Front Cover
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Program development and delive...
 The FSSP support base
 Technical assistance
 Networking activities
 Special studies
 Regional activities
 Summary calendar

Group Title: Annual work plan, Farming Systems Support Project
Title: Annual workplan
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00055456/00006
 Material Information
Title: Annual workplan
Series Title: Annual work plan
Physical Description: v. : ; 29 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Farming Systems Support Project
United States -- Agency for International Development
Publisher: University of Florida.
Place of Publication: Gainesville
Publication Date: 1985 draft version
Frequency: annual
Subject: Agricultural extension work -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Agricultural extension work -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
Issuing Body: Submitted to U.S. Agency for International Development.
General Note: Description based on: 1984; title from cover.
General Note: Latest issue consulted: 1986.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00055456
Volume ID: VID00006
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 70876997
lccn - 2006229270

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Title Page
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
    Program development and delivery
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
    The FSSP support base
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
    Technical assistance
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
    Networking activities
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
    Special studies
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
    Regional activities
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
    Summary calendar
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
Full Text

Farming Systems Support Projeot
International Programs Office of Agriculture and
Institute of Food and Office of Multisectoral Development
Agricultural Sciences Bureau for Science and Technology
University of Florida Agency for International Development
Gainesville, Florida 32611 Washington, D.C. 20523

Farming Systems Support Project

January 29, 1985

Cooperative Agreement No. Dan-4099-A-00-2083-00

Project No. 936-4099

Submitted to

The United States
Agency for International Development

Pr epar ed by

University of Florida
in cooperation with
FSSP Support Entities


PREFACE...................... ................... ........... 5

INTRODUCTION ...................................................7

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY...............................9

Present Support Structure............................13
Strengthening Through Domestic Workshops..............13
Strengthening Through Technical Assistance............14
Projections For 1986-87 and Beyond.....................14

Synthesis for Training and Comparative Analysis.......17
Units and Their Development............................17
Delivery of Training Activities.......................19
Projections for 1986-87 and Beyond...................19

FSSP/FSR Biodata File.................................21
Project Support ....... ......... .......................22
MSTAT (Michigan State Statistics).....................24

Networks hops........... ...... ...... ........ .......... 27
Publications ..........................................28
FSSP Documentation...................................30

Organization and Management Handbook..................33
Intra-Household Dynamics and FSR/E...................34
Comparison of Approaches to FSR.......................34

Africa............. ...... ................. .......... 37
Latin America and the Caribbean.......................43
Asia and the Near East.................................45

SUMMARY CALENDAR .............................................47

Overview of FSSP Capability...........................51
Official MOA Contacts.................................53
Support Entities' Work Plan Summary...................55
Budgets and Accounts Schedules .......................61


Farming Systems Support Project Work Plan

As a short-term scope of work directed toward overall project
objectives, this Work Plan highlights activities and reaffirms current
undertakings in a formalized framework. It constitutes a general guide to
the project's synthesis and state-of-the-arts work through technical
assistance, training and networking support to AID Missions and national
farming systems research and extension projects and programs for the coming

This document is not to be construed as absolute, either as
criteria for evaluation or progress. It represents the known quantity of
demand for services and the initiatives that have been undertaken by the
project and the Support Entity network which it represents. However,
experience has shown that a significant portion of the demand for project
services remains an unknown quantity at any given time. Efforts to
structure that demand are, to a large extent, what comprises the current
Work Plan. Priorities have been set based on past demand and experience in
responding to that demand.

The development of FSR/E capabilities in developing countries
involves synthesis and state-of-the-arts efforts in both technical
assistance and institution strengthening. Technical assistance provides
immediate help in resolving problems in program management. Institution
building helps create within participating countries the professional
expertise and commitment necessary for self-sustaining, coordinated
national programs. These represent the scope of work for the FSSP and what
is reflected in this Work Plan.

Planning Beyond 1985

Each section of this Work Plan concludes with some perspectives for
the duration of the project, projections for 1986-87 and beyond. These
reflect the future direction of project resource allocation as perceived at
this time. They also raise a number of questions pertaining to the broader
.outlook for farming systems research and extension beyond the life of this
proj ect.

FSR/E continues to undergo an evolutionary process and the Farming
Systems Support Project is evolving along with it, while supporting it in
the process. The state-of-the-art is dynamic, beyond the life and
resources of the project.


This Work Plan addresses specifically plans for 1985, generally
plans through 1987 (the period of the first Cooperative Agreement) and
briefly, general perspectives for a second five year agreement to 1992,
should such action occur. The FSSP is dedicated to: 1) strengthening the
farming systems approach to agricultural research and extension, 2)
coordinating program development for research and extension, 3) providing
basis for improved adaptive research, and 4) improved adoption and use of
Farming Systems Research and Extension (FSR/E) technology and methods.

In 1985 the early geographical focus will continue with primary

th' t'P t^H faylrmB-t n cvcfamo'* mar :

a-t;LnulugL y wj.j adwayM Lcmau. 1mapuranu Lo improve agricu.Lrural research
and extension.

The philosophy and role of the FSSP remains intact as an important
Science and Technology Bureau support component to the regional AID
Bureaus. The FSSP continues to provide communication linkages among


Following from experience in Stage 1 of FSSP activity (needs
assessment, evaluation and design) the overall implementation structure of
the FSSP has emerged through core staff, AID/S&T and Support Entity
deliberations. This structure, depicted in Figure 1, is a program
planning, development and delivery model for budgeting and implementing the

Figure 1. FSSP Program Planning, Development and Delivery Model.

Components and dynamics of the model include:

Project Administration: consists of the Director's offices,
including two Assistants to the Director and secreterial support.

Administrative Support: flows from the University of Florida and 25
other Support Entities represented by the Administrative Council
(three members) and Administrative Coordinators (one from each SE).

Program Management: consists of four core regional coordinators
(West Africa, East Africa, Asia/Near East, Latin America) and a
communication/editorial coordinator. All have general program
development responsibilities.

Program Support: is facilitated through the SEs from the Technical
Committee, Program Leaders (1 from each SE) and Program Associates
(nearly 600). Direct support emerges with task force, team and
individual participation.

Program Delivery: addresses needs in the regions through various
training/networking and technical assistance program services
(Figure 2). Worldwide activity includes the FSSP Newsletter,
documentation and publication, and a symposium, while U.S. oriented
services strengthen faculty and support entity capability through
workshops and in-service experience.


Workshops Diagnostic
Multicountry Design
Courses Evaluation
interventions Briefing / Debriefing
Courses Participant add-on
Meetings Support Base
Support Base Guidelines
Resources Resources
Units Personnel
Team Exchange

Figure 2. FSSP Delivery Capacity Through Program Services

Program Development: evolves from nearly all FSSP interventions anc
activities through deliberate state-of-the-art synthesis (Figure
3). The approach includes:

Resources from state-of-the-art synthesis based in
practitioner experience (human), project experience
(cases) and research results (literature).

Resources for program delivery are provided through
training aids (slide-tape modules, manuals, etc.),
training techniques (team building, group
interaction, etc.) and technical assistance

Training/Learning Units focus upon needs in operating the
farming systems approach inclusive of concepts, skills and

program development and delivery.

Program Development

Resurcs/ Human Case Literature Training Training Technical
%," 4Assistance
Units Aids Techniques Guidelines
Concepts /
1. / /
\ / \ /
\ / \ /
\ / \ /
% / \ /
State- /
of-the Delivery
Arts /
/ \ /

Figure 3. Program Development for Training/Learning

The following Work Plan is developed against the backdrop provide<
by this presentation of the FSSP conceptual model for program development
and delivery. The model serves as a basis for establishing priorities anm
budgets for program development activities and delivery of program
services. The budget presented in Appendix 2, is organized around four
schedules: Administration, Management, Program Development and Program
Delivery. These functions, and the processes involved, are incorporated
into a procedural manual, which will be tested, refined and utilized in
1985. The procedural manual is specifically directed to the interworking!
of varied core. SE. AID S&T and Mission activities within the FSSP.


