these watersheds were selected in the proposed project. Please see assessment report attached as Annex 1.

2

4. Implementation of SFPs in one of the selected watersheds. The progress of these activities will be tracked against the achievement of milestones, and success of the project will be assessed using a set of targets and indictors that have been developed along the lines of the UNDP GEF OP5 project level indicators. The targets include:

• At least 20% of farming community in each of the watersheds implementing sustainable farming practices2 (SFPs). Farmers will be introduced to a range of SFPs, and will be encouraged to select a set of SFPs that they want to implement. It is expected that farmers may not be able to implement all of the desired SFPs at once, and therefore a phased approach for implementation of SFPs will be designed.

• At least 20% of farming community made aware of participatory decision making processes

• At least 20% of the farming community trained in participatory processes • At least 20% of farmers agreeing to contribute to a Revolving Fund. A revolving Fund

will be established to provide resource support to farmers for long-term implementation and mainstreaming of SFPs.

The project was designed and will be executed by The Cropper Foundation (TCF) in collaboration with a number of institutional partners – the Ministry of Food Production, UWI, FAO, IICA, CARDI and the Trust for Sustainable Livelihoods; these institutions will be invited to be a part of a steering committee for the project. A technical team will also be established for the project which would comprise the Technical Coordinator at TCF, members of the steering committee, and the consultants hired for various aspects of the project. The sustainability of the project is bolstered by TCF’s established track record in working with agricultural communities in the Northern Range for the past eight years, as well as the Foundation’s strategic partnerships, developed with a number of key agricultural stakeholders. The project’s activities are designed to be implemented over a period of 18 months, and a total budget of US $216,968.94 has been determined for the project, of which US $138,684.78 is being requested from the GEF SGP; US $52,430.12 will be provided as a counterpart cash (64%) and in-kind (36%) contribution from The Cropper Foundation and its partners; an estimated US $25,854.04 will be provided as a counterpart in-kind contribution from the farming communities.

2 The term “sustainable farming practices” (SFPs) is used to describe a set of farming practices that address:

• Economic sustainability: While sustainability suggests a long-term focus, the short-term focus is equally and perhaps more important when considering livelihoods based on small-scale farming. Practices need to be economically beneficial to farmers. If they are not so in the short term, practices should be implemented in a manner that does not introduce high economic risk to the farmer’s system.

• Livelihood sustainability: Livelihood opportunities in agriculture must be economically and socially attractive in order to keep persons involved in agriculture. This can be done through raising the national profile of agriculture, finding different ways to portray agriculture as a livelihood, and creating a strong support system for persons wanting to get involved in a career in farming.

• Environmental sustainability: Practices should reflect an awareness of the impact of farming on the surrounding environment, and one’s responsibility as part of that environment.

The term therefore may be synonymous with a set of practices known as good farming practices (GAP) and, SFPs will certainly include, but will not be limited to, organic farming practices.

3

1.2 Organizational Background and Capacity to implement the project

The Cropper Foundation (TCF) is a not-for-profit non-governmental organization established in August 2000, under The Companies Act, 1995 of Trinidad & Tobago. It has a legal framework and was accorded charitable status by the Board of Inland Revenue of Trinidad and Tobago in 2006. TCF has an established governance framework through a Board of Trustees (twelve members), which is led by a President, who also oversees day-today management of the organization. The core staff consists of three project officers, and one administrative/ financial officer. The goal of the Foundation is to act as a framework mechanism for networking people, dialogue and resources across various sectors of the society for the public good and to influence, participate and contribute to Sustainable Development policy and practice – locally, for the Caribbean region, and globally. Over the past twelve years, TCF has amassed experience in project development, management and implementation in the areas of biodiversity, land and natural resources management, ecosystem management, food security, and community and livelihood development. Working with government agencies, research institutions, local (principally hillside) communities, CSOs, the private sector, youth, educators, and regional and international organizations, TCF’s substantive programme is structured around the following focal areas, under which all of its projects are undertaken: 1. Ecosystem and Scientific Assessments: The Cropper Foundation has led, or has played/ is

playing a leading role in a number of scientific assessments: a. in Trinidad and Tobago – the Northern Range Assessment (2002 – 2005); Guide for

monitoring and managing oil and gas resources in T&T (2008); the Fourth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010); the Project for Ecosystem Services - ProEcoServ (2010 ongoing); and the National Biodiversity Assessment of Trinidad and Tobago (2011 – 2012).

b. at the regional level – The Caribbean Sea Assessment (2003 – 2007); Global- Local Caribbean Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Scenarios - GoLoCarSce (2012 ongoing).

c. at the global level – Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2001 – 2005); UNEP’s Fourth Global Environment Outlook Report (2006 – 2007); MA Methods Manual (2006 – 2009); UNEP’s Fifth Global Environment Outlook Report (2010 - 2012); and the MA Sub-Global Assessment (SGA) Network including managing a regional hub for Latin America and the Caribbean (2010 ongoing).

2. Sustainable Management of the Northern Range in Trinidad (building on the NR Assessment):

a. Between 2004 and 2006, TCF led a project to support residents of the Bon Air North community in the Northern Range in exploring and creating livelihood opportunities while improving the natural environment and building the community’s sense of place, collective identity, and communal forms of governance (UNDP GEF-SGP funded).

b. EcoAgriCulture: In 2009, The Cropper Foundation initiated an IDB-funded project in the Maracas and Caura Valleys in the Northern Range to assist farmers in the identification and implementation of sustainable farming practices. Emerging from this very successful experience, the Foundation is in the process of developing a programme of support for hillside farming communities in T&T; a project framework for sustainable management of the Northern Range is provided in Annex 2.

c. ProEcoServ: Since 2010, and as part of a global initiative that aims to better integrate ecosystem assessment and economic valuation of ecosystem services into poverty reduction and national sustainable development planning, TCF is leading work in the NR.

4

3. Education for Sustainable Development (ESD): Since 2004, TCF has been supporting ESD-related activities in T&T, and throughout the Caribbean with the support of UNESCO.

4. Support to National Development Planning and Decision Making: Since 2002, TCF has been using the results of its work to support national decision-making, working closely with the Ministries of Planning and Sustainable Development, Environment and Water Resources, and Education.

A key aspect of the Foundation’s success in delivering its programme of work is its ability to mobilize and bring together a wide range of technical partners who provide the necessary capacities for implementing activities, and facilitating follow-though.

