Download - Maize

Process monitoring will include participatory reviews of milestones in each region and SI during virtual
and annual face‐to‐face meetings of research partners; and taking corrective measures if milestones are
delayed. Performance assessment will review the quality and quantity of outputs and outcomes, based
on the evolution of Key Performance Indicators (Table 5). 6 Uptake of outputs by clients (NARSs, seed
companies, NGOs and extensionists, policy makers) will be a key indicator for the usefulness and quality
of the outputs, and will be supported at one‐, two‐ or three‐yearly intervals, depending on the nature
and extent of the change, using web‐based surveys and stakeholder consultations that capture outcome
indicators.
Process monitoring and performance assessment will be conducted in a participatory manner
(Douthwaite et al. 2007) to emphasize learning and improvements, rather than simply stacking outputs
and ticking boxes to show that milestones have or have not been accomplished. If a “failure” to
complete a milestone leads to better understanding of the situation being addressed and development
of a better way to accomplish the objective behind the milestone, then the initial effort was not
necessarily a failure. The participatory approach will also emphasize a multidisciplinary approach to
allow unforeseen events (failures as well as unexpected successes) to be reflected upon from different
perspectives and better assessment of non‐technical factors that condition technology choice, adoption,
and adaptation by small‐scale farmers.
Impact assessment will be done in SI 1 (Socioeconomics and policies for maize futures) in collaboration
with external experts. It will evaluate the success of MAIZE in achieving its stated goals and objectives. It
will measure progress using tangible indicators identified by the program, testing how the program
output differs from a counterfactual situation without interventions. It will use recent advances in both
qualitative (outcome mapping, narrative stories with key informants) and quantitative approaches
(econometric, bio‐economic modeling, and general equilibrium modeling) to understand the
determinants of adoption. It will evaluate the heterogeneous economic, social (poverty and gender) and
environmental impacts of interventions on the target groups, offer realistic assessment of returns to
investment, and extract useful insights for targeting, up‐scaling and priority setting of proposed future
interventions (Alston et al. 1995; Wooldridge 2002; Alwang and Siegel 2003; Moyo et al. 2007;
Zilberman and Waibel 2007; Shiferaw et al. 2008).
Given research‐to‐impact timelines, farm‐level impact assessments during 2011–13 will focus on
establishing baselines and monitoring adoption in three primary project intervention areas in SI 2 and on
assessing past and on‐going impacts for SI 4 and SI 5. This will be in addition to a rigorous gender audit
done for the entire MAIZE agenda. Impact assessment during 2014–16 will focus on SI 2, SI 3, SI 6, and SI
7, while SI 8 and SI 9 will only be monitored at the level of output and outcomes.
6 In addition to technical performance indicators, generic key performance indicators (KPIs) based on institutional financial
reports will be prepared in accordance with international accounting standards, which measure aspects such as liquidity,
financial stability, organizational efficiency, and planning and investment capability. Risk management and organizational KPIs,
while useful, are less standardized than financial KPIs and therefore need to be interpreted with more caution. In addition to
using such KPIs, the Lead Center will commission its own yearly organizational audit from management and risk‐assessment
experts who would report their findings and recommendations to management as well as the Oversight Committee.
60