Present Support Structure

Twenty-five SEs have signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with
the FSSP. Of these, 20 are Universities and the remaining five are private
consulting firms. At the present time, there is no policy regarding
purging or replacement of these entities. There is now in effect a
moratorium on signing any more MOAs with other entities.

There are 735 individuals listed in the FSSP Bio-data files as
possible sources of support. Of these, 565 are Program Associates (PAs)
from the affiliated universities. Additionally, 170 individuals are listed
as independent within the FSSP Bio-data. (See Appendix 3) Proj ected
changes within the SE biodata structure wfil consist of updating and
streamlining the current system.

Strengthening Through Domestic Workshops

Domestic Workshop I (DWI) has represented the first round of
training activities for the SEs. DWI is primarily used as an introduction
and orientation to the farming systems approach to agricultural
development. DWI represents a "What is" approach to the concepts of FSR.
It presents a framework for thinking about the FSR approach. The primary
audience for DWI has been faculty of U.S. universities; international
graduate students studying in the U.S. and USAID representatives have also
attended these workshops.

DWI has been used to strengthen the ability of U.S. institutions to
do FSR work. The strategy of the FSSP has been to use these workshops to
strengthen the personnel base of the SEs by exposing personnel to the
concepts of FSR. Often Title XII Strengthening Grant monies used by the
participating institutions to send faculty to the various DWIs in 1984,
hosted by the University of Minnesota, Southern Illinois University, and
Virginia State University.

It appears that the demand for DWI may be slackening. However,
there will probably be enough demand, from new personnel at universities
and at USAID, to continue the presentation of this workshop. The FSSP is
currently polling all PAs to get a better feeling for the demand for DWI
within the FSSP network. The current strategy regarding DWI is to
establish DWI at one of the SEs, so that it may continue to be offered
annually or as demand dictates.


i rmn nrn i~C n A ,n .

since SEs can use other funds for participants. Projected target dates for
these workshops are: mid-year for DWIII, and fourth-quarter for DWII.

Strengthening Through Technical Assistance

General technical assistance activities: Either teams, or
individuals for teams, are selected from Support Entities for needs assess-
ments, project design or project evaluation activities in FSR. The details
of these activities are provided under "TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Project
Support" in this workplan.

Participant add-ons (PAOs): The concept of a participant add-on
(PAO) was added to FSSP Support Entity strengthening activities during
1984. A PAO candidate is defined .as a Program Associate who has
participated in a general farming systems orientation workshop (or
equivalent), has a high degree of interest in working in some facet of FSR,
hopes to perform such FSR work overseas (preferably in Africa), and has no
previous hands-on experience in implementing FSR. PAO candidates are
nominated by either the Program Leader or the Administrative Coordinator of
respective Support Entities from their lists of Program Associates. Each
Support Entity can nominate up to five PAO candidates.

The PAO category is intermediate in the general upgrade experience
of Program Associates between no experience and some hands-on FSR
experience. It is not seen as a replacement for hands-on experience, but
rather as a way in which several Program Associates can put their interest
in FSR to the test and decide whether or not to invest more of themselves
in FSR activities in the future. The FSSP views the PAO category as a
significant upgrade of Support Entity faculty or staff in the use of the
tools of FSR methodology. Such individuals should serve to strengthen the
international faculty expertise of the given Support Entity they represent.

During 1985, the FSSP core hopes to be able to include as many PAOs
as possible in African FSR activities. PAOs will also be considered for
Asian and Latin American FSR activities on a case-by-case basis. The FSSP
core, along with the Support Entity Program Leaders, believes the PAO
concept is vital to the continued upgrading of FSR expertise in the FSSP
network, and accords this function a very high priority.

Projections For 1986-87 and Beyond

Sunnort Entfty Strw'1wit-lltr Thar- iQA Pi n -i,-n -r Vnt- f-n- A

.JU A. k i ULJ. L ULL L. J.k WJ.LJ.. U JC =V CW CU L.U U. V, CL iLU LL LLI, WU L 1.L L16 4LLU
support benefits among various institutions for future and continued
affiliation. Biodata files will be updated and purged of those individuals
who neglect to provide full and accurate information needed by the FSSP.

Domestic Workshops: It is anticipated that both DWII and DWIII will
be institutionalized with one or more of the Support Entities. They may
also become a part of the course offerings at universities or regional
institutions in West Africa and Latin America. Domestically, this will
enable these workshops to be given as demand dictates. Internationally,
the workshops and the training units developed for use in FSR course
offerings have the potential to support the development of an indigenous
capacity in farming systems.



Synthesis for Training and Comparative Analysis

Since last year, the FSSP has moved away from the development of
training "courses" toward the development of "units" that can better link
its training initiatives with comparative analysis and a synthesis of the
state-of-the arts. The importance of this approach is inherent in the
project's multiple objectives. As a support project, the FSSP receives
requests for training national practitioners; response to these requests
is a key element of the project's work. At the same time, FSR/E remains an
evolving set of skills. Knowledge of FSR/E skills is not at a stage where
oneifixed training content can or should be delivered.

The project will continue to synthesize existing FSR/E knowledge,
and, more importantly, to provide real-world tests of those skills for
comparative analysis as it meets the demand for its training services. The
development of training units will provide a better means to do so through
state-of-the-arts synthesis.

Reflexion on proj ect experience to date, as well as discussions at
a recent (June, 1984) FSSP workshop at Iowa State University to train
trainers, suggested the unit concept as a most appropriate means to meet
project objectives. Accordingly, an initial training units workshop was
subsequently held at the University of Florida (August, 1984) to define
units and plan for their development and testing. Participants in this
workshop have been formed into a committee to coordinate the development of
the units and to informally serve the FSSP training coordinator in an
advisory capacity for training, generally.

Units and Their Development

The units to be developed fall into three broad groups: FSR/E
concepts, FSR/E skills, and FSR/E implementation. First priority will be
placed with FSR/E skills. The focus of this effort will be a
state-of-the-arts synthesis to obtain pertinent examples of skills
applications for inclusion in the training units.

1. FSR/E Concepts ,
a) Philosophy, Objectives, Evolution
b) Characteristics of FSR/E

2. FSR/E Skills
a) Diagnosis

b) Agronomic Experimental Design and Analysis
c) Animal Production Experimental Design and Analysis
d) Socioeconomic Analysis
e) Applied Statistics
f) Management and Administration of FSR/E Teams
g) Evaluation of New Technology

3. FSR/E Implementation
a) Organizational Linkages
b) Management and Administration of FSR/E Projects
c) Field Program Development and Implementation
d) Training
e) Policy Development
f) Proj ect Design
g) Project Evaluation
h) Needs Assessment

Since these units can be variously combined, they will strengthen the
training effort by affording trainers the flexibility to design and deliver
courses that best respond to the needs of a given training milieu. It will
still remain for the trainer to adapt the units to any particular training
setting. The need for able trainers, therefore, can never be dispensed

The first units slated for development are those of the skills
category. These units are given priority since they are needed to train
developing-country research and extension practitioners, the recipient
population for the burden of the FSSP training effort, in the range of
skills required to actually carry out the farming systems research and
extension process at the field level. All but units "c" and "e" will be
initiated in a one-week workshop scheduled for the first quarter of 1985.
The workshop will be highly structured to achieve its aim and will include
FSSP core staff, members of the informal training advisory group, and
individuals selected for their subject expertise. Professional trainers
will be present to serve the developers as consultants. The units will
then be field tested in overseas and domestic workshops by the third
quarter of 1985. Units "c" and "e" will be developed by year's end and
tested soon thereafter.

The concepts units will be developed by the FSSP Core by mid-1985.
These units have a lower priority since there is already considerable
quality material for training in this area, so that development will
consist of only a modest but creative synthesis. The implementation
category, as the units subsumed suggest, is concerned with the
implementation of the FSR/E approach. This category has a lower priority
than the other two only because the development of units for most of its
subject areas must await state-of-the-art research. The preparation of
guidelines for project design and evaluation is now underway, so the
completion of the development of these units is projected for the end of
1985. The remaining units are to be ready by the close of 1986.