1.3 Project Objectives and Expected Results

Problem Statement Small scale subsistence farming (SSSF) is prevalent on the slopes of Trinidad’s Northern Range (NR). These SSSF activities contribute to livelihoods and local food production, and are thus considered important in alleviating poverty and playing a role in Government’s efforts to make Trinidad and Tobago a food secure nation. What has become evident however is that the preferences for short-term (cash) crops in SSSF, and the use of land clearing practices such as slash and burn on NR hillsides, with little or no investment in soil conservation measures, is having perceptible impacts on key ecosystem services provided by the Range - such as water quality regulation, flood regulation, erosion control and soil formation. In addition to this, high inorganic inputs (fertilizers and pesticides) are also impacting water quality and other biodiversity-related services. The loss of these ecosystem services, many of which support agricultural practices, is having, and will continue to have direct consequences for farmers’ livelihoods and agricultural productivity. In addition to this, with the watersheds of the NR estimated to produce 60 to 80% of Trinidad’s potable freshwater supply, and with the heavily populated lower-lying areas at the flanks of the Range (including the capital city of Port-of-Spain, and surrounding densely populated residential areas), unsustainable farming practices, if left unattended, will continue to have significant downstream impacts in Trinidad, with anticipated increasing economic and social costs. The need to address the un-sustainability of many of the current hillside practices in the NR has long been recognized. And because the option of relocating farmers in a land-scarce, small island is not politically or socially attractive, focus must be placed on working with hillside farming communities to improve their practices in a manner that respects the links and tradeoffs between livelihoods and environmental concerns in the short-to-long term. In this context, applying a more landscape-based approach (which recognizes that even though farming is an individual activity, collective resilience and sustainability depend on the management of key resources for agriculture across the agro-ecosystem) is important. Project Objectives Primary Objective This project, designed as part of a larger initiative being implemented by The Cropper Foundation and its partners (Annex 2), seeks to build capacity of small-scale subsistence farmers within the Northern Range to implement sustainable farming practices, explore opportunities for improving livelihoods and food security, and reduces the negative environmental impacts of unsustainable hillside farming.

5

Specific Objectives The project will draw on lessons and experiences of a recently-concluded project in the Maracas and Caura watersheds of the Northern Range (titled ‘Implementing Sustainable Farming Practices in Trinidad’s Northern Range Communities - EcoAgriCulture’). The EcoAgriCulture project yielded several lessons which have influenced the design of the proposed project:

i. Participatory approaches are necessary for both understanding the myriad of challenges that small farmers face, and for devising solutions for these challenges. Participatory approaches that involve participants in project design, implementation and evaluation foster greater ownership of the project among participants.

ii. Farmer Groups are often challenged by fragmentation of the farming population due to issues of distrust and perceptions of corruption among members, which reduces the effectiveness of the Farmer Group for improving local farming conditions. There is need for the development of robust governance systems within farming communities to help counter these issues.

iii. Long term (5 – 10 years) technical support and capacity-building is needed in farming communities for mainstreaming sustainable farming practices; such support can be provided through a robust institutional framework that supports agriculture at the local and national levels.

iv. Mainstreaming sustainable farming practices requires national policy support. Detailed explanations of the lessons learnt can be found in the EcoAgriCulture project final report attached as Annex 3. The proposed project will therefore seek to:

1. Undertake a baseline assessment of farming conditions in three Northern Range watersheds (Santa Cruz, Lopinot and Aripo Valleys)

2. Design a strategy (intervention strategy) for engaging approximately 90 farmers across the three farming communities, building capacity and providing technical support for the implementation of SFPs in the selected watersheds

3. Design and implement a pilot approach for enhancing community governance arrangements in the selected watersheds

4. Implement sustainable farming practices in one of the selected watersheds

In meeting its objectives, the project will address the following socio-economic issues in the Santa Cruz, Lopinot and Aripo Valleys:

• Lack of awareness and/ or lack of capacity among small-scale subsistence farmers to implement more sustainable forms of farming on the hillsides of the Northern Range

• Inadequate governance arrangements in farming communities within the Northern Range to:

o support farmers in meeting their needs and addressing challenges o facilitate a more landscape-based approach to managing agricultural activities

within watersheds • Need to enhance relationships between farming communities and public agencies

responsible for agriculture, especially the Ministry of Food Production, in order to better facilitate the implementation of the National Food Production Action Plan for Trinidad and Tobago (2012 – 2015)

• Need for better information on agricultural issues (including food security and community resilience) to support decision and policy-making in Trinidad and Tobago

6

In meeting its objectives, the project will address the following environmental issues in the Santa Cruz, Lopinot and Aripo Valleys:

• The use of unsustainable land clearing practices by farming communities on hillsides, such as slash and burn, which can increase soil erosion and water runoff; thereby exacerbating flooding in low-lying areas at the foothills of the Northern Range

• The lack of soil stabilization techniques in farming practices which result in soil erosion and nutrient depletion

• The unregulated input of inorganic chemicals (fertilizers, pesticides), which affects water quality in the Northern Range

• The reduction of biodiversity on farms due to pesticides and mono cropping techniques • Need for better information on linkages between agricultural activities and the

environment in order to support decision and policy-making at the local and national levels

Project Rationale This project is designed to address the issue of land degradation which is considered a focal area within the context of the UNDP Global Environment Facility Small Grants Programme (GEF SGP). It will also deal with the some of the problems associated with Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), given that alternative farming practices focus on reducing the use of inorganic inputs. Indirectly, the results of the project are expected to improve farming communities’ adaptation to climate variability and change, principally through the implementation of practices which include climate proofing considerations. Other important issues within the - GEF SGP’s focus which will be addressed through this project are capacity development (both at the level of the project, and in the context of TCF’s Programme to support communities); community participation and empowerment; poverty reduction; knowledge management; replication and up-scaling; and policy impact with a focus on forming partnerships with key government and non-government authorities. This project is being developed within the overall context and framework of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago’s (GoRTT) National Food Production Action Plan (2012 – 2015). By addressing agricultural resource and livelihood sustainability needs at the local level, this project will respond to critical factors required for achieving national food security, namely the availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods, sustainable land resources for agricultural production, and clean water for irrigation and use in downstream areas. In addition, the project is well aligned with two other local-level initiatives which are underway in the Northern Range:

• The National Reforestation and Watershed Rehabilitation Programme (NRWRP) 2004-2014: this programme is being led by the GoRTT and aims to engage communities and other relevant stakeholders in protecting and managing existing forests for the continued provision of ecosystem services and maintenance of livelihoods. The NRWRP currently works with communities in the Santa Cruz, Lopinot and Aripo Valleys on issues dealing with forest management, forest stewardship, and education for best practices in agriculture to reduce the incidences of ‘slash-and-burn’.

