EVALUATION

1. To what extent and under what conditions did an increased fish provision lead to better employment for fishing among households?
Evaluability: MAYBE. “Better employment” can only be achieved under operational and profitable enterprises or shifts to jobs that
are not depleting fish resource, e.g. ecotourism and SMEs in growth centers near MKBAs.
Result area: Fish provision
Indicator/unit Appropriateness 8 Data Availability 9 Data Quality 10 Analyses Overall Remarks
CPUE within
municipal fishing
ground (relative to
Baseline)
Weighted averages
of Kg/day w/in
MFG
Fish biomass in
MPA
Yes. This is the
standard indicator
for fisheries
monitoring.
Yes. This is the
standard indicator
for fisheries
monitoring.
Yes. This is a very
important
parameter on the
Yes. This is a direct TA
by Tetra Tech. Data are
in their database.
Currently, baseline
monitoring data are
available. While
midterm data are still
being processed. Data
collection is
programmed to be
collected at the start or
baseline, midterm and
at EOP. Sampling
strategy is intensive
covering 3-month of
CPUE in at least 3
LGUs per MKBA
covering at least 1
barangay per LGU.
Yes. In addition, it
covers at least 3 MPAs
per MKBA with 1 MPA
Yes. The data are
summarized in a standard
format for fisheries
reporting system. For
the available baseline
information data, it was
not yet analyzed for an
“objective decision
making” approach. The
analyses covering the
baseline and midterm
reports may provide a
trend on the
effectiveness of the
project intervention
resulting an increase in
fish provision.
Yes. The data are
summarized in a standard
manner with an
Annex 4 - 2
Trend will show the %
increase or decrease of
the catch levels in
relation to the level of
fishing effort.
Increase/Decrease of
the standing fish
biomasses in the MPAs
and the spill-over effect
will also be factored in.
Such analyses will be
done at the targetspecies
level
(economically
important species). For
the fish biomass, it is
recommended that
slender fishes such as
from the Family
Aulotomidae be
excluded in the
computation of fish
It “may” in the sense
be that there are many
factors involved related
to CPUE. This
parameter has to be
analyzed in relation to
the other indicators
such as increased
enforcement beyond
MPAs or at the
municipal or inter-LGU
levels.
The fish information
(e.g. fish stocks) in
MPAs however can
drastically change due
to natural calamities
such as storms and
earthquakes. These
two events did happen
in Calamianes and
Danajon Reef MKBAs,
8
Is the indicator/unit appropriate?
9
Are there records in Tetra Tech to objectively substantiate the reporting of these indicators to USAID?
10
Are the data collected, analyzed and reported to USAID by Tetra Tech systematically organized or sufficient to inform objective
decision-making?