It must be understood that unit development is fluid : training
experience, the advent of new training materials and techniques to
accommodate a new and ever-changing field, even the presently unforseen

ieed for future units will all modify unit composition as well as the unit
inventory itself throughout the life of the FSSP. Unit development and
maintenance, therefore, are never-ending activities.

deliveryy of Training Activities

Training that effectively addresses the real needs of a group
requires careful planning. With that in mind, the FSSP has adopted the
practice of dispatching an advance planning team to the training site to
profile the group to be trained, to assess its needs, and to gather
Information about local agricultural research and extension that might be
useful in making the proposed training activity relevant to the needs of
:he recipients. The planning team is composed of individuals who will
Later return to conduct the training.

projectionss for 1986-87 and Beyond

As noted above, all units of the implementation category will be
ready in 1986 except those of project design and project evaluation, which
;ill be ready in 1985. But unit development and maintenance, for reasons
already given, will necessarily continue fdr the life of the FSSP and for
;o long as FSR/E training is in demand.

The Office of International Cooperation in Development (OICD) of
:he United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has solicited an
expression of interest in a proposed FSR/E practitioner course from USAID
missions and other international development agencies. If there is
sufficient interest, the FSSP will collaborate with the OICD/USDA in the
development of a course to be offered in the United States for foreign
nationals. Such a course would be ready for delivery in 1986.

In a similar vein, initial discussions are underway to institute an
FSR/E course at a university which could serve West and Central Africa, in
ioth English and French. This course would be similar to the one
.nstituted by CIMMYT at the University of Zimbabwe. The FSSP is also
cookingg to institute such a course in Latin America, where the prospects
for it are good.

These contemplated courses are part of a long-term FSSP strategy to
Institutionalize FSR/E training through capacitating established entities.
'he United States domestic FSR/E workshops also work to that end by
strengthening American university personnel to ultimately conduct their own
:raining through bilateral projects.


can be formalized bet

Projected biodata use 1985: This year will be characterized by
group decisions between the Support Entity network and the FSSP core staff
as to how best to keep the biodata system up to date. For example, more
than 50 percent of the requests made on the biodata file ask for candidates
with "two or more years of FSR field experience." Most of the individuals
with this level of FSR experience are either currently overseas on
bilateral contracts, working at IARCs, or are located at universities or
consultant firms.

To be of the greatest use to everyone involved, the FSSP biodata
file should be revised and updated by all Support Entities, in terms of a
number of its facets. First, SE information needs to be upgraded as to who
is on overseas assignments in FSR and other bilateral projects, the length
of assignments, and whether or not the individuals can be tapped for
short-term consultancies in the region where they work or on a global
basis. Second, there needs to be a revision of Program Associate lists to
include all long-term replacement personnel, subject to all the provisions
stated above. Third, a revision of Program Associate lists must include
the long-term availability status of both individuals returning from
overseas FSR assignments and professionals newly-added to the Support
Entity's roster. Additionally, current recommendations for Participant
Add-On (PAO) lists should be supplied by each Support Entity.

To be of maximal use to searchers utilizing the biodata, the files
must be maintained in as dynamic a state as possible. The FSSP core staff
intends to reduce the number of memos to Support Entities requesting update
information during 1985.

Projected biodata use 1986-87: Once the biodata files are updated
to the satisfaction of the FSSP core staff, and when the system of updates
and purging functions well, the project can consider turning the biodata
files over to each Support Entity. The FSSP core is prepared to continue as
the central clearing house for additions, corrections or deletions in the
biodata system if necessary. However, since the Support Entities will
outlive the FSSP, the network is urged to consider how the FSR biodata will
be maintained in the long run.

Project Support

Needs assessment: Originally conceived of as the first logical
step in project planning and design, FSSP involvement in these types of
needs assessments has been infrequent so far. The FSSP still urges that
such a first step be undertaken, either before, or between, FSR projects.

utner neeas assessments -- sucn as ror training in FSR methodologies -- may
become more important and frequent occurances in the future of the project.
It is not possible to predict the frequency of future "technical assistance
for training" requests.

Project design: This traditional AID activity consists of both the
Project Identification Document (PID) and Project Paper (PP) stages of
project design. The Cooperative Agreement between the University of
Florida and AID creating the FSSP specifies that a FSSP core staff person
will accompany each overseas technical assistance assignment sponsored by
the FSSP. In practice the volume of requests, accompanied by needs for
leadership in program development, make such participation impossible. In
fact, during implementation of the project, the FSSP core is attempting to
make increasingly greater use of the overall expertise of the Support
Entity network in the major area of technical assistance. During 1986-87,
this trend will become even more pronounced as FSSP core staff answer less
and less of the required FSR technical assistance activities themselves.

Proj ect evaluation: Demand for FSSP involvement in FSR proj ect
evaluations is rather more consistent and somewhat more "predictable" than
other types of techincal assistance demands. The FSSP network will be
involved in at least two 1985 project evaluations, in Zambia (March) and in
the Philippines (February April). Again, the FSSP role in assisting any
project evaluation is provision of the most appropriate personnel to carry
out the task, based on complete information from the host country and the
AID Missions relating to the specific needs of the evaluation. The FSSP
can also facilitate such evaluations and provide logistical support upon
request and mutual agreement.

The FSR project evaluation revision task force, or ETF, was formed
in November, 1984. The ETF will complete its task of suggesting a revised
format and method for evaluating FSR projects, including guidelines, during
1985. After tentative agreement on the revised format is reached between
the ETF, AID and interested USAID Missions in early 1985, this format and
methodology will be field-tested on a minimum of two FSR project
evaluations. The final revised recommendations of this ETF, along with the
final evaluation format, will be presented at the annual KSU FSR-FSSP
meetings, October 13-16, 1985. It is expected that such a revised format
and methods will address current frustrations felt by all parties involved
in the bilateral FSR contract process -- the host country nationals, the
contractor, AID and the USAID Missions.

Team/individual orientations (briefings): To date, such activities
have been ad hoc in nature. In order to move from this informal to a more
routinized basis, the FSSP must be advised of their requested involvement
in such activities with considerably more lead time than is usually
provided. Standard procedure would indicate that the FSSP should have a
minimum of one month of lead time via an "official" notice -- from any
entity requesting assistance in FSR briefings. This lead time is
necessary to allow staff to prepare for such activities, and to avoid
reacting to every "possible" request for assistance -- requests which often
do not materialize.

The FSSP will assist in either team or individual

orientations/briefings. In addition, while adequate, phased FSR
orientations are seldom, if ever, carried out in practice, the FSSP
believes that such briefings are highly desirable and could be an
inexpensive "add-on" to routinely scheduled, phased project briefings. The
major problem to date is that such briefings themselves seldom occur, yet
could be a very cost-effective way of guaranteeing the best start-up
possible for any given project.

The FSSP has not yet established a generic FSR briefing format.
The expectation is that such a general briefing format will be one outcome
of the "general technical assistance guidelines" to be initiated in 1985
and refined during the final three years of the project. Preliminary to
that, the project has supported the development of a series of "country
books" representative of 14 West African nations. The prototype of these
orientation/briefing books has been completed for Burkina Faso.
Development of this series will continue throughout the year.

Additionally, the FSSP has acquired access to the International
Data Base of the U.S. Bureau of the Census. This data base includes
demographic and economic data for all countries in the world. These data
will be used to support the development of the country books and to provide
secondary information for inclusion in briefings. FSSP will also use
Cooperative DEelopment for Africa (CDA) information, as appropriate, held
by Michigan State University.

Team/individual debriefings: FSSP plans are to hold debriefings of teams or
individuals who have recently completed FSR assignments for, or been
sponsored by, the FSSP network. Such debriefings will feed.
state-of-the-art and will be included in the "general guidelines" to be
developed. The frequecy of these debriefings will depend on the supply of
individuals and/or teams during any given time period. These debriefing
sessions will not be limited to short-term technical assistance activities,
but will also include returning FSR field practitioners (long-term
technical assistance) and training activity participants.

The FSSP continues to view debriefings as the final step in the
process of improving the state-of-the-art in FSR project implementation.
Nothing should assist the improvement of this delivery more than utilizing
the vivid impressions of technical assistance and training practitioners to
isolate and eliminate common project problem areas, and to reinforce
positive project areas and accomplishments.