• The Ministry of Food Production through its research and extension services provides technical support to farmers in the Santa Cruz, Aripo and Lopinot Valleys in key focus areas of soil conservation, pesticide usage, pesticide safety and home gardening.

Specific Results The expected results of the project are given below:

7

Table 1: Expected Results of Project Activities ACTIVITY KEY RESULT(S)

Baseline Assessment of farming conditions in three selected watersheds in the Northern Range

Establishment of a baseline understanding of the potential economic and environmental impacts of the adoption of more environmentally sustainable hillside farming practices in three Northern Range watersheds (Santa Cruz, Lopinot and Aripo) including: • Identification of persons engaged in farming activities, existing farmer

networks and other local organizations/networks that support farming activities in the sites

• Improved understanding of the type of farming, and farming practices being used in the three sites

• Improved understanding of the economic, social and cultural factors that drive the type of agricultural production at the three sites

• Improved understanding of the key ecological problems that result from agricultural practices at the three sites

Participatory planning exercises for the design of intervention strategies

• Consensus among farming community on the need for transitioning from conventional farming practices to more sustainable ones to ensure protection of ecosystems, and sustaining of livelihoods

• Opportunities identified for addressing environmental and livelihood challenges, including through the use of Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES)

• Consensus among farming community on priority actions for addressing environmental and livelihood challenges

• Improved capacity of farming communities in managing, planning and decision-making processes

• Improved capacity of farming communities to monitor and evaluate the results of implementing alterative farming practices

Pilot an exercise to enhance community governance arrangements in selected watersheds

• Improved networking amongst farmers and other stakeholders within watersheds

• Built capacity of farmer groups (and other relevant groups) within each of the selected watersheds to facilitate greater involvement of farmers in:

- decision-making at the community level - lobbying for support from government agencies and ministries - mobilizing funding to support farmers’ activities - activities beyond the watershed - monitoring and evaluating, and subsequent revision of the community

governance framework • Careful documentation of experiences and lessons learned which can be

shared with other farming communities and stakeholders throughout Trinidad and Tobago

Implementation of sustainable farming practices in one of the selected farming

• Farming community trained in using sustainable farming practices • Interest generated among farming community and stakeholders in the use of

sustainable farming practices. • Lessons based on experiences of farmers in implementing sustainable

farming practices generated, documented, and shared among farming

8

ACTIVITY KEY RESULT(S)

communities communities • Revolving Fund established to support long-term implementation and

mainstreaming of sustainable farming practices

Outreach and engagement

• Improved policy support for, and interest in sustainable hillside farming practices

• Improved public understanding of the benefits of sustainable hillside farming • Careful documentation of experiences and lessons learned which can be

disseminated and shared with other farming communities and stakeholders throughout Trinidad and Tobago

1.4 Description of Project Activities

Project activities will be undertaken over an eighteen-month period. The activities are listed in the table below: AS – Agricultural Stakeholders FCs Farming Communities MFP – Ministry of Food Production Extension Dept.

PSC – Project Steering Committee M – Month # PTC – Project Technical Consultant TCF – The Cropper Foundation

Table 2: Project Activity Matrix

Activity

Means of Verification Responsibility Beneficiaries Time-

frame 1. Establish Technical Team for the Project

1.1 Assign Technical Coordinator at The Cropper Foundation

Terms of Reference for Technical Coordinator TCF - M1

1.2 Convene Project Steering Committee

Guidelines for Project Steering Committee members List of Project Steering Committee Members

TCF - M1

1.3 Prepare detailed work plan

Work plan TCF/ PSC - M1

1.4 Recruitment of technical expertise for main project components

TORs for technical expertise Criteria for selection of candidates List of suitable candidates

TCF/ PSC - M1

2. Baseline Assessment of farming communities in three selected watersheds

2.1 Identification of farmers in each watershed

Lists of farmers in each watershed PTC - M2

2

Activity

Means of Verification Responsibility Beneficiaries Time-frame

2.2 Inception workshop in each watershed to introduce project and discuss community needs and priorities

Workshop report

PTC FCs M3

2.3 Hold interviews and focus groups discussions with farmers and other relevant stakeholders; and undertake review of technical documentations

Baseline assessment report for each watershed

PTC - M3 – M8

3. Participatory planning exercises for the design of intervention strategies

3.1 Conduct workshops and focus group discussions with farmers and other relevant stakeholders within each watershed

Schedule of workshops and focus groups Reports for each watershed on specific considerations and steps required for interventions within each watershed

PTC FCs, MFP M9 – M15

4. Pilot an exercise for Community Governance in selected watersheds

4.1 Establish a baseline understanding of needs

Document on governance needs for each watershed

PTC FCs, MFP, PSC

M9 – M10

4.2 Conduct capacity building workshops within farming communities to address governance challenges especially related to planning and decision-making

Schedule of workshops Report for each watershed that details the approach, experiences, and lessons learnt from the pilot exercises

PTC FCs M10 – M15

5. Implement Sustainable Farming Practices (SFPs) in one of the selected watersheds 5.1 Work with individual farmers to determine the set of SFPs they want to implement and a plan for implementation

Individual farmer plans for implementing SFPs

PTC FCs M13-M14

5.2 Work with farmers to implement SFPs

Report on progress of implementation of SFPs in farming community

PTC FCs M14 – M18

5.3 Establish Revolving Regulations for PTC, FCs FCs M15-

3

Activity

Means of Verification Responsibility Beneficiaries Time-frame

Fund revolving fund upkeep, spending, accountability, and transparency List of participants contributing to Revolving Fund

M17

6. Project Technical Coordination

6.1 Recruit technical consultants, and issue contracts

Signed contracts for technical consultants TCF - M1 - M2

6.2 Service meetings of the Project Steering Committee

Minutes of Project Steering Committee meetings

TCF - M1 – M18

6.3 Project Review and Evaluation

Evaluation Reports TCF/ PSC UNDP SGP/ Stakeholders

M1 – M18

7. Visibility, Outreach and Engagement

7.1 Prepare information briefs, videos and documents for farming communities and other stakeholders, both within selected watersheds, and throughout Trinidad and Tobago which focus on approaches, experiences and lessons learned from the project

Information briefs, videos and documents produced

TCF/ PSC FCs, MFP, AS

M14 – M18

7.2 Prepare policy briefs for relevant public agencies

Policy briefs TCF/ PSC AS M14 –

M18

7.3 Prepare a quarterly newsletter for the project

Newsletter TCF FCs, MFP, AS

M1 – M18

7.4 Organize and host a national workshop to disseminate project findings and raise awareness

Agenda for National Workshop List of Participants attending Workshop Workshop Report