MSTAT (Michigan State Statistics)

The FSSP has provided some support for the development of
MSTAT and its deployment on a pilot basis in three countries: Malawi in
English, Ecuador in Spanish, and Senegal French. To date, MSTAT has held
six workshops in four countries, including one of the pilots agreed to with
the FSSP. Delivery in Spanish (Ecuador) is tentatively scheduled for early
1985, as is delivery in French (Senegal).

In the long run (1986 and beyond), MSTAT may become the statistical
package used by many of the IARCs in their regular training programs. The

funding. Since the FSSP has been involved in the development of MSTAT and
remains committed to the delivery of a quality practitioner-oriented
product, MSU is encouraged to add the following as a minimum to the MSTAT
package: (1) the environmental index and (2) more relevant data sorting
programs to address the field needs of FSR teams, especially for analysis
of socio-economic data.


While networking activities are a function of the FSSP core staff
and the entire program support structure that project management
represents, these activities are interrelated with the programmatic areas
of technical assistance and training. Through networking activities
state-of-the art synthesis is encouraged. Networking activities are
supportive of the regional opportunities and mandates of the project and
are undertaken to facilitate FSSP accomplishments in these areas. Three
specific areas of networking are addressed in this section: Networkshops,
Publications, and Documentation.


The term "networkshop" is taken from CIMMYT's East African FSR
Programme, and is used to indicate a workshop.where peers with common
concerns come together to exchange information and results and to determine
common strategies for solving problems. A network of shared results
develops from continued support for the same (or nearly the same) group to
'meet on a regular basis. Technical support to individuals within the
network can come from among the network members, or can be demanded by the
network from the larger research community beyond the network. Technical
assistance input in one area can be shared with other network members in
order to increase the effectiveness and benefits of costly consultancies.

A networkshop differs from a training workshop or course in several
significant aspects:

-The networkshop leaders) must have training skills,
but the objective is to facilitate an exchange of
information among peers, rather than a transfer of
skills from trainer to trainee;

-Participants who attend have a certain level of
expertise in the topical area in question.

-A networkshop does not stand alone, but must carry
with it a commitment to reconvene regularly, and
to provide a resource base upon which network members
can draw.

In many instances, the basis or need for a networkshop can develop from
training activities. For example, training in on-farm research methods and
analysis should be followed by exchanges among trainees concerning the
results of their own experiences in on-farm research.

FSSP is prepared to support several regional or sub-regional
networkshops on a variety of topics during 1985. Generally, these will be
no longer than one week in duration. A generic format for a networkshop,
with modifications according to specific topics, is as follows:

Day 1. State-of-the-Art presentation (involving appropriate IARCs
or other research institutions) Participant research
results reports

Day 2. Continue results reporting

Day 3. Field activity (observation, evaluation,
hands-on application of new technique, etc.)

Day 4. Synthesis of results in small group sessions.
Definition of problem areas and prioritization.

Day 5. Research strategy proposalss.
Selection of theme, agenda and location of next meeting.
Define calender of technical assistance to network
participants during interval between meetings.

The FSSP is prepared to support networkshops among FSR
practitioners, managers, or administrators. Operationally, these meetings
might support networks within a single country, or among countries within a
region, or in some cases, between regions, depending upon the organizing
theme of the networkshop. FSSP's role in supporting networkshops is
primarily to facilitate networking around systems-based needs for topical
and commodity interactions. Wherever possible, FSSP will support
networkshops in conjunction with IARCs and existing research or FSR
networks. FSSP's goal is to link those in need of technology information
with those who can best supply it through networkshops. Specifically,
practitioners can keep pace with and contribute to the state-of-the art.
The proj ect will help develop and strengthen networks where there is a
demonstrated need and local support for their continued existence.


Having been initiated to address an expressed or perceived need,
FSSP publications can be divided into three general categories: 1) regular
publications, 2) publication series, and 3) special publications. Each of
these categories is elaborated on below and a projection for the scope of
undertaking in 1985 is made.

Regular Publications

This category includes the FSSP Newsletter, Annual Report,
Quarterly Activity Reports and Work Plan. These are the primary documents
of the project and are issued on a regular basis.

FSSP Newsletter: The newsletter will continue to publish quarterly
in English, Spanish and French. In the second quarter of 1985 there will be
a purge of the mailing list. This will acquire some demographics on

FSSP Biodata currently on file. It will facilitate the exchange of
. .. . . .. -. _ _ .... .. . .

outlined below.

FSR Proj ect Directory: As the second phase of the FSR Project
Inventory prepared by the FSSP, a Directory will be published during 1985.
Distribution will include inventory participants as well as the FSSP
Newsletter mailing list.

SIt is anticipated that the directory will be out-of-date as soon as
it is issued. A file will be maintained during 1985 in anticipation of
updating the directory at a future date. Feedback from the Newsletter
Survey should contribute information bearing on the interest/necessity of
updating the directory.

FSR Boosk of Readings: Letters to secure copyright privilege to
publish various selected farming systems works in an anthology have been
sent out in the last quarter of 1984. Response will suggest the
feasibility of publishing such a collection of FSR writing. A determination
will be made early in 1985 by the core staff of the FSSP as to whether or
not to proceed with this publication.

A collection of readings in Spanish, or of translations into
Spanish will be completed by the first half of 1985. A collection of
readings in French, or of translations into French will continue in 1985.

On Networking and On Demand: These two internal newsletters will
continue to be published and distributed to the program associates and
management support of the FSSP during 1985. No change is anticipated in
content or format, and the newsletters will continue to be issued on a
needs basis (publication frequency to date for On Demand has been five
issues in eight months; On Networking has been published 14 times in the
same period).

FSSP Documentation

Annotated Bibliography of Readings in Farming Systems: In 1985,
FSSP will continue its commitment to publish annotated bibliographies of
FSR/E materials. Kansas State University (KSU) will continue to take the
lead in identifying 100 documents annually to include in the bibliography.
CDIE/USAID (formerly the DIU) will continue to procure the items on the
selected KSU bibliography, and manage the annotation, translation and
publication of the bibliography. Due to delays in document procurement in
1984, which delayed the annotation procedure and thus publication of the
1983 bibliography (Vol. I, published October 1984), some changes will be
instituted in 1985 to insure more timely publication of Vol. II.

KSU will send the bibliography selections in batches
so CDIE can begin procurement immediately.

KSU will charge the FSSP Technical Committee to make
the final review of the items proposed for the
bibliography. This review will also be done in
batches, and the review will coincide with Technical
Committee meetings. (The first of these took place
during the 1984 KSU FSR Symposiumand FSSP Annual Meeting.)

KSU will complete the selection and review of the
items for Vol. II by the end of 1984, thus enabling
CDIE to complete and distribute the bibliography by

KSU will begin selection of items early in 1985 for
Vol. III, so that reviews of batches can take place
at each 1985 technical committee meeting. Final
review of the 100 documents for Vol. III should be
completed by the technical committee at the 1985 KSU
Symposium and FSSP Annual Meeting. November 1 is
the deadline for delivery of the Vol. III selection
to CDIE.

KSU FSR Collection: In 1984, FSSP supported the microfiching of the
ion-copyrighted portion of the FSR collection at KSU libraries in order to
providee KSU with a permanent archive collection, and to facilitate future
:opying of the collection for placement in developing country settings
there regional FSR/E training programs are regularly conducted. This
processs will be completed by June 30, 1985.

Microfiching the KSU FSR collection (some 2000 items total) greatly
facilitates utilization of the collection either by those physically
)resent at KSU or through the inter-library loan network. However, this
loes not facilitate international usage, particularly by practioners,
usually located in isolated field sites. During the first quarter of 1985,
rSSP will explore possible locations of the entire collection in order to
facilitate requests for documents from developing countries. We hope
corporationn into the CDIE collection, along with the 100 selected FSR
teamss provided each year, will be a viable alternative, as CDIE's mandate
already allows it to distribute documents by request to virtually anywhere
.n the world.

Such a system would allow KSU to meet demands for literature from
rS based institutions and individuals through inter-library channels, while
internationall demand could be met by a separate organization (hopefully,
he CDIE.)

FSSP has initiated discussions with several West African
organizations regarding possible location of microfiche copies of the KSU
'SR collection. The University of Dschang, Cameroon, and ISRA, Senegal
tave both expressed interest in obtaining copies of the entire collection.

'SSP will continue in 1985 to determine the costs, logistics, management
ind utility of olacine the collection in these or other locations.

ram.Luj syLms LCreearcU ana extension mecnoaoiogy is relatively
more advanced than farming systems research and extension organization and
management in terms of knowledge and skills. Much of the farming systems
research methodology is captured in the written word, and this constitutes
a respectable base on which to build. No such base exists in organization
and management.

Organization and Management Handbook

In 1985 a written base will be developed and made as respectable as
is feasible. The first draft will be written by a single author, relying
pn input from a variety fr sources. The material will be organized into a
handbook following this format:

Principles (and assumptions) of FSR/E organization and

Guidelines for project activities
a. development
b. design
c. implementation
d. evaluation

Appendices Rigorously selected supporting material for the
guidelines will be prepared.

Annotated Bibliography also rigorously selected.

The draft manuscript will be reviewed and analyzed in a workshop of
personnel with significant international experience in farming systems that
is relevant to this undertaking. Following the workshop, the manuscript
will be revised and published for use in at least three service or delivery
activities: a domestic workshop; an African workshop (with INTERPAKS), for
research and extension directors; and briefing of both long- and short-term
technical assistance teams.

A second handbook workshop is tentatively planned for late 1985.
It will attempt to involve persons briefed from the original handbook to
the extent feasible.

State-of-the-art initiatives will continue in special activities

proj ect.

Several kinds of special studies have evolved from early FSSP
support and will begin to bear fruit in 1985. One is the case study series
on "Intra-Household Dynamics in Farming Systems Research and Extension" an
the other concerns the comparative analysis of FSR perspectives.

Intra-Household Dynamics and FSR/E

In 1984, FSSP and the Population Council, with funding in part froi
Ford Foundation, agreed to co-sponsor a case studies series on this topica
area. The objective of the series is to detail several examples of
agriculture under conditions of change and demonstrate how an understanding
of the intra-familial division of resources and benefits can better inform
the choices at various decision points in the FSR process.

A managing editor has been selected and an advisory committee has
been nominated to provide direction in the selection of case study
materials. In early 1985, proposals for case studies will be elicited.
The managing editor and advisory committee will select three for immediate
development, and rank others for possible future case studies, dependent
upon the outcome and review of the initial three. Of the first three case
studies, two will come from Africa and one from Latin America. Drafts of
the three case studies should be ready for final review by September 1985.

Comparison of Approaches to FSR

Due to its considerable involvement in Africa, FSSP has developed
keen interest in the differences and similarities between FSR development
in Anglophone countries compared to that in Francophone countries. Through!
various training and networking activities, FSSP has supported a comparison
and synthesis of the existing FSR perspectives in Africa. This was
presented at the KSU FSR Symposium, October 1984 (L. Fresco, 1984,
"Comparing Anglophone and Francophone Approaches to Farming Systems
Research and Extension"). The paper is being issued in the FSSP Networkin
Papers series.

Interest from Latin American and Asian FSR practitioners in the
comparative analysis of African FSR perspectives has generated a proposal
to hold a networkshop to address this issue. The objective of the proposed
networkshop is to analyze the variations in FSR traditions and perspectives
with a view to defining the appropriate conditions for specific kinds of
FSR approaches. The activity would be proceeded by some initial analysis
of the FSSP inventory of the various FSR projects and their current
perspectives within different settings.

In the first quarter of 1985, FSSP will explore with various donor
organizations concerning possible joint support for the proposed workshop.
IDRC/Canada has already expressed interest in supporting the activity.
Tentatively, the workshop is scheduled for early August, 1985. A synthesis

KSU FSR Symposium.




FSSP is mandated to spend 50 percent of its resources in support
activities within AFRICA. FSSP follows USAID's divisions of Africa into
five regions: North, East, Southern, West and Central. FSSP's activities
as outlined in this section pertain to the latter .four of these regions.
For planning purposes East and Southern Africa are considered together
here, as are West and Central Africa. Inter-regional activities planned for
1985 and beyond are outlined using these delineations.

East and Southern Africa

In East and Southern Africa, FSSP supports on-going FSR activities
through two mechanisms. First, FSSP responds to requests for technical
assistance and training from AID Missions or from REDSO/ESA Nairobi.
Second, FSSP collaborates with IARC activities, particularly those of.
CIMMYT (through its AID-financed FSR programme) and ILCA (regarding on-farm
research with animals). As much as possible, FSSP tries to align Mission
requests with IARC activities and vice-versa.

FSSP activities foreseen in this region for 1985 fall into the
following categories:

FSR Team Briefings (Jointly with CIMMYT):

Rwanda No date yet
Burundi No date yet

FSR Country Level Training (Overview/Diagnostic Jointly
with CIMMYT)

Rwanda No date yet
Burundi No date yet

FSR Proj ect Evaluations:

Zambia February/March

West and Central Africa

FSSP activities in West and Central Africa are generally more
pro-active than in any other region. FSSP collaborates with
IARC activities in the region, especially those of IITA, ICRISAT, WARDA,
and ILCA. FSSP works closely with AID missions to determine needs for FSR
training, technical assistance and networking, however, as FSSP expertise
in the region develops, collaboration shifts to a more direct interface
with national FSR project and program leaders. FSSP has been defining a
support role to play in relationship with the development of the West
African Farming Systems Research Network (WAFSRN). Activities programmed
(both firm and tentative) for 1985 within the above parameters are
described below.

Networkshops: In the West and Central African region, these are
designed to develop around specific themes generated by participants in
previous FSSP activities. The themes selected for 1985 also correspond to
themes designated as priorities for WAFSRN attention. FSSP views these
networkshops as contributory to the overall networking need addressed by
WAFSRN, and does not view them as precursors of separate FSR networks, but
rather as sub-units of the larger regional network. WAFSRN steering
committee will participate in FSSP networking activities as they deem
appropriate. As WAFSRN develops, FSSP hopes to draw the directions for
future networkshop from priority topics designated by WAFSRN members.

Networkshop #1. "Animal Systems in FSR/E"
Togo, March 4-8.

Networkshop #2. "Role of the Agricultural
Economist in W. African FSR Programs"
(May-June, tentatively in Ivory Coast)

Networkshop #3. "On Farm Research Results in
West Africa" (July August, tentatively in
Bourkina Faso) This workshop will be conducted
in collaboration with Purdue/SAFGRAD/FSU.

FSR Team Exchanges: As a part of its networking activities, FSSP
will facilitate exchanges between FSR teams. This is seen as especially
useful for newly established teams who need to visit with teams having more
hands-on experience. ISRA/SENEGAL has offered to host a limited numbers of
these for French-speaking teams. For English-speaking teams, FSSP will
look to CIMMYT East and Southern Africa programs for exchanges.

Rwanda/Senegal FSR Team Exchange.
(Requested, exact date unknown)

Regional Training Activities:

Data Analysis for On-Farm Research.
FSSP will assign a SE task force to develop this course for
delivery in English and French in West Africa during the second
half of 1985. Exploratory discussions with MSTAT personnel and
CRED/University of Michigan for leadership in the design of the
course have been initiated.

Permanent FSR Training Program.
FSSP has initiated discussions with the USAID Mission Cameroon
and Univ. of Florida staff with the University Center, Dschang,
Cameroon, concerning the possibility of developing a
University-based FSR training program in West Africa similar to
the one CIMMYT helped to establish in the University of Zimbabwe.
A workshop to discuss the issues surrounding this proposal is
scheduled for April. Support and collaboration in course
development and delivery will be discuss with IITA Staff in

FSR Team Briefings/ Technical Assistance input:

Gambia Design Team Briefing January
Guinea Design Team Briefing Pending request from
Title XII University contractor.
Sierra Leone CSD Design Team Support Pending request
from Title XII University contractor when selected.
Gambia FSR specialist will be placed on design team -

Country Program Support:

Liberia Overview/Diagnostic Workshop, Requested for June July
Gambia Overview/Diagnostic Workshop, Requested for May
Cameroon Technical Assistance Seminar, April
Informal workshops at Univ. Center, Dschang, April
Ivory Coast Support to IDESSA Regional FSR workshop, Nov.
Senegal Support for publication and distribution of
proceedings from FSR workshop held with trainer and backstopping
support from FSSP, Oct. 1984.