TCF/ PSC FCs, MFP, AS M17

8. Monitoring and Evaluation of Project Implementation

8.1 Design an M&E framework and plan for assessing TCF’s progress and execution of the project

M&E framework for assessing TCF’s progress and execution TCF, PSC UNDP SGP,

TCF, PSC M1

8.2 Implement M&E Progress reports against TCF, PSC - M1 –

4

Activity

Means of Verification Responsibility Beneficiaries Time-frame

plan indicators presented at project steering committee meetings

M18

8.3 Prepare clear documents and records of the outputs of the M&E exercise

Progress reports against indicators presented at project steering committee meetings

TCF UNDP SGP M1 – M18

9. Monitoring and Evaluation for Sustainability of the Action

9.1 Design an M&E framework for assessing progress and identifying challenges associated with implementing the Plan of Action for the project

M&E framework for assessing sustainability of Action

TCF, PSC, FCs UNDP SGP,

M1

9.2 Implement M&E plan

Progress reports against indicators developed in the M&E plan

TCF, PSC, FCs

UNDP SGP FCs, AS

M1 – M18

1.5 Implementation Plan and Time Frame

See Gantt Chart attached as Annex 4

1.6 Plan to Ensure Community Participation

Stakeholder participation and inclusion is central in the execution of this project, as these help to ensure relevance, and credibility of the project, and adds legitimacy to the efforts of the project partners. This project includes stakeholders in the planning, execution and review of this project through the following means:

Project planning and design 1. Having worked with farming communities since 2009 and conducted needs assessments of

farmers as part of this work, TCF is aware of the specific needs and issues that smallholder hillside farming communities face. These needs and mechanisms to address issues have been used as inputs for designing the proposed project.

2. TCF has consulted with a number of different institutions that support agriculture and farming communities (Ministry of Food Production; FAO; IICA; CARDI; UWI) for inputs to the proposed project. This helped to ensure that the needs of the farming communities are well captured, that the project is nested institutional efforts and frameworks, and that the project does not duplicate efforts.

Project Implementation

1. The proposed project is built on principles of participation and information-sharing, and thus the project activities are designed to facilitate collaborative learning and decision-making among stakeholders (farming communities, PSC, and project team). The major project

5

activities (Baseline Assessment, Design of Intervention Strategies, Building Community Governance, and Implementation of SFPs) have been designed in a manner which includes stakeholder participation throughout the activity and promotes ownership of the outputs and outcomes of the activity; in this way the project hopes to build the capacity of stakeholders.

2. The proposed project design includes several opportunities for review and evaluation of project implementation by the Project’s Steering Committee (PSC). The PSC will comprise representation from key government ministries and agencies, and civil society including representatives from the farmer organizations of the target communities.

Project Monitoring and Evaluation

1. A Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework will be developed to assess the progress and identify and manage challenges in implementing the project. The M&E framework will be designed as a collaborative exercise with the PSC, and will form the basis of periodic review of the project as identified in the workplan.

2. An M&E framework is also being designed to assess TCF’s progress and execution of the project by the PSC. This will help to ensure accountability with regards to project execution, and will have the potential to generate valuable lessons for project management.

3. The farming communities will also be involved in post-project monitoring and periodic review and revision of the developed governance strategies.

6

Section B 1.7 Risks to Successful Implementation Key Assumptions The following are key assumptions on which the project plan is based:

− Sustainable farming practices can lead to economically viable operations − Hillside farmers are willing to engage in opportunities that can potentially generate

greater income − Willingness of farming community to participate in activities − Willingness of donor community to fund activities − Stability of political landscape − Watersheds are not affected by prolonged extreme weather events

Risks to successful implementation While specific risks have been identified for the project, it is being designed in such a manner to mitigate these risks and thus ensure successful completion of the work, and sustainability of the effort.

1. It is recognised that the project requires the buy-in and full participation of the farmers. This will be ensured by i) designing and implementing the project in a fully participatory manner so that there is prior authorization and ownership over the results, products and follow-up, and ii) allowing for sufficient adaptability and flexibility in the project design to ensure success.

2. There is no guarantee that the information, experience and learning generated by this project will be integrated into future projects and decision-making in T&T, especially farmer groups. In order to offset this risk, it will be necessary to engage relevant stakeholders in the project implementation from an early stage, provide opportunities for capacity development amongst key stakeholders, and ensure that project results are integrated into a larger framework for application and follow-up.

1.8 Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Indicators

Formative Evaluation The performance of the project during its implementation will be assessed based on the achievement of milestones; five successive milestones have been developed that correspond with activities of the project. Means of verification of the achievement of these milestones have been identified; these are included in the table below.

Table 3: Project Milestones with corresponding Activities and Means of Verification of Completion

Milestone Activity

Means of Verification

1. Establish Technical Team for the Project 1.1 Assign Technical Coordinator at The Cropper Foundation

Terms of Reference for Technical Coordinator

1.2 Convene Project Steering Committee Guidelines for Project Steering Committee members

7

Milestone Activity

Means of Verification

List of Project Steering Committee Members 1.3 Prepare detailed work plan Work plan 1.4 Recruitment of technical consultants for main project components

TORs for technical consultants Criteria for selection of candidates List of suitable candidates

2. Baseline Assessment of farming communities in three selected watersheds 2.1 Identification of farmers in each watershed

Lists of farmers in each watershed

2.2 Inception workshop in each watershed to introduce project and discuss community needs and priorities

Workshop report

2.3 Hold interviews and focus groups discussions with farmers and other relevant stakeholders; and undertake review of technical documentations

Baseline assessment report for each watershed

3. Participatory planning exercises for the design of intervention strategies 3.1 Conduct workshops and focus group discussions with farmers and other relevant stakeholders within each watershed

Schedule of workshops and focus groups Reports for each watershed on specific considerations and steps required for interventions within each watershed

4. Pilot an exercise for Community Governance in selected watersheds 4.1 Establish a baseline understanding of needs

Document on governance needs for each watershed

4.2 Conduct capacity building workshops within farming communities to address governance challenges especially related to planning and decision-making

Schedule of workshops Report for each watershed that details the approach, experiences, and lessons learnt from the pilot exercises

5. Implement Sustainable Farming Practices (SFPs) in one of the selected watersheds 5.1 Work with individual farmers to determine the set of SFPs they want to implement and a plan for implementation

Individual farmer plans for implementing SFPs

5.2 Work with farmers to implement SFPs

Report on progress of implementation of SFPs in farming community

5.3 Establish Revolving Fund to support implementation and mainstreaming of SFPs

Regulations for revolving fund upkeep, spending, accountability, and transparency List of participants contributing to Revolving Fund