WAFSRN: FSSP will support, together with other donors, the next
WAFSRN meeting, currently scheduled for September, 1985.

systems prac

Regional Farming Systems Workshop for Sub-Saharan Africa August 1985

FSSP will co-sponsor this activity with Egerton College, Kenya by
providing support for selected West Africa participants and input tc
the Workshop design. The aim of this workshop is to bring together
East and West African FSR scientists to share views on issues of
methodology, practice, and training as different FSR approaches are
currently employed.

FSSP African Support Planning Sessions

To again take advantage of the FSR practitioners attending the
KSU FSR Symposium, FSSP will host a series planning sessions to
gather input for support activities to be carried out in 1986.

Projections for 1986-87 and Beyond

While it is difficult to project specific country demands for the
FSSP, planning for the kinds of regional training and networking activities
which should be forthcoming is possible.

In the networking area, FSSP will support the topical subnetworks
created within the WAFSRN's domain through the networkshops. This will
include annual meetings and technical support as demanded. A goal of the
FSSP will be to set these subnetworks in motion, help them, through WAFSRN,
to secure funds to continue networking activities, and provide linkage
support between subnetworks, WAFSRN, and the larger network of FSR
practitioners worldwide. The FSSP will work to tie the subnetworks to
support entities or groups of SE's to provide long term institutional
backstopping and technical assistance. In 1986-87, FSSP envisions
supporting networkshops on topics such as FSR Management and
Administration, Agro-forestry and FSR/E, and Integrated Pest Management in
FSR/E Approaches. Beyond 1987, the project will move to build linkages
between regions, as well as within regions. These activities should help
to facilitate such crossovers and interchanges of FSR/E results as those
between Africa and Latin America, between the Sahelian countries and the
arid lands of the Near East and Sub-Continent, or between the Francophone
countries of the Caribbean and West Africa.

In the training area, a growth in the 1986-87 demand for in-country
training programs is anticipated, to meet the short-term requirements of
staffing newly created FSR projects. More trainers will have to be located
and trained to meet this demand. To more fully and securely meet the
projected training demand and needs from the West and Central African
Region, FSSP is investigating the potential for institutionalization of a
permanent training base, hopefully within a University location, where
training in French and English can take place. The FSSP anticipates that
this program will be operational by the end of 1986, however, to fully
develop to needed capacity, such a program will require continued support
from outside sources for at least five years. Concomittantly, FSSP will
need to support the training base with materials appropriate to the region
and bt providing access to relevent literature.

In the technical assistance area, FSSP looks forward to greater
emphasis on capacitation of the U.S. university support entity group in
order that they can be more fully capable of supporting their own
international technical assistance demands in Africa. FSSP sees clearly
its role to provide mechanisms for countries to draw upon the technical
assistance capabilities within their own regions. Networking activities
will contribute to development of this avenue for cooperative technical
assistance. In 1986-87, FSSP will increasingly draw upon practitioners
within the African region to meet requests for technical assistance.
Beyond 1987, it is anticipated that linkages between countries and project
activities will begin to solidify and FSSP's role could be one of greater
facilitation, than direct action in this area.

Finally, in 1986-87 and beyond, FSSP will need to focus greater
support on the synthesis of the disparate results from FSR activities, not
only within the African region, but from all areas engaged in FSR
activities, the comparison of FSR approaches and perspectives for
determining their suitability to specific conditions, and on the
programatic institutionalization of FSR at the national and regional
levels. These activities will necessitate a merging of the information
generated by topical networkshops, inventories of FSR projects and project
results, case study analyses, documentation efforts and evaluation
activities. Synthesis and comparison of FSR results must take place before
their wider utilization through institutionalization will be possible.


Latin America and the Caribbean

As stipulated in the Cooperative Agreement, no more than 25 percent
of project funds may be allocated to Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC).
The proj ect has experienced its greatest demand for services from the LAC
region, a demand that shows no signs of abatement, and even signs of
increase, for the near future. The problem posed for the FSSP in 1985 and
beyond, therefore, is how to meet an expanding demand for services. The
project proposes to address this problem through encouraging AID Missions
to obtain solicited services either on a cost-sharing basis or through
"buy-ins." The FSSP also will prioritize its resources for the region by
project functional area.

Priority for project resources: In order of priority, the
functional areas to which project resources will be allocated for 1985 are
networking, training, and technical assistance. Up to nine percent of FSSP
funds for the year will be budgeted for networking (e.g., regional
workshops), with a maximum of eight percent each for training and technical
assistance. Considering only project funds allocated:.to the region, the
respective percentages become thirty-six, thirty-two, and thirty-two.
Missions will be expected to cover fifty percent, through buy-ins or
cost-sharing, of all training and technical assistance activities until
FSSP budgeted funds are depleted. All costs for training and technical
assistance conducted thereafter must be borne by Missions. Regional
networking activities may be undertaken on a cost sharing basis, or may not
involve any costs to Missions.

For the above scheme to work most effectively, Missions must
request supporting services well in advance, preferably at the beginning of
the year, and have been so advised. The FSSP will respond to requests in
the order that they are received, subject to the qualification that
projects or countries where there is a greater prospect for positive impact
will receive preferential attention and have first claim on resources.
Missions were also advised to budget for training and technical assistance
in their projects as the most reliable way to secure support from the FSSP,

Activities in 1985: FSSP planned activities in Latin America and
the Caribbean are fewer than in Africa since the project continues to
assume a reactive (rather than proactive) stance there.

As a networking activity, the FSSP will support the Centro

Ie UcaeInda prej.LJmj.uay nLJ.uUIomaL J

Projections for 1986-1987 and Beyond: Barring a significant
increase in the project resource base, the FSSP will continue in a reactive
ode with regard to its activities in Latin America and the Caribbean.
should there be such an increase, or should the project mandate otherwise
change in favor of the Americas, the FSSP stands prepared to assume a
coactive stance in a region where it already has the personnel capacity to
operate considerably beyond present funding levels.

The capabilities of the FSSP square well with current USAID
interests in Latin America and the Caribbean. For example, the FSR/E
approach lends itself to developing and testing appropriate technologies
or "fragile lands," which are settled in the main by small farmers. The
approach can also be used to enhance export capability on the production
ide. And with all the emphasis on the private sector, it must be noted
hat the small farmer belongs par excellence to that sector.


Lsia And The Near East

Asia, 1985: With the exception of the
,o be reactive in nature, the FSSP began 1981
n the Spring, an Asia FSR ad hoc Strategy Ad
;erve in an advisory capacity to the FSSP coi
lid-July, a cable outlining in broad terms tt
network in FSR was sent to all Asian Missions
Lnd Charles Antholt, AID AS Bureau. This cab
.nitiate requests for FSSP services, and indj
lad to conduct initial, exploratory visits t

.ais adLe a iiCeuuLeu LU ULCUL LL1 Lt&L 170o', LU ILLUL
addition, the FSSP network supported a technical a.
anka and Thailand in October, 1984, to backstop a

During the recent KSU FSR-FSSP meetings,
strategy Advisory Committee was expanded from six I
presenting ten Support Entities and AID/W. The c
upgraded and expanded, as reflected by its new tit.
sia Advisory Committee (NEAAC). The strategy for
'hen requested, exploratory Mission visits, and to
invitation, in the Asian Farming Systems Network (I
ite monitoring visits as well as the South East A.
meetings. The Committee has expressed a concern tl
efficient time in Asia to (1) become familiar enoi
egion to understand some of its complexities and 1
.eal with same and (2) be able to plot a strategy 1
expertisee in backstopping other Asian FSR field te.

It is also anticipated that on-site trainii
eans working mainly in newly begun upland (non-pat
ainfed systems projects may be in demand in the rf
advised that there may be a latent demand for FSR <
n general, and that regional, or sub-regional, woi
practitioners may be a current demand which is not
ARCs working in the region. Finally, the FSSP mai

that policy in Asia was
no specific Asia policy.
SCommittee agreed to
'f on Asia issues. By
abilities of the FSSP

the Asia
:o thirte

iost country i-bK

being met by all of the
provide the means for

search in the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) and the International Rice
;earch Center (IRRI). The FSSP core visit to IRRI included an exchange
mailing lists. Joint sponsorship of FSR activities between any of the!
CCs and the FSSP may occur in the future. The FSSP must be very careful
Asian expenditures, based on the overall priorities of the project.

Asia, 1986-87 and Beyond: It is expected that the Support Entities
have expressed the most interest in Asia will perform more activities
Asia during subsequent years. In addition, it is expected that FSSP coi
iff travel to service Asia requests will be much reduced during the
6-87 years of the project. By this time, the Support Entities will be
ected to respond to most, if notkall, of the Asia FSR requests.

Near East, 1985: The FSSP has no explicit policy to address the
Ids of Near East USAID Missions. There is already some demand for FSR
vices from the FSSP -- for example, the Jordan project design effort it
y and August, 1984 -- and in fact the implementation policy will be
=ntical to that for Asia. This means that FSR activities in the Near
t will occur on a reactive basis, after being reconciled with overall
P priorities.

Near East, 1986-87 and Beyond: No policy changes are anticipated
this region during the final two years of the project. Again, greater
greater dependence upon the Support Entity network to answer FSR
uests is anticipated.

al r% rng Pa n fo /rA"r \ A-,^ T.DTrt #- UC.-


Page Activity 1st 2nd 3rd


11 FSSP Procedural Manual Use and Testing-. ------------



14 Establish DWI at one of the SEs

14 Projected target date for DWII

14 Projected target date for DWIII X

14 PAOs in African FSR Activities ------------


21 Update and Maintenance of Biodata file ----------- --------

22 Biodata Files to SEs

23 Project Evaluation, Zambia X

23 Project Evaluation, Phillipines X

23 Project Evaluation Guidelines ---------- X

23 Evaluation Guidelines field tested -------------->

23 Revise Evaluation Guidelines X

24 Develop briefing/debriefing guidelines ------------ >

24 MSTAT, Ecuador (Spanish) X

24 MSTAT, Senegal (French) X



28 FSSP Newsletter issued quarterly X X X X

28 Purge Newsletter mailing list X

29 Newsletter readership survey X

29 List maintenance and exchange --------------->

29 1985 Annual Report X

29 1986 Work Plan X

29 Information Series brochures: TA, FSSP, TRNG




_~ ___~___ ___

31 Microfiche KSU FSR Collection -------X

31 Explore location of collection in LDCs ----------------------->


33 Organization and Management
Handbook Workshop I X

33 Handbook Workshop II X

33 African Workshop (with INTERPAKS) ------X

34 Intra-Household Dynamics and FSR/E ------------------------X

34 Workshop on Comparative Analysis of
FSR/E Approaches (tentative) X

35 Workshop Synthesis Paper Presentation X

ings French ----


30 Bibliography of FSR

31 Bibliography of FSR

. Readings Vol

Readings Vol





38 Networkshop #1, Togo : Animal Systems X

38 Networkshop #2 Role of the Agricultural
Economist in W. Africa FSR Programs (May/June tentative)

38 Networkshop #3 On-Farm Research Results
in W. Africa (July/August tentative)

38 Rwanda team exchange to Senegal (tentative)

38 Develop Date Analysis For On-Farm
Research Course --------X

39 Gambia team briefing (no date set)

39 Gambia ARD design (pending request)

39 Gambia FSR specialist placed on design team X

39 Liberia Overview/Diagnostic Workshop (requested for June/July)

39 Gambia Overview/Diagnostic Workshop (requested for May)

39 Cameroon TA Seminar (April)

39 Cameroon FSR Workshop: (April)

39 Ivory Coast support to IDESSA FSR Workshop (November)

39 Senegal publication support X

39 Support WAFSRN Network meeting (September)

39 Farming Systems Symposium, KSU X

40 FSR Training in the African University (Tentative late '85)

40 Regional FSR Workshop for Sub-Saharam Africa
(Co-sponsered with Egerton College, Kenya) (August)

Latin America and the Caribbean

43 FSSP/CATIE Workshop: Case Studies X

Asia and the Near East

45 Exploratory AID Mission visits (on demand)


The Farming Systems Support Project (FSSP) was created and funded
by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to
provide technical support to the agency's agricultural research and
extension projects in which Farming Systems Research and Extension
(FSR/E) is an integral part. The project is managed by the University
of Florida, the lead entity in an institutional network that includes
21 universities and five private firms. Nearly 800 scientists,
researchers and educators represent these institutions, providing a
substantial base of expertise for the proj ect to draw from.

The FSSP offers a variety of support services (the FSSP itself
does not compete for long-term contracts, although institutional
members of the FSSP Network can and do). In each of the following
categories, services can be tailored to accommodate specific project
(client) needs:

Technical Assistance
Needs assessments
Studies leading to the Project Identification Document (PID)
Preparation of the PID
Preparation of the Project Paper (PP)
Collaborative mode proj ect design
Briefings for design, evaluation or implementation teams
(including replacements)
Project evaluations

FSR/E Training
Needs assessments
On-farm research: trial design and analysis
Data management and analysis
Management and institution building

Stimulate peer contact within and between countries/regions
involved in FSR/E
Sponsor and/or facilitate thematic workshops

Communic at ion
FSSP Newsletter

These services are flexible. The FSSP can manage and perform a
wide range of activities in support of project (client) objectives; it
is also prepared to assist in the FSR/E initiatives of AID Missions,
contractors or host country institutions. In the first two years of
the project, the FSSP has worked in over 40 countries in Africa, Asia
and Latin America.

Training & Networking Technical Assistance

Africa 11 Africa 9
Latin America 8 Latin America 9
Asia 4 Asia 0

Additionally, the FSSP has hosted or sponsored nine workshops in the
United States, training nearly 200 persons in the farming systems

For additional information contact either:

Wendell Morse, Project Coordinator
Washington, D.C. 20523 (telephone: 703-235-8946)

Chris 0. Andrew, Director
University of Florida
International Programs
3028 McCarty Hall
Gainesville, Florida 32611 (telephone: 904-392-2309 or
TELEX 568757 for FSSP business only)

Telephone: (904) 392-1965
Farming Systems Support Project

Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
3028 McCarty Hall
Gainesville, Florida 32611


This list provides the FSSP network contacts the verified telephone
numbers of all Administrative Coordinators (AC's) and Program Leaders (PL's)
for the 26 entities with signed MOA's as of August 1984. Those contacts which
are UPPER CASE have been designated as "official" contacts by their entity for
technical assistance requests or inputs. Abbreviations:

AGRIDEC=Agricultural Development Consultants, Inc.
DAI=Development Alternatives Inc.
IADS=International Agricultural Development Service
RTI=Research Triangle Institute
WI=Winrock Institute
CSU=Colorado State Univ.
CU=Cornell Univ.
ISU=Iowa State Univ.
KSU=Kansas State Univ.
LU=Lincoln Univ.
MSU=Michigan State Univ.
NCSU=North Carolina. State Univ.
PSU=Penn State Univ.
SIU=Southern Illinois Univ.
TI=Tuskegee Institute
UOAR=University of Arkansas
UOAZ=Univ. of Arizona
UOF=Univ. of Florida
UOH=Univ. of Hawaii
UOI=Univ. of Illinois
UOK=Univ. of Kentucky
UMN=Univ. of Minnesota
UMC=Univ. of Missouri (Columbia)
VPI=Virginia Polytechnic Institute
VSU=Virginia State Univ.
WSU=Washington State Univ.