The Implementation plan for the project (Section 1.5) identifies opportunities for review for the evaluation, correction and adjustment of the project design. The evaluation plan for assessing the progress of the project will be designed as a collaborative effort among the PSC, the project team and representatives of the farming community (Activity 9.1). Reviews of the project will be done upon completion of milestones, and will be undertaken by the PSC, project team, and the farming

8

communities. Adjustments to the project design will be submitted to the UNDP SGP for review and ‘non-objection’. Summative Evaluation A log frame has been designed to guide the implementation of the project and assess the impact of the project; the log frame is attached as Annex 5. Indicators have been developed in line with the GEF SGP OP5 Project level indicators to assess achievement of the overall objective of the project upon completion; these are included below: Land Degradation and Sustainable Forest Management Target: At least 20% of farming community in each of the watersheds implementing sustainable farming practices. Indicators

− Land preparation practices used − Soil and slope stabilization techniques − Irrigation practices − Weeds, pests and disease management practices − Types of fertilizers, pesticides, and other inputs used on farms

Livelihoods and Sustainable Development Target: At least 20% of farmers agreeing to contribute to the Revolving Fund Indicators

− Number of farmers agreeing to contribute to the revolving fund Empowerment Targets:

− At least 20% of farming community made aware of participatory decision making processes

− At least 20% of the farming community trained in participatory processes Indicators

− Number of farmers attending and participating in decision-making meetings within communities

− Procedures for participatory decision-making within farming communities − Number of persons consulted in the development of plans − Number of farmers attending governance capacity building workshops − Number of farmers trained in facilitating participatory processes − Number of farmers participating in decision-making processes − Number of applications to government agencies for technical support and funding

assistance − Invitations to government agencies to attend Farmer Group meetings

1.9 Sustainability

This project builds on an initiative being led by The Cropper Foundation with several partner institutions to assist farmers in implementing sustainable hillside farming practices throughout Trinidad and Tobago – beginning with the Northern Range (NR). So far, work has been catalyzed in two Northern Range watersheds (Maracas/ St. Joseph and Caura) with funding from

9

the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the local FAO office, and efforts to implement sustainable farming practices in these communities has yielded some very promising results. The current project seeks to build on the work undertaken in the Maracas/St. Joseph and Caura watersheds to establish a baseline and build capacity in three other watersheds in the NR (Santa Cruz, Lopinot and Aripo) in anticipation of the implementation of sustainable hillside farming practices in these three communities. Specifically, the project places significant focus on building capacity within selected communities as a means of ensuring that communities are equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary for ensuring continuity. Additionally, this project is being designed within the overall context of Government of Trinidad and Tobago’s (GoRTT’s) Medium-term Policy Framework document, which lists agriculture and food security as one of the country’s five strategic priorities (2011 – 2014). The approach and activities suggested as a part of this project are therefore directly aligned with the Ministry of Food Production’s National Food Production Action Plan (2012 – 2015); the Food and Agriculture (FAO’s) regional strategy, and the interests of the UNDP SGP. These frameworks provide a very concrete platform upon which the effectiveness and sustainability of this type of project could be achieved. The Cropper Foundation’s established track record in working with agricultural communities in the Northern Range for the past eight years, as well as the Foundation’s strategic partnerships, developed with a number of key agricultural stakeholders (including the Ministry of Food Production, research institutions like the UWI, FAO, IICA and CARDI, and civil society organizations) provides a robust framework for ensuring that the results of this project are fed into other initiatives which can apply its results and lessons. Discussions are currently underway with the IDB regarding (additional) funding to support implementation efforts in these three watersheds (Santa Cruz, Lopinot and Aripo). It is also expected that the IDB funding will help to support similar activities in a number of other critical watersheds throughout Trinidad and Tobago. Because the activities being undertaken in this project are part of a larger plan to improve agricultural activities on hillsides, it is expected that results will be used well beyond the project lifespan.

10

2.0 PROJECT BUDGET INFORMATION SHEET

Section C

2.1 Project Funding Summary

Funding Source Funding Plan, [local currency] Total (local currency)

Total US$ Year 1 Year 2

a. GEF SGP 458,850.00 434,280.00 893,130.00 138,684.78

b. Community 165,000.00 1,500.00 166,500.00 25,854.04

c. Proposing Organization 128,400.00 89,250.00 217,650.00 33,796.58

d. Other co-financiers 72,000.00 48,000.00 120,000.00 18,633.54

Total Project Cost 824,250.00 573,030.00 1,397,280.00 216,968.94

a. Community Contribution Sources of Community Contribution Type Committed or

Projected?* Value, in local currency

1. Farmer’s participation in workshops (estimated 30 farmers per community @ $200 per day)

In Kind P 162,000.00

2. Venue for workshops within each community (estimated at $500 per day for renting community venue)

In Kind P 4,500.00

Total 166,500.00 * Write ‘C’ for committed and ‘P’ for projected funds b. Proposing Organization Contribution Sources of Contribution Type Committed or

Projected?* Value, local currency

1. Core Funding Cash C 217,650.00

Total 217,650.00

* Write ‘C’ for committed and ‘P’ for projected funds c. Other Contributions Sources of Contribution Type Committed or

Projected?* Value, local currency

1. Project Steering Committee Kind P 120,000.00

Total 120,000.00

* Write ‘C’ for committed and ‘P’ for projected funds

11

2.2 Projected Expenditures Expenditure Category

Year 1, [local currency]

Year 2, [local currency

Total, [local currency

US$ % Total

1. Personnel / Labour

162,000.00 162,000.00 25,155.28 11.6

2. Equipment / Materials

0.00 165,000.00 165,000.00 25,621.12 11.8

3. Training / Seminars / Travel/ Workshops

25,500.00 43,250.00 68,750.00 10,675.47 4.9

4. Contracts 387,000.00 218,000.00 605,000.00 93,944.10 43.3 5. Other costs** 227,900.00 126,100.00 354,000.00 54,968.94 25.3 6. Contingency (5%)

21,850.00 20,680.00 42,530.00 6,604.04 3.0

Total Project Cost

824,250.00 573,030.00 1,397,280.00 216,968.94 100.0

**Specify here (category and cost): Project Leadership - $171,000.00

Administration - $63,000.00

Project Steering Committee - $120,000.00

Exchange Rate ([local currency /US $): TT $6.44 = US $1.00 Notes and Remarks: ________________________________________________________________________

2.4 Bank Details

Provide information on any of the Organization’s bank account. Upon being successful, a separate bank account would have to be opened for handling of grant funds - No combining of funds is allowed in the GEF SGP. Account Name : The Cropper Foundation

Title (current, savings, etc): Chequing

Account Number : 560 1388 19902

Branch/Service Centre: Long Circular Mall

Bank Name & Address: Republic Bank Limited, Long Circular Mall, St. James

END OF APPLICATION FORM

Y1 Y2 Y1 Y2

Personnel/ LabourFarmers' participation in workshops ($200/day/farmer)

162,000.00 162,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sub Total 162,000.00 162,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Equipment/material Production of outreach materials for project

100,000.00 0.00 25,000.00 0.00 75,000.00

Funding for purchase of materials and equipment for implementation

65,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65,000.00

Sub Total 165,000.00 0.00 25,000.00 0.00 140,000.00Training/Seminars/ Workshops10 Steering Committee meetings at TT$500/ meeting

5,000.00 0.00 0.00 3,000.00 2,000.00

9 Technical Team meetings at TT$250/ meeting

2,250.00 1,500.00 750.00 0.00 0.00

3 inception workshops (1 per watershed) at TT$3,500/ workshop

10,500.00 1,500.00 0.00 9,000.00 0.00

6 workshops (2 per watershed) for capacity building exercises at TT$3,500/ workshop

21,000.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 9,000.00 9,000.00

1 national workshop at TT$15,000

15,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15,000.00

1 community fair at TT$15,000

15,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15,000.00

Sub Total 68,750.00 4,500.00 2,250.00 21,000.00 41,000.00ContractsTechnical Coordinator (TT$20,000/ month x 18 months)

360,000.00 24,000.00 12,000.00 216,000.00 108,000.00

Baseline Assessment (TT$25,000/ watershed x 3 watersheds)

75,000.00 0.00 0.00 75,000.00 0.00

Capacity Building (TT$1,600/ day x 75 days)

120,000.00 0.00 0.00 72,000.00 48,000.00

Implementing SFPs (TT $50,000)

50,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50,000.00

SubTotal 605,000.00 24,000.00 12,000.00 363,000.00 206,000.00Other: Project Leadership and Administration

Inkind UNDP SGP Support Expenditure Categories Total Anticipated Cost

(TT$)

Project leadership at The Cropper Foundation (TT$5,000/ month x 18 months)

171,000.00 81,900.00 41,000.00 32,000.00 16,100.00

Project Steering Committee (TT$12,000) x 10 persons

120,000.00 72,000.00 48,000.00 0.00 0.00

Administrative support 63,000.00 21,000.00 10,500.00 21,000.00 10,500.00Sub Total 354,000.00 174,900.00 99,500.00 53,000.00 26,600.00Sub total of budget categories

1354,750.00 365,400.00 138,750.00 437,000.00 413,600.00

Contingency (5%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 21,850.00 20,680.00Total cost (TT $) 1397,280.00 365,400.00 138,750.00 458,850.00 434,280.00Total cost (US $) 216,968.94 56,739.13 21,545.03 71,250.00 67,434.78

ANNEX 1

1

Sustaining the Northern Range and its Agriculture

First Planning Workshop

May 2-3 2007

Room E, Dudley Huggins Building

The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine

Draft Note of Workshop

Opening

Angela Cropper, President of The Cropper Foundation welcomed the participants and

invited them to share their background with the group. See Annex I for the list of

participants. She then set the background and rationale for the project as one of the ways

in which the Foundation is following up on the Northern Range Assessment by

continuing to be catalytic and collaborative in an attempt to contribute to the systematic

and integrative management of the Northern Range.

Overview of Project Concept

Sarika Maharaj presented the main findings of the Northern Range Assessments-

condition of the main resources (forest, freshwater, biodiversity and coastal); and drivers

and effectiveness of responses to date-followed by the concept of the project ‘Sustaining

the Northern Range and its Agriculture’ (See attached power point presentation ‘NRA

Findings 1st planning workshop_SNRAIA_2 MAY 07’)

Discussion of project concept

Approach

Project can learn and build from other initiatives so as to build critical mass and be

strategic about interventions while maximizing limited resources. The technical

knowledge for such a project exists in the country and regionally, the main uncertainties

would probably be impetus and funding. It should also have an overlay of macro level

planning that can contribute to integrated watershed management and the ridge to reef

concept, which were considered in the project concept.

There should be buy in from public sector to more effectively influence the possibility of

funding and collaboration during planning and implementation.

Two main discussion points or concerns in the project approach were agriculture as the

focal point for intervention and the selection of communities across the Range. The first

concern was driven by the views that agriculture is one of the drivers, land clearance and

pollution from settlements is more of a threat to degradation and the project should

maximize on limited resources. The counter point, which was agreed on, was that

agriculture as an intervention point will inevitably cross cut issues associated with other

drivers such as the current top down and ad hoc approach to physical planning, lack of

coordination in public sector, superficial understanding of links between ecosystem and

2

human well-being, which is reflected by current behaviour and practices. To add to the

argument, there are no current initiatives that address the agronomic practices on the

Northern Range but that there are other efforts within the public sector and within the

Foundation that the project can contribute to in terms of an integrated approach to the

sustainable management of the Northern Range.

Following from the first discussion point and fuelled by the collective sense of urgency of

the rate of degradation, it was decided that watersheds should considered as the

management units. The new approach would be to conduct baseline assessments in the

watersheds of concern, identify the critical ones and then select communities within these

watersheds, possibly traversing and tracking the river courses onto the Caroni Plain in the

south and the coast in the north. The project sites can then reflect a range of variables

that can provide research opportunities to compare and contrast situations so that the

learnings can better inform national policies and planning as well as have wider

applications.

Revised Working Title

The project title was revised, to reflect the discussions, to ‘Towards an Integrated

Management of the Northern Range: An EcoAgriCulture Project’.

Some Project Needs Identified:

Mapping of agriculture across the Northern Range

History of development across the Range to better understand and learn from the

drivers of change, the activities and their impacts, both positive and negative.

Baseline assessments for watersheds of different characteristics (location,

activities, condition) to identify critical watersheds/subwatersheds, livelihood

activities and active agents for potential partners.

Existing Resources

The project will build on, learn from and bring together existing resources in terms of

programmes, research and technical capacity. Some relevant resources identified were:

CARDI

ECIAF

Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, UWI, St. Augustine

Incentive programmes in Forestry Division and Extension Training and

Information Services Division of the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine

Resources

CANARI (i.e. watershed valuation in Jamaica and St. Lucia)

KAIRI Consultants ( Assessment of St. Anns/Maraval and Courland Watersheds)

Organic certification process in Jamaica

Jagdeo Initiative in Guyana

CARICOM GECAFS initiative

3

Brief Assessment of Watersheds

The major watersheds were assessed based on the findings of the Northern Range, and on

the ground experience by personnel from Water Resources Agency (R. Sankar) and

Forestry Division, NW Conservancy (N. Hosein and K. Belcon). Preliminary

assessments looked at activities and condition of the main watersheds, including the

forest reserves, unauthorized agriculture and cultivation of illegal crops.

Seven watersheds were identified as critical and five that require further consideration.

Watersheds Identified as Critical

1. Tucker valley

2. POS/Maraval/Moka/St. Anns

3. San Juan/Santa Cruz

4. Caura/Tacarigua

5. Lopinot

6. Gunapo

7. Aripo

Watersheds for further consideration

1. St. Joseph/Maracas

2. Arima

3. Mausica

4. Arouca

5. Five Rivers

Criteria and Method for Watershed Selection

Participants amended the list of suggestions for criteria for site selection by adding to the

elements as well as grouping them into three dimensions along ecological lines for

consideration. These elements will be assigned reference values or weights and analysed

with statistical software. The watershed will then be subjected to further assessment for

selection by adding an overlay of human considerations, which would also be weighted

and statistically analysed. See Annex II for table of criteria for watershed selection.

Baseline Assessments

The list of suggested elements for baseline assessments was amended and it was agreed

that the Environmental Management Authority’s Terms of Reference for an EIA be used

to expand the first three elements.

Revised list of baseline assessments:

1. Ecological characterisation

2. Geophysical characterisation

3. Socio-economic setting

4. Governance and capacity

5. Crop selection, agronomic practices and soil analysis

6. Land tenure arrangements

4

7. Farmer health

8. Micro-economic analyses

9. Influence, positive and negative ,of external programmes (including extension

services of the Ministry of Agriculture)

10. Past and existing interventions and activities

11. Identification of scope of interventions for each selected community

Research Potential

The project will seek to incorporate a research overlay, which if done coherently and

effectively, can be used to distil methods and experience for application elsewhere as

well as influence national policy and practice.

Several categories of research opportunities were identified:

1. Agricultural (see attached power point presentation ‘Research Potential’)

2. Social

3. Political

4. Economic

5. Ecological

(See Annex III for indicators for monitoring and assessment)

Risks Identified

1. Buy in from farmers and communities

2. Lack of/insufficient funding

3. No political buy in

4. Loss of existing limited political support

5. Inadequate capacity in community (e.g. governance, organization, leadership,

technical)

6. lateness of intervention

7. Pre-emption by current development actions

8. Lack of collaboration

9. Continuity (of collaborators and communities/farmers)

10. Data unavailability

Project Organisation

It was agreed to establish a Project Steering Committee which would comprise individual

and/or organizations with relevant technical expertise as well as representatives from

potential partnering public agencies. Individuals will be selected and invited after the

scope and nature of expertise have been identified. Some potential collaborators include:

CARDI

CABI

CANARI

UWI:

o Department of Land Surveying and Information

o Agricultural Economics and Extension

o SEDU, Department of Economics

o Life Sciences

5

UTT

Relevant Ministries

o Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources

o Community Development

o Planning and Development

o Public Utilities and the Environment

o Tourism

o Works

Farmers associations within the selected watershed

Follow up

1. Further develop project concept

2. List of criteria, weighted and analysed

3. Baseline assessments detailed so as to outline Terms of Reference

4. Flow chart of project process

5. Collation of existing information on watersheds

6. Planning for 2nd

planning workshop to develop project document

Summary of Outputs

1. Keep agriculture as the intervention point

2. First identify critical watersheds and then select communities to locate project

sites

3. Identification of some project needs and existing resources for some of the needs

4. Preliminary assessment of watersheds and identification of watersheds of concern

5. Criteria and method for selection of watersheds

6. Some baseline assessment

7. Potential areas for research

8. Possible risks

9. Project to be guided by Project Steering Committee

TCF May 4, 2007

6

ANNEX I

Participant List

No Name Designation & Organisation Address E-mail and Telephone

1 Alamu, Shango

PRO Caura Valley Farmers

Association

Home: 640-8859 (Glen Ramjag)

Cell: 373-3034

ixora006@yahoo.com

2 Amoroso, Candace

Environmental Policy Analyst

Ministry of Public Utilities and

the Environment

16-18 Sackville St

POS

Office: 627-5915 ext 501

fax is 625-7003

camoroso@pubutilenv.tt

3

Barnes, Latona

Town and Country Planning

Division, Ministry of Planning

and Development

Eric Williams Finance Bldg

Independence Sq, POS

Office: 627-9700 ext 2143

Cell: 775-6092

4 Bellamy, Salisha

Land Administration Agency

Ministry of Agriculture

110-112 Frederick St

POS

Office: 627-9002, 627-9070

Cell: 757-4644

salisha6@yahoo.com

5 Belcon, Kathleen

Forestry Division Farm Rd, St. Joseph Cell: 776-9233

fullcircle2kathy@yahoo.coom

6 Cropper, Angela

President, The Cropper

Foundation

CCA Bldg 7, Fernandes

Industrial Centre, Laventille

626-2628/2564

acropper@thecropperfoundation.org

7 De Freitas,

Claudette

Information Resource Manager,

Caribbean Agricultural

Research and Development

Institute (CARDI)

UWI, St. AUgustine ic@cardi.org

defreitas.c@gamil.com

7

No Name Designation & Organisation Address E-mail and Telephone

8 George, Andre

CAB International

Caribbean and Latin America

Regional Centre

Gordon St, Curepe 662-4173, 645-7628

ageorge.andre@gmail.com

www.cabi.org

9 Homer, Floyd

President, Trust for Sustainable

Livelihoods

23 McInroy St, Curepe floyd@sustrust.org

10 Hosein, Nasir

NW Conservancy, Forestry

Division

Farm Rd, St. Joseph Cell: 776-2909

11 James, Carol

Independent facilitator 4 Cocrico St, Samaan Gardens

Trincity

Home: 640-5941

Cell: 680-0504

ackjames@tstt.net.tt

12 Lee Yuen, Wendy

PO Box 133

POS

643-7110

Cell: 681-8534

leeyuens@gamil.com

13 Maharaj, Sarika Programme officer

The Cropper Foundation

CCA Bldg 7, Fernandes

Industrial Centre, Laventille

626-2628/2564

smaharaj@thecropperfoundation.org

14 Mohammed,

Kadeem

Technician, CARDI

UWI, St. Augustine 645-1205

kmohammed@cardi.org

15 Ram, Justin Sustainable Economic

Development Unit (SEDU)

Dept. Economics, Faculty of

Social Sciences, UWI, St.

Augustine

jram@fss.uwi.tt

16 Ramlal, Bheshem Lecturer, UWI Dept. Surveying and Land

Information, UWI, St.

Augustine

Cell: 735-4235

bhramlal@eng.uwi.tt

8

No Name

Designation & Organisation Address E-mail and Telephone

17 Sankar, Randolph

Assistant Manager

Water Resources Agency

WASA Head Office

Farm Rd, Valsayn, St. Joseph

Office: Tel: 868 662 2302 ext 3840

Fax: 662-2810

sank3193@wasa.gov.tt

18 Pantin, Dennis Sustainable Economic

Development Unit (SEDU) Dept. Economics, Faculty of

Social Sciences, UWI, St.

Augustine

dpantin@fss.uwi.tt

19 Polar, Perry CAB International

Caribbean and Latin America

Regional Centre

Gordon St, Curepe 662-4173, 645-7628

P.Polar@cabi.org

www.cabi.org

20 Simpson, Leslie

Soil Scientist

CARDI

UWI, Mona, Jamaica (876) 977-1222

leslieasimpson@hotmail.com

9

ANNEX 11

Criteria for Watershed Selection

Vulnerability of Ecosystem Nature & Extent of Activities Significance to

Ecosystem

Services

Overlaying Considerations

Geophysical characteristics

1. Topography

2. Geology

3. Land capability

4. Slope

5. Hydrology

6. Rainfall

7. Coastal area

Agriculture:

1. Area under cultivation

2. Type of agriculture

3. Agricultural systems

4. Agricultural and

cultural practices

5. Hillside vs flat lands

Potential for water:

1. Production

2. Quality

Governance, Capacity, HWB:

1. Socio-economic characteristics

Size of community in relation to

watershed

Household/community income

2. Governance

3. Capacity

4. Land tenure

5. Existing livelihood activities

6. Existing collaboration and demo

sites

7. Community support

Settlement:

1. % area under settlement

2. no of people

Species significance:

1. Endemism

2. Richness

3. Threatened sp.

Political agenda

Recreation:

1. no of visitors

2. facilities

Amenity value:

1. No of sites

2. No of visitors

Access to funding

Land cover

Ecological

characterisation

Level of degradation

10

ANNEX III

Categories of Indicators for Monitoring and Assessment

Political Economic Social Ecological

Change in policy and

practice

Cost and return of

production

Health of farmers Freshwater:

- Quality

(measurement

of possible

bio-chemical

and physical

pollution)

Quantity

New policies and

programmes

Market share Level of

participation:

-age

-number

-time

-opportunities

Forest:

- Tree cover

- Species

diversity

- endemism

Better enforcement:

- Better regulation

- Increased

enforcement

- Strengthened

institutional

framework

Environment and

Health cost and

benefit

Behavioral Change:

- Practice

- Management

- Self reliance

- Community

cohesion

Consumer

acceptance

Clarification/improveme

nt in land tenure and

access rights

Cost of dredging Diversity of

agricultural outputs

and other income

generating

opportunities

Agroecosystems:

- Soil bio-

composition

- Beneficial

insects

Pest and diseases

Incentives

Ecotourism

potential

Marine & Coastal:

- Health of

mangroves

- Size and extent

of mangroves

Change in physical

planning

Flooding

ANNEX 2

Implementation of Sustainable Farming Practices in

Trinidad’s Northern Range Communities

Building Governance Capacity in a Hillside Farming Community

Purpose: Capacity Building for community governance in hillside watershed communities

Building Small Scale Farmers’ Capacity to

Implement Sustainable Farming Practices in

Trinidad’s Northern Range Purpose: Building resilience and sustainability of livelihoods in Northern Range Communities

Project for Mainstreaming Sustainable Farming

Practices in Trinidad’s Northern Range

Purpose: Building resilience and sustainability of livelihoods in Northern Range Communities; Reducing incidences of land degradation from direct farm practices

Project for Ecosystem Services

Green Fund Project

Purpose: Building resilience and sustainability of livelihoods in Northern Range Communities

Payment for Ecosystem Services in an Agricultural

Landscape Purpose: Consensus building among stakeholders of the value of sustainable farming practices in hillside watershed communities

PROJECT FRAMEWORK FOR THE CROPPER FOUNDATION

ANNEX 4

Activity # Activity M1 M2 M3 M4

1.1 Assign Technical Coordinator at The Cropper Foundation1.2 Convene Project Steering Committee1.3 Prepare detailed work plan

1.4 Begin recruitment of technical consultants for main project activities

2.1 Identification of farmers in each watershed

2.2Inception workshop in each watershed to introduce project and discuss community needs and priorities

2.3 Hold interviews and focus groups discussions Report on Baseline Assessment completed

3.1Conduct workshops and focus group discussions with farmers and other relevant stakeholders in each watershedReports for each watershed on steps required for intervention in each watershed completed

4.1 Establish a baseline understanding of needs

4.2Conduct capacity building workshops within farming communities to address governance challenges especially related to planning and decision-makingReports for each watershed on approach, experiences and lessons learnt from pilot exercises

5.1Work with individual farmers to determine the set of SFPs they want to implement and a plan for implementation

5.2 Work with farmers to implement sustainable farming practices

5.3Establish revolving fund to support implementation and mainstreaming of SFPsReport on implementation of sustainable farming practices

6.1 Recruit technical consultants, and issue contracts6.2 Meetings of the PSC6.3 Project Review and Evaluation

7.1 Prepare information briefs, videos and documents7.2 Prepare policy briefs7.3 Prepare a quarterly newsletter for the project

7.4Organize and host a national workshop to disseminate project findings and raise awarenessReport on national workshop

Visibility, Outreach and Engagement

Monitoring and Evaluation of Project Implementation

Milestone 1: Establish Technical Team for the Project

Milestone 2: Baseline Assessment of farming communities in three selected watersheds

Milestone 3: Participatory planning exercises for the design of intervention strategies

Milestone 4: Pilot and exercise for Community Governance in selected watersheds

Project Technical Coordination

Milestone 5: Implement sustainable farming practices in one of the selected watersheds

8.1Design an M&E framework and plan for assessing TCF's progress and execution of the project

8.2 Implement M&E PlanReports on M&E exercise

9.1 Design and M&E framework for assessing progress and identifying challenges associated with implementing the Plan of Action for the Project

9.2 Implement M&E PlanReports on M&E exercise

M# - Month Number

Prepared by: The Cropper Foundation

Monitoring and Evaluation for Sustainability of the Action

M5 M6 M7 M8 M9 M10 M11 M12 M13 M14 M15 M16 M17 M18