DAI A H (Tony) Barclay
IADS Colin McClung
RTI Ronald Johnson
WI Ned Raun
CSU Jim Meiman

Phone Number


Ramiro Ortiz

Phone Numb er


CU Larry Zuidema 607-256-3035 RANDY BARKER 607-256-2105
ISU J.T. Scott 515-294-4866 ERIC ABBOTT 515-294-4340
KSU Vernon Larson 913-532-5714 CORNELIA FLORA 913-532-6865
LU Collin Weir (Int'1)314-635-4547 EDWARD WILSON 314-636-5511
Helen Swartz (Dom.) 751-3797
MSU Don Isleib 517-355-0174 MERLE ESMAY 517-353-0767
NCSU J.L. Apple 919-737-2665 LARRY NELSON 919-737-2534
PSU Dean Jansma 814-863-0249 JOHN AYERS 814-863-3543
SIU HOWARD OLSON 618-536-7727 Steve Kraft 618-453-2421
TI Eugene Adams 205-727-8953 205-727-8114
UOAR Tom Westing 501-575-2252 DON VOTH 501-575-2409
UOAZ MICHAEL NORVELLE 602-621-4416 Timothy Finan 602-621-45:3
UOF Hugh Popenoe 904-392-1965 KEN BUHR 904-392-1823
UOH Harold J. McArthur 808-948-6441 VICKIE SIGMAN 808-948-6452
UOI Earl Kellogg 217-333-6337 SAM JOHNSON III 217-333-5512
UOK Herb Massey 606-257-1711 BILLIE DEWALT 606-257-2796
UMC Mike Nolan 314-882-6085 DONALD OSBURN 314-882-4512
UMN Delane Welsch 612-376-3563 MARTHA GAUDREAU (Int'l) 612-376-1061
373-1498 MICHAEL PATTON (Dom.) -3974
VPI P H Massey 703-961-6338 JOHN CALDWELL 703-961-7433
WSU James Henson 509-335-2541 ROBERT BUTLER 509-335-2980



The following summary is based responses to a form
FSSP to all Support Entities requesting information on t
workplans. Of the twenty-five current Support Entities,
proposed workplans for the coming year. Out of the 11 S
Entities submitting reports, 7 have been signed with the
for over one year.

1 Camin-fiaa-

/. Domestic/Int'l FSR/E programs:
CSU international
MSU possible domestic
UOI expand domestic and link with international
UOA arid lands
8. Computers:
MSU develop and implement use
AGRIDEC study uses
9. Participant Add-Ons:
UOI encourage use
KSU encourage use
MSU encourage use
TI encourage use
UMN encourage use
10.Language Training:
UMN offer classes to staff

S..,* v.IU, '--rLn m j-I.LLj. rLj%.,r i n roar O urrvi tL t.L VL LLV i

1. Technical Assistance:
A. To provide TA:
MSU (including MSTAT)
CSU (including follow-through on Management task force
UOI (participate with FSSP to develop and Asian Strategy for
farming systems support)
UOA (computerized data base-biodata information data base- for
UOA PAs available)
2. Training:
AGRIDEC 1. participation in Training Units Development
2. -Delivery of training workshops:
a. Guatemala/ Sondeo Seminar
b. Guatemala/ Regional On-farm research applied course
c. Costa Rica/ Seminar strengthening research and extension
d. Panama/ Seminar strengthening research and extension
e. Peru/ Seminar for FSR/E
f. Paraguay/ course for animal production research and
extension with a farming systems concept.
CSU 1. support for Animal traction workshop in Togo, 2. Animal
Science research needs workshop, 3. USDA/OIDC course in

2. FSR/ Livestock,
3. research management and project evaluation,
4. relationships between agricultural production economics
and management behaviour of small, limited resource farms,
5. structure analysis of the economics of small farm
agriculture for field practitioners,
6. assist with revision of training modules covering
economics of small farm agriculture.
KSU 1. Intrahousehold case studies/ conceptual framework, 2.
literature review of on-farm trials,
3. sponsor FSR/E Sysmposium.
TI 1. Work with the University of Missouri on FSR/D, 2. TI is
open for collaborative work.
UMN 1. Interested in the task force on evaluation.
UOI 1. Analyze role of extension in Farming Systems programs
to develop guidelines and plan workshop,
2. Management/Institutionalization of farming systems
programs in national agricultural research and extension
AGRIDEC 1. Follow up on visits to project will provide
KSU Participate on the Technical Committee
MSU Active involvement in manangement/institutionalization
task force.
PSU Open offer to serve on committees


Farming Proj ect
:t proposal development/implementatior
aborating with a group of universities
habilitate the faculty of Aariculture

KSU 1. Botsw
2. Liber
MSU 1. Seneg
3. Zimba
UMN 1. Rwand
2. Ugand
FSR but
UOI 1. Zambi
proj ect
2. Asia:
CSU 1. Pakis
IADS 1. Bangl
2. Nepal
3. Indor
4. Indor

bwe/ explore expansion

a/ Rwanda farming sys
la/ Manpower developed
shows potential)
a/ Zambia Agricultura

tan/ (tentative) Farm
it, the networking act
edesh/ Bangledesh Agr

/ Integrated cereals
iesia/ National Agricu

lesia/ Sumatra Agricul

of FSR/E in

ems proj ect
t proj ect (n

research an

ng systems w
vity deserve
cultural Res

research proj
tural Reseac

ural Researc


ot officially

d extension

ith livestock
s monitoring.
earch Council

h Project

h Proj ect with

proj ect.
9. Pakistan/ Agricultural extension and adaptive research
in Baluchista (tentative)
10. Pakistan/ Forestry Planning and Development
(collaborating with Winrock) (tentative)
. Latin America:
AGRIDEC Paraguay/ Training course for animal production research
and extension with a farming systems concept.




FSSP 1985-87 Summary Budget*

The summary budget is rooted in annual projections. Firm budgeting is not
possible in program delivery as there will be some distribution between years
and between core and buy-in funds. This fact is influenced by the response/
demand nature of support as the primary goal of the FSSP. Nevertheless,
program development (in most respects state-of-the-art synthesis) does evolve
from a specific budget supporting tasks that may extend throughout the 1985-87
period. Duration is somewhat indeterminate because the flow of task activity
and synthesis is a cumulative process. Every attempt is made to extend FSSP
dollars as "seed" funds to stimulate this process. Thus, not shown in this
budget would be the significant amount of in-kind complimentary support from
the FSSP Support Entities, other entities and other projects. Experience from
1982-84 shows this support is very substantial both in program development and




Proj ect Coordination

Program Development

Program Delivery

Total (85-87)


$ 745,747






TOTAL (82-87)



Total Core and Buy-In (Authorized Max) 9,764,000.




Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
3028 McCarty Hall
Gainesville, Florida 32611

February 1, 1985

.1 Morse

0. Andrew

: & Release for 85-87: Corrections to replace
.y 2, 1985.

:o replace the computations shown in the brief
;e summary submitted to you on January 2, 1985.
i text of the memo stands but changes were made

1. No further funding is necessary for FY 85.
2. The $1.18m for FY 86 includes carry over f
FY85 which would carry FSSP approximately
SMay 1, 1986. Optimally, $1.18m should be
forthcoming shortly after October 1, 1985.
3. For FY 87, assuming a two month delay in t
release as you suggested, which would be al
December 1, 1986, an approximately $270,001
should be released during fiscal 1986 to ci
the cash flow until the FY 87 release. Th
the FY 86 release could be increased to
$1,450,000 and the FY 87 release could be
reduced to $1,351,000 to adjust for the re
4. We have projected for buy-in but have no r
basis for the projection.


FY 83-84 85 86 87


Core Budget*a 2,805,440 1,482,978 1,787,596 1,622,9

Accum. Total 4,288,418 6,076,014 7,699,C

Release 3,775,000 1,123,000 1,180,000*b 1,621,

Accum. Release*c 4,898,000 6,078,000 7,699,

Country and/or*d 127,568 400,000 600,000 937,
Mission Buy Ins

Total 2,933,008 1,882,978 2,387,596 2,560,4
(S&T and buy in)

*a Includes actual expenditures as well as encumberances f

*b Required Release.

*c 83-84 Release
12/28/82 2,360,000 Core budget 3,775,000
7/28/83 365,000
9/28/83 10,525* Buy-in 127,568*
3/15/84 1,050,000
5/15/84 10,744*
8/24/84 12,000*
8/24/84 94,299*

*d 85 thru 87 is projected, not budgeted.

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs