Annual workplan

Material Information

Annual workplan
Farming Systems Support Project
United States -- Agency for International Development
Place of Publication:
University of Florida.
Creation Date:
Physical Description:
v. : ; 29 cm.


Subjects / Keywords:
Agricultural extension work -- Periodicals -- Florida ( lcsh )
Agricultural extension work -- Periodicals ( lcsh )
serial ( sobekcm )


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.
Electronic resources created as part of a prototype UF Institutional Repository and Faculty Papers project by the University of Florida.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact Digital Services ( with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
70876997 ( OCLC )
2006229270 ( LCCN )

Full Text
Farming Systems Support Project
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, 1986
Cooperative Agreement No. Dan 4099-A-00-2083-00
Project No. 936-4099
Submitted to The United States
Agency for International Development
Prepared in cooperation with
FSSP Support Entities

Farming Systems Support Project (FSSP)
The FSSP Wrk Plan is an annual contribution of the Cooperative
Agreement (Dan-4099-A-00-2083-00) between USAID/Bureau of Science and Technology and the University of Florida, calling for support to AID Missions and related entities in the area of farming systems research and extension. The 1986 Work Plan reflects a strategy addressed by a task group consisting of the AID/Project Management Team in S&T, FSSP/University of Florida Project Management and the Africa Bureau. The Work Plan includes program activities and comittments set into motion during 1985. It also considers recommendations resulting fran a 1985 external evaluation, the needs and opportunities outlined in the Africa Bureau's "Plan for Supporting Agricultural Research and Faculties of Agriculture in Africa", continuing interactions with AID Missions, and technical priorities identified by the FSSP Technical Cannittee.
The regional focus of FSSP's activities for 1986 and 1987 is West and
Central Africa. This focus is in response to current concerns of USAID and represents an increase in emphasis on project activities in this region. Concurrently, the project must significantly reduce or eliminate activities in the other regions but will respond on a full buy-in basis to requests from Asia/Near East and Latin America.
Program objectives address three major areas: 1. Synthesis and
analysis (state of the art) directed to priority training materials and support of problem-oriented networking activities. 2. Delivery and support for West Africa training and networking. 3. World-wide program development and networking support activities. The budget for 1986 is focused upon these objectives as presented in Appendix I. Sumary of Expected Major Outputs For FY86
Concentration of the FSSP network in FY 86 includes the following outputs in support of major program areas:
1. Two training unit collections, (a) diagnosis and (b) design and analysis of on-farm trials, distributed to FSSP network institutions
and individuals, and made widely available to AID Mission and bilateral
contract personnel.
2. A three week training course in West Africa, principally for English speaking participants from West and Central African nations, addressing
ccmmon constraints to agriculture production in the region and employment of the FSRE approach to integrating caumodities and
technologies to alleviate those constraints.
3. A three week training course in West Africa, principally for French
speaking participants fran West and Central African nations, with
emphasis as in 2 above.

4. A world wide symposium entitled "FSR/E: Food and Feed" at Kansas State
University involving practitioners from Asia/Near East, Latin America
and Africa followed by the FSSP annual meeting.
5. The top 100 publications in FSRE for 1986, selected and published in
Vol III of the FSR/E bibliography.
6. Publications including: (a) the quarterly Newsletter (with a
circulation of approximately 5,500 worldwide), (b) continuation of the
the Network Paper Series (through 1985, 10 Network Papers have been
published and distributed), (c) eight FSR/E-intrahousehold Case
Studies, (d) a methodological guide to accompany the cases (funding
entirely fran Ford Foundation), (e) the evaluation task force
guidelines and format for evaluating FSR/E projects, (f) a sumnary of
U.S. university-AID bilateral contractors technical successes and
suggestions for improving project development and implementation, (g)
the livestock systems reports and guidelines evolving from the
Livestock Task Force, the Togo and ILCA workshops, and the ICARDA
livestock conference in Syria, (h) joint report on workshops conducted
with ISRA, Senegal.
7. Purged and reconstituted the newsletter mailing list.
8. Revised and published results of the FSR/E project inventory begun in
9. A report on responses from practitioners regarding their current uses
of the FSR tool known as rapid rural appraisal (RRA), or the sondeo.
10. A report on the most pressing technical problems facing practitioners
as identified in the newsletter readership survey conducted December
11. The second annual meeting of the West Africa Integrated Livestock
Network under supervision of the W. African steering committee and in
cooperation with ILCA, IITA, and FSSP.
12. A networkshop in west Africa based on the topic "FSR/E in the African
University Context".
13. FSR/E-intrahousehold Case Studies reviewed and tested.
14. Enhanced networking among USAID bilateral Title XII contractors
concerning issues of project implementation and the design and analysis
of on-farm experiments.
15. Respond upon AID/Mission requests to assist in technical assistance,
training and networking needs assessments and/or delivery, in Africa
upon a case-by-case basis, and in Latin America and Asia/Near East as remaining staff time permits on the basis of canplete Mission buy-ins
to the project.

Goals in 1986
The outputs listed above are supported by goals and processes of the FSSP network in FY 86 and in support of USAID. The outputs reinforce
and are reinforced by procedural goals which are:
1. To work closely with the Africa Bureau (through the policy paper for
Africa) AID Missions in East and Central Africa, REDSO/E and REDSO/W,
and the S&T Bureau to better reflect the evolving mandate in
agricultural development in general and in FSR/E in particular(all) .*
2. To further solidify the training strategy for conduct and support of
effective short-term training programs in FSR/E methodology in West and
Central Africa (2,3).
3. To review and incorporate changes and additional materials, including
those evolving fran training and workgroup activities, into the
collections of training units (a) diagnosis and (b) design and analysis
of farm trials, with the goal of producing and distributing this
supplemental material by January 1, 1987 (1, 2, 3, 4).
4. To identify, interact with, and strengthen a West or Central African
entity as a base for establishing a center of excellence for short-term
FSP/E training (2,3).
5. To establish stronger ties with BIFAD for mutual benefit fran the FSSP
support entity network system and expand upon the expertise, giving
special emphasis to completion of the training unit collections and to
delivery of FSR/E training for problem solving in West and Central
Africa (14).
6. To continue to support the West African Farming Systems Research
Network (WAFSRN) with arrangements for the first annual meeting and
participation in support of this network (11,12).
a. To facilitate and support a networkshop in West Africa based
around the topic of "FSP/E" in the African University Context".
b. To support and facilitate the second annual meeting of the West
African Integrated Livestock Network.
7. To continue supportive interactions with CIMMYT/and CIAT outreach in
Eastern and Southern Africa, and with CIP, ICRISAT, IITA AND ILCA in
West and Central Africa in areas of mutual concern (all).
8. To strengthen the effort between the FSSP and U.S. university bilateral
contractors implementing projects that involve FSR/E in Africa, by (a) assisting in the collection, sumary, compilation and dissemination of information on those technical areas which are going well in projects
* Note the number or word in paranthesis refers to the suimary of expected outputs for 1986.

and (b) investigating areas which could be improved in project design, implementation and evaluation and (c) linking FSR/E activities between
bilateral contractors through at least one meeting in We-st Africa in
1986 based upon two meetings held in 1985 by US based contract backstop
people (4, 8, 9, 10, 14).
9. To support the Technical Ccmittee of the FSSP in its effort to obtain
information on practitioners' special (or non-traditional) techniques
of farm trial designs and make this information available to
practititoners (4, 9, 10).
10. To continue to urge the program associates in the FSSP network, and
practitioners receiving the Newsletter, to provide input in state of
the art in FSR/E through (a) submissions to the Newsletter, (b)
submissions to the Network Paper Series and (c) ideas for, and acting,
when possible, as moderators/discussants/leaders in, sessions of the
FSSP annual meetings dedicated to state of the art topics (10).
11. To continue with regular publication activities, including (a) the
quarterly Newsletter, (b) the Network Paper Series, (c) project reports
(quarterly/annual) and (d) various training units, case studies and
workshop reports (6).
12. To compile additional information on those receiving the Newsletter so
that discipline and FSR/E interests can be referenced, pressing
technical problems identified, and direction given to the type of
information most wanted/needed by practitioners (7).
13. To continue to maintain and make available the services of the FSR/E
biodata collection (15).
14. To caplete, and field test the evaluation guidelines and framework
being completed by the evaluation task force (15).
15. To continue to host numerous visitors to the University of Florida,
IFAS and International Programs with interest in FSR/E (all).
16. To involve more of the support entity program associates in development
and delivery of FSSP-supported activities, giving greatest emphasis to
training and networking (all).
FSSP in Africa
Program Development
Program development is embodied in the FSSP approach to training and networking for West Africa. Many of the training materials and networking activities draw upon the more generic FSR/E experiences throughout the
world which contribute to the greater pool of experience and to synthesis of the state of the art in Farming Systems. Interactions that occur between farming systems practitioners on a worldwide basis are desired by African practitioners and contribute to accelerated development and learning in application of farming systems research concepts. Ephasis is

given both to development of materials in Africa, and adaptation of existing materials to national program needs in Africa. All activity of
the FSSP is designed to synthesize experience through case studies, development of training units, various publication efforts and training activities. State-of-the-art activity is an integral part of the project.
The present work plan desires to build upon the successful synthesis concept established by the intra-household case studies. While moving these projects to completion, testing and inclusion in the training program, small project grants are planned for West Africa to support practitioners in their efforts in write-up and analysis of results from their farming systems research activities. Sixteen small grants are proposed to stimulate these study reports. The Technical Committee, including the West African representative to the Committee, will serve as the steering and review carmittee for these technical reports, thus providing for overall synthesis of technical and methodological experience.
State-of-the-art synthesis provides ground work for a longer term FSR/E program activity. A strategy developed by the FSSP Technical Committee draws upon the resource base provided by the overall support entity structure and is included as Appendix II to the 1986 Wbek Plan. The Technical Committee is prepared to develop a long term action plan for
state-of-the-art synthesis.
The FSSP continues to strengthen U .S. institutions for participation in USAID technical assistance in Africa. The FSSP is emphasizing the concept of networking technical and methodological experiences among support entities, particularly as they relate to their African bilateral contract work involving an FSR/E.approach. This emphasis complements the overall network programming of the Africa Bureau.
The FSSP continues to further strengthen US institutional capability
through participant add-on opportunities at no cost to the contract. This concept provides an opportunity for an FSSP Program Associate to join a
technical assistance, training or networking team and became an understudy of those leading the effort. The participant add-on also contributes his or her expertise to the activity. While the focus for participant add-ons is West and Central Africa, similar opportunities occasionally arise through the buy-in process in other regions.
Training Strategy
A major objective of the FSSP is to provide training and support for training activities in FSR/E methodology. The general training strategy
for West and Central Africa is outlined below.
Goal: To conduct and support effective training programs in FSR/E. Objectives:
1. Have effective logistical support and facilities.
2. Provide useful training materials:
a) Training Units
b) Project Handbook for Research and Extension
c) Slide-tape Modules

d) Case Studies e) Documentation
f) Reports on previous workshops
g) Materials from other sources of FSR/E training
3. Have appropriate and competent trainers:
a) Provide a pool of individuals knowledgable in FS/E
b) Select appropriate trainers
c) Inform trainers about training units and other
4. Ensure the attendance of appropriate participants.
These four objectives are discussed in detail in Appendix III.
Particular emphasis on Networking and Training in Wst Africa includes refining and utilizing the training units and case studies. A schedule for this process and for delivery is given in Table 1.
Training Delivery
The FSSP training strategy for West and Central Africa is designed to initiate and implement institutionalization of regional practitioner-level English and French short-term training in FSR/E. Criteria for selecting a location in the region for a training center include:
1) Cmpatability with the Africa Bureau's Africa Strategy.
2) Ability to provide hands-on activities within on-going FSR/E
projects, thereby enabling a practical experience of applying
methods learned in the training activity.
3) Delivery capability in English and French.
4) An institutional location where extension and research
personnel are trained.
5) High potential for good logistical support, transportation,
airline access, and training facilities.
6) Interest and commitment towards institutionalization within
the selected African educational institution, explicitly detailed
prior to short course initiation and evaluated following course
7) Willingness of selected African institution to accept partial
enrollment in the training course of regional participants.
Using these criteria, Cameroon has been identified as a potential site for holding regional short courses and for the establishment of a regionally
based support program. Other countries may request delivery of selected courses through AID Missions. Courses for practitioners fran only one country can be designed for delivery in that country.
The University Center Dschang (UCD) is the site specified as most appropriate within Cameroon as appropriate for long term institutionalization of the required short courses. For logistical reasons initial courses would be presented in Yaounde. Operation of the short course program in Cameroon will build linkages with on-going FSR/E activities, particularly those within the National Cereals Research and Extension (NCRE) program, assisted by IITA and USAID.

Date Activity
January Complete first edition of the Diagnosis
in FSR/E (Vol I) and On-Farm Experimentation (Vol II) training units February Production of training units
February-March Distribution of training units
February 26-Mar 1 Gender issues in FSR/E, UF/WIA Africa
February Review and test four intra- household
case studies
March 10-14 First WAFSRN meeting in Dakar
March 15-17 Bilateral contractor meeting on Fannrming
Systems in Africa
March Complete first draft of intra-household
case studies
April Gambia regional training course (English)
May Animal systems networkshop, West African
Integrated Livestock Network
June July Cameroon regional training course
July Complete intra household case studies
Open Networkshop on FSR/E in the African
University Context.
October KSU Farming Systems Symposiun & FSSP
annual meetings
November Integrate feed back froman training unit

The FSSP envisions that short courses offered at the Center will be of two to three week's duration. Courses will be divided into three parts. Part one will focus on diagnostic methods. Part two will be a practicumn in diagnosis within an actual FSR/E project. Part three will focus on the design of on-farm experiments and analytical methods, including field-level implementation and management issues. The area of socio-econanic analysis needs further emphasis. FSSP training materials will provide the backbone of the courses. Currently, these are available only in English. However, selection of existing French materials and translation of other material is
Operationally, the FSSP plans to deliver the first course in English in The Gamrbia, tentatively in April, 1986, because the University of Cameroon will not be prepared to host the effort due to ongoing faculty and student relocation. The second course in French will be offered in Cameroon later in 1986. Should enough participants express interest in the Francophone course, it may be divided along ecological lines to have one focus on humid uplands and lowlands, and the other on the problems of the arid Sahelian zone. Evaluation following these deliveries will determine further programming needs relative to site and language.
An exchange of training experience and materials between university faculty in Africa provides a means to excelerate the development of indigenous training capacity. A networkshop focused on FSR/E curriculum in the African university will give early focus to strengthening the FSR/E training base.
Network strategy
Communication among nationals, technical assistance personnel and others is facilitated through newsletters, publications, practitioner visits, workshops and training activities. Specific FSSP support to network activity will include problem commodity and canponent concerns where FSR!E can contribute to resolving these constraints in a whole farm
systems context. Three thrusts are anticipated:
1) Participation with and support to existent crop/commodity
2) Support of the emerging network (West African Integrated
Livestock Network) on animal systems in a mixed crop-livestock
context, and
3) Methodological exchanges focused on design and analysis of
on-farm experimentation.
Participation and support of crop/ccumnodity based networks will require further planning in 1986 with USAID, CIMMYT, IITA, ICRISAT, and SAFGRAD to insure ccmzpatability of interests and organized mutual support. Introducing and strengthening the farming systems dimension in support of adaptive and on farm research is a mutual objective towards the overall goal of establishing stronger linkages between farmers and basic research. The technology development process calls for various adaptive research and extension activities where FSR/E concepts and applications service crop/cammodity needs.

The commodity area of emphasis in FSSP support to ccrnrodity based
networks will parallel those in the Africa Bureau Strategy which includes maize, sorghum, millet, upland rice, roots and tubers, and edible beans. Program associates in the FSSP network all have strong disciplinary bases with emphasis in ccrmiodity areas. FSR/E calls for camplementarity with the camodity focus through consideration of household and livestock influences on the adaptability and acceptability of commodity based research improvements.
The West African Integrated Livestock Network is planning a second annual workshop dealing with various animal forage, traction and farmer/household concerns. A steering committee of West African practitioners is planning network activities in consultation with ILCA, IITA, FSSP, FAO and various national entitites. The goal is to provide for practitioner exchange of on-farm research experience pertaining to livestock in the farming system.
The third thrust follows up on the bilateral contractor interactions of the project during 1985. A meeting with selected FSR/E projects in Africa in 1986 will attempt to accomplish two things:
1. Arrive at a synthesis of particularly successful on-farm techniques and methods in trial objectives, design, analysis and redesign, and
2. Arrive at a concensus for improving FSR/E implementation, both through bilateral contracts and host country approaches.
The focus of this thrust will be on the experience of current
practitioners of FSR/E. The output of the thrust will be a synthesis of their experience, both positive and negative. The audience of this synthesis is host country decision-makers involved in funding and staffing FSR/E effort, bilateral contractors (especially the U. S. Title XII institutions), and USAID (Washington and African missions).
Development of the support base for FSSP programming, while not
ccmplete, is sufficient for 1986 and 1987 program delivery. New efforts are anticipated relative to development of materials for support of technical assistance, networking or training programs as they evolve from delivery experience. Delivery through networkshops and training activities generates experience and is the basis for continued evolution of the material support base.
The concept of farming systems is advancing to include numerous
research and extension linkages at the farm level and anticipates regional and sectoral concerns. The FSSP continues to develop methodologically and technically in its implementation and support of Farming Systems Research and Extension (FSR/E). It encourages systems considerations for the
agricultural sector and a responsibility for improved policy making relative to technology development and use. The FSR/E process is dynamic and will continue well beyond the present FSSP Cooperative Agreement. The FSSP remains prepared to address these concerns and to support the farming systems initiatives and strategies of USAID, bilateral contracts, and national interests in agricultural development.

The notion that FSR/E should be a project for bilateral
contracting is no more valid today then it was five years ago. FSR/E
as an approach should not be the sole basis for developing a project but a methodological approach to improve agricultural research, education and extension projects. As an approach FSR/E is stronger and in greater worldwide use today than five years ago when there were many more projects defined as "Faming Systems".
The University of Florida is committed to completion of the training and synthesis tasks of the FSSP with emphasis upon high quality results. These results can be transfered to a West Africa training and support center. Should funding prove adequate in a second phase of the project, the state of the art synthesis, training development, and network support activities can be based on a solid set of experiences, materials and methods forthcoming frcm the present program strategy.
The FSSP was established to provide a support base for AID Missions and bilateral contractors and to provide for leadership in synthesis of methodological experience particularly in on farm research. The mechanism of delivery for this worthy objective has been through training activities and networkshops. Reduction in support resources by more than fifty percent for the 1986 and 1987 years has removed all capability for involvement in Asia and Latin America. This is a significant loss not only in training where both regions were requesting assistance but also a loss to the overall synthesis activity and development of training programs for
Wst Arica.
labOO8: 21dsk5

Appendix I
The attached activity budgets and the following discussion gives sane detail concerning activities for 1986 specifically and projections for 1987. The overall budget is based on carry over as of January 1, 1986 of $332,900 and expected release of $720,000 for 1986 and $700,000 for 1987.
The Administration budget includes one director '(2) full time and 2.5 full time secretarial units (3) for 1986. The director will devote 50% of his time to general project leadership and 50% to project management in Africa with specific reference to liaison work with missions and the Africa Bureau.* The travel-budget (4) is to support that activity and anticipates one annual administrative trip to hWast Africa and up to six trips to Washington. Travel by the Advisory Council is also included in this budget. (See activity budget).
The Program Delivery budget is oriented entirely to Wast Africa with a worldwide network ccxnplement in the publication area.. The editor (9) is one half time on FSSP budget which is devoted entirely to the newsletter and the general publication program including networking papers, the documentation center and the bibliography. A full time (10) training unit coordinator works with synthesis of materials and experience through reports, task forces, case study teams, etc.* to make materials available in particular to the Africa training and workshop program. Two training and network coordinators(ll) work in West and Central Africa and coordinate state of the art activity in 1986. one works full time on networking (33%) and (67%) training program planning, management and delivery. The other is in charge of program development and synthesis (67%) and West and Central Africa technical assistance (33%). This person also provides for liaison with Asia and with the Technical Committee. The travel budget (12) anticipates regional travel by core or a designated SE representative for purposes of program planning and delivery (see activity budget). A budget for Technical Commnittee travel includes participation by regional representatives from Latin America, Asia and Africa at the annual symposium and meeting along with four US representatives who also meet once during the year besides the annual meeting. of fice support includes supplies and assistance in final preparation of materials for delivery activities associated with travel.
Training and networking activities for Africa are only detailed for 1986. The FSR/E Gender/Intra-household case studies will be reviewed and tested in conjunction with other FSSP activities in West Africa and the funds are to be used for travel (16). The WAFSRN meeting is receiving travel funding support for 10 participants (17). The Gambia regional training course is budgeted (18) in the attached activity budget. wnile
*Note that the numbers in parentheses through the test refer to the budget line items in the full budget.

the French course planned for Cameroon (19) is not yet budgeted, it is anticipated to be similar to the budget for the English course in Gambia. Specific budgets are not yet prepared for the animal systems (20) and university (21) workshops. The general funding allocation anticipate travel support for participants as the primary use of funds. Some facilitator time will be made available in each.
To strengthen the synthesis output of FSSP in West and Central Africa FSSP will provide case study grants (28) for practitioners. The case studies will document results to be made available to other practitioners through various training and caununication activities.
The worldwide network support base features the newsletter (33).
Activity budgets are also provided for the bibliography (34), training unit development (35), and technical committee and symposium/annual meeting (37) items. While no specific budget is provided for the Technical Committee in 1987, the work in 1986 will provide a basis for continuing similar activity or adjusting the effort to meet other synthesis needs.

FSSP Budget (January, 1986)
in 1000s of dollars Alternative One
Jan 1-Sept 30
1986 FY 87
1 Administration: FTE FTE
2 Director (base & 23% fringe) 1.0 57.0 0.5 39.9
3 Secretarial (base & 23% fringe) 2.5 26.3 2.5 36.8
4 Travel & office 12.2 16.0
5 Indirect cost (42% on campus) 40.0 39.0
6 Total Administration 135.5 131.7
7 Program Delivery Africa
8 Base (Gainesville)
9 Editor (base *& 23% fringe) 0.5 14.0 0.5 19.6
10 Training unit coordinator 1.0 18.8 1.0 26.3
11 Training & network coordinator(s) 2.0 78.0 1.5 82.5
12 Travel & office 72.6 90.9
13 Indirect cost (42% on campus) 77.0 92.2
14 Total 260.4 311.5
15 Training & networking activities
16 Gender Issues In FSR/E,
case testing 5.0
17 WAFSRN in Dakar 12.0
18 Gambia regional training course, English 50.0
19 Cameroon regional training course. French 50.0
20 Animal systems networkshop In Sierra Leone,ANTRAC network 20.0
21 African University FSR/E Networkshop 12.3
22 Total 149.3
23 Ind cost 1/2 @ 26% 19.4
24 1/2 @ 42% 31.3
25 Total 200.0 200.0
26 SOTA synthesis and analysis
27 Case studies and SOTA grants
28 16 @ $2480 each 39.7
29 Ind cost @ 26% 10.3
30 Total 50.0 50.0
31 Total Africa (14,25,30) 510.4 561.5
32 Program development & worldwide network** 33 Newsletter/publication 78.4 78.4
34 Bibliography 43.0
35 TUD 38.3 21.7
36 Technical Comittee 50.0 50.0
37 Symposium/annual meeting 30.0 24.0
38 Total Program Development 239.7 174.1
39 TOTAL (6,31,38) 885.6 867.3
40 Funding S&T 720.0 700.00
41 Carry over balance 332.9 167.3
42 Total 1052.9 867.3
BALANCE 167.3 0.0
* Projected
** Includes Indirect costs

(January, 198
1986 1987
Director Travel
International 5000 5000
us 2000 3000
Advisory Comittee 3500 4800
Office Support 1700 3200
Total 12200 16000
Program Delivery
Editor Travel
International 5000 5500
us 2000 3000
TU Coordinator
International 5000 11000
us 2000 2500
International 35200 40100
Us 4000 6000
Technical Ccmmittee Travel 16000 18000
office Support 3400 4800
Total 72600 90900
TOTAL 84800 106900

(January, 1986)
Salary (14.5 weeks) 16168
Travel & Subsistence 11526
Total 27694
Resource People
Asia (Philippinos) 4389
Latin America 5608
Total 9997
Workshop Operations
Adm. Support 2222
Travel (in country) 2494
Resource persons 120
Misc. supplies 1154
Total 5990
Meals & lodging 7390
* Travel 2500
Total 9890
TOTAL 53571
* *Participant fee 5600
TOTAL (Virginia Tech.) 47971
* maximum 10 to coincide with 10 waivers
** minimum 10 charged, maximum 10 waived

(January, 1986)
1986 1987
Newsletter (4 issues)
Production 9125 9125
Translation and Typesetting 16000 16000
Postage 16000 16000
Total 41125 41125Networking Papers
Publication 10085 10085
Postage 4000 4000
Total 14085 14085
Total 55210 55210
Indirect Cost (42%) 23190 23190
TOTAL 78400 78400

(January, 1986)
Salary 27336
Travel 1988
Materials 3500
Total 32824
Indirect Cost (31%) 10176
TOTAL 43000

(January, 1986)
Final Preparation
Advisory 2700 3000
Graphics 700
Monitoring & Feedback
Reviewers 5700
Monitoring 4300.
Integration of Feedback
Advisory 3000
Technical Editing 6100
Publication 8510 2200
Distribution 5045 1000
Total 26955 15300
Indirect Cost (42%) 11320 6425
TOTAL 38275 21725

(January, 1986)
Virginia Tech/Ch
Salary 1670
Comunications 1500
SOTA Projects (6) 30000
Materials 2041
Total 35211
Indirect Cost (42%) 14789
TOTAL 50000 50000

(January, 1986)
1986 1987
Honoraria 18000* 14000**
Canmunication and Misc. 3127 2901
Total 21127 16901
Indirect Cost (42%) 8873 7099
TOTAL 30000 24000
* 9 guests from Asia, Latin America and Africa
* 7 guests froman Asia, Latin America and Africa

1. Institutional Spport
The overall program development and support base for the FSSP remains unchanged in 1986 from that explained in the 1985 Work Plan. (pp 9 -12, 1985 Plan.) The support entity base is well developed and investing in itself for continued quality improvement of human resources and institutional capability to work with farming systems projects.* Without financial or human resource investments from the FSSP core the support entity structure will continue to hold domestic workshops and local university seminars to strengthen the overall base.* FSSP core will assist through various communication instruments and general coordination to help facilitate this important and continuing process. The support entities are called upon to host such workshops and those previously hosted by the FSSP are being located at support entities.
As a complement to the domestic support entity workshops the FSSP will continue to provide for the participant add-on opportunity. The participant add-on concept provides an opportunity for an FSSP program associate to join a technical assistance training or networking team and in
effect become an understudy of those leading the effort. The PAO also contributes expertise to the effort as they are carefully selected to suit the particular activity. The focus for this effort is T~st Africa but similar opportunities occasionally arise through the buy-in process in the
other regions.
The concept of networking experiences among support entities
particularly as they relate to their bilateral contract work in Africa will be emphasized. This process is under way as a complement to the overall
network programing of the Africa Bureau.
Further program development is embodied in the approach of training and networking for %bst Africa. Many of the training materials and networking activities will draw upon the more generic experiences extending throughout
the world-wide network and will also contribute to the pool of experience on a world-wide basis. Emphasis is given to development of materials in Africa and adaptation of materials to Africa. Nevertheless, it is recognized that the interaction that occurs between farming systems practitioners on a world-wide basis is desired by African practitioners and
contributes to excelerated development and learning in application of farming systems research concepts.
Specific emphasis on state-of-the-art synthesis is put forward in the form of ground work for a longer term FSSP program activity. A brief proposal, developed in concert with the technical ccmittee, draws upon the resource base provided by the overall support entity structure.* It is included in the 1986 plan as a basis for long term planning.

FSR and Commodity Research
The FSSP Technical Ccmmittee believes in the validity and usefulness of the farming systems approach and that farming systems research/extension is essential for the successful strengthening of ccmodity research in Africa
as envisioned in the Arica Bureau Strategy. The strategy is a positive challenge for farming systems and the FSSP. The FSSP Technical Committee proposes to AID a partnership between farming systems research/extension and commodity/biotechnology research. Some of the essential elements of this partnership are the following:
1. Farming systems research/extension practitioners draw on technology
developed by commodity researchers for adaptive research. The
rationale of the Africa Strategy is based on the judgment of
technical scientists that the commodity knowledge base for many
African food crops needs major strengthening, to expand
alternatives for more meaningful adaptive research. Farming
systems practitioners should respect this technical judgment.
2. Commodity researchers draw on farming systems experience to guide
their research objectives. The needs of farm households are
constantly changing. A constant flow of information from
collaborative diagnosis is necessary to adjust the commodity
research trajectory and keep it moving with changing farm household
goals. Commodity and biotechnology research is expensive and long
in duration. Its products simply cannot afford the luxury of being
non-acceptable by farm households. Commodity and biotechnology researchers should respect the need for input by farm households
into their research.
3. Farming systems has evolved in part, as a response to problems
associated with inappropriate technology. There are many positive
examples of how an understanding of farm household needs has made commodity research more effective and efficient. An example from
Africa is the sweet potato breeding program of Dahniya in Sierra
Leone. Many other examples can be found in Asia and Latin America.
These two regions have had much longer experience in linking
ccmmodity and adaptive research through the "Green Revolution ." A
partnership effort in Africa need not lose time and money by
repeating some of the same errors and relearning the sane lessons.
An Africa partnership should be part of a global effort, and build
on Asian and Latin American experience.
Conceived as a global project with a West Africa focus, in partnership with AID, the FSSP can be the vehicle to achieve these objectives. The Technical Committee is prepared to develop a state-of-the-arts strategy in 1986 for this partnership. It requests the resources to do so.
Redefinition of FSSP State-of-the-Arts
In contrast with tactical priorities, technical priorities are areas where state-of-the-arts work is needed to improve implementation efforts.
The FSSP Technical Committee defines state-of-the-arts as synthesis and analysis. State-of-the-arts work must move beyond simple synthesis or combining different methods and experiences. It must undertake comparative analysis of those experiences, to draw lessons from them, to determine what methods have been more successful than others, and to determine the reasons
why sane methods have been more successful.

on the other hand, the state-of-the-arts work of the FSSP will not include development of special projects. Such projects would be both artificial and expensive. Rather, state-of-the-arts development will be development through practitioners. This can be done by:
1. Introducing alternate methods through training.
2. Involving practitioners in analysis of the alternate methods based
on their circumstances.
3. Documenting the choices made by practitioners (through training
4. Analyzing with practitioners the results of their experience (also
through training follow-up).
1986 Technical Priorities
Based on its review of the sources of information on technical needs described above, the FSSP Technical Committee identified twelve technical priorities where state-of-the-arts work is needed in 1986 and beyond. The Technical Committee then prioritized the twelve into two major categories, on-going priorities and new priorities.
1. Of the highest priority, for which state-of-the-arts work is
on-going through existing FSSP-supported or affiliated task forces,
are the following four priorities:
a. Documentation, synthesis, and analysis of farming systems
experiences with crop-livestock interactions. Several
excellent papers fran the field were given at the 1985
symposium. These, and other similar experiences, are being
documented by representatives of the mixed crop-livestock task
force as a set of case studies. The set of case studies will
include analysis of "lessons learned." These will then be
incorporated into the training program.
b. Farming systems research and extension. Synthesis and analysis
of extension and related experience underway through the
INTERPAKS project will be utilized in the training program.
c. Training program refinements. Wbrk by the training units
development task forces already underway to revise the existing
units should be continued. The recommendations for placing
existing units on a menu basis should be incorporated into this
d. Development of a consistent evaluation framework for farming
systems. The on-going work of the evaluation task force should
be continued.
2. New priorities which require additional budget funds for state-of-the-arts synthesis and analysis. These in turn consist of three groups, a, b, and c.
a. Of highest priority in this category, for which the FSSP should first allocate any budget funds available for state-of-the-arts synthesis
and analysis, are the following three priorities
(1) Use of iterative diagnostic information for intervention
design. The following state-of-the-arts activities are

reccmended to address this priority:
i. Preparation of a published paper with synthesis and
analysis of examples showing why iterative
diagnostic/design is needed, and how it can be done. For example, persons in Thailand with experience in this area
could be supported by FSSP to document their experience.
ii. Circulation of the paper to personnel from selected
projects for review, testing of the methods documented,
and feedback.
iii. Preparation, based on the above feedback, of materials for
training in iterative diagnostic/design.
(2) Alternatives for design and analysis of on-farm
experimentation. Several papers at the 1985 Symposiu
presented alternative techniques for on-farm experimentation not based on standard statistical designs traditionally used
by researchers, but rather based on farmers' own spontaneous
experimentation. These alternatives generated considerable discussion and debate. The Toechnical Caomittee reccmends:
i. Further analysis of the information obtained by the Randy
Barker survey of design and analysis techiques being used
in farming systems projects.
ii. Analysis of information being gathered by Chuck Francis in
a survey of alternate research designs.
iii. A request via the newsletter for other projects which are
using non-conventional design and analysis techniques
based on spontaneous farmer experimentation to provide
information on their work.
iv. Establishment of a task force to document in published
form selected techniques identified through the Barker and
Francis surveys and newsletter responses.
(3) Linkage of commodity and biotechnology research with farming
Systems research. This as a key priority because farming
systems research provides the testing ground for products of
camodity and biotechnology research that are a primary focus
of the Africa strategy. The Technical Comittee recomends
several state-of-the-arts activities, which may be either
simultaneous or sequential, to address this priority:
i. National or regionally-based networkshops linking
commodity researchers and farming systems
research/extension practitioners. These should be
nationally or regionally based in recognition of
differences in agro-ecological conditions and
national-level policy and institutions. The Sahel and
humid Wst/Central Africa are two regions for which
regionally-based networkshops could be organized.
ii. A policy paper should be prepared on how to address the
linkage between commodity and biotechnology research, and
farming systems research/extension.
iii. Case studies should be prepared documenting existing

examples linking ccmnodity research and farming systems,
cropping systems, or other related adaptive research
programs. Both national and regional case studies are
needed. Candidates for national case studies include ICTA
in Guatemala, NCRE in Cameroon, and RIARS in the
Philippines. Candidates for regional case studies include
the WVRA, CIAT, CIMMYT, and IRRI networks.
iv. Guidelines should be prepared for the involvement of
commodity researchers in diagnostic activities, leading to
more effective joint evaluation by farming systems
practitioners and commodity researchers of on-shelf
technology suitable for adaptive research, and
identification of further needs for backstopping commodity
b. Of medium priority are three priorities:
(1) Methods to take both commerical and consumption goals into
account in diagnosis, design, testing, and extension.
(2) Management information systems, for linking different
agro-ecological zones for technology transfer.
(3) Synthesis and analysis of feedback from previous training
programs, through follow-up assessment of what
participants have actually used.
C. Of lower priority, for which the FSSP should draw on
persons with conmmodity expertise (rather than establishing
FSSP- supported task forces), are two priorities:
(1) New technologies for uncertain, "harsh" environments with
low soil fertility and low and/or unpredictable rainfall.
(2) Sustainable technologies for areas with high population
pressure under risk of environmental degradation.
labOO8: 31dsk4

The Training Base
A major objective of the FSSP is to provide training and support for training activities in FSR/E methodology. The following is an outline of the general training strategy attempted for West Africa.
Goal: To conduct and support effective training programs in FSR/E objectives: a. Have effective logistical support and facilities
b. Provide useful training materials i. Training Units
ii. Project Handbook- Research and Extension iii. Slide-tape Modules
iv. Case Studies
v. Documentation
vi. Reports on previous workshops
c.* Have appropriate and comipetent trainers
i. Provide a pool of individuals knowledgable in FSR/E
ii. Select appropriate trainers
iii. Inform trainers about training units and other materials.
d. Ensure the attendance of appropriate participants
These four major objectives of the FSSP training strategy are discussed below.
a. Have effective logistical supprt and facilities
A fundamental part of providing for the successful delivery of an effective training program is having effective logistical support and facilities within which to deliver training. In as much as possible, the logistical support which the FSSP gives directly to the delivery of a short course should be kept at a minimum. Having the local USAID mission or host governments provide logistical support for the program is encouraged and essential for the longer term. Transfering and handling money is often a potential bottleneck when handled in isolation froan the local USAID mission. To establish a regional center in which to hold short courses for %Tst Africa FSSP has proposed establishment of a training center in
b. Provide useful training materials
Training materials are the basis of any training effort and the FSSP has included in its training strategy the development and collection of a variety of training materials. The project is preparing training units addressing specific skills in FSR/E, has produced a number of slide-tape

modules which cover a range of topics, has produced a project handbook for research and extension, has produced and supported work on FSR/E-intrahousehold case studies, has contributed to documentation holdings, has developed annotated bibliographies to support FSR/E training, and keeps reports on previous training activies.
i. Training units
A collection of training units is being developed by the FSSP to
teach skills in FSR/E. This collection is not a course but rather
is a set of resources which can be used to support course
development. The collection of training units essentially
provides a menu listing a variety of topical information and
learning activities available to the FSR,/E trainer. The training
units provide flexibility in course design. The array of
information on FSR/E ranges from diagnosis to the analysis of
on-farm trials. By picking and choosing the relevant units or
parts of units from the collection the trainer will have the
opportunity to provide a wide variety of short courses based on
the needs of the clientel.
ii. Project Handbook for Research and Extension
This document is a synthesis of experience or "lessons learned"
and is intended for all personnel involved in the life of a donor
project. It describes the AID donor process fran project
development to evaluation and addresses problems of
institutionalization of FSR/E projects.
iii. Slide-tape Modules
The slide-tape series, including 14 audio sets, is designed to
provide a take-off point for discussions on the stages of FSR/E.
The sets address introduction to FSR/E, characteristics of small farm systems, rapid appraisal techniques, and design and testing
of on-farm trials.
iv. Case Studies
The FSSP/Population Council case study project "Intra-Household
Dynamics and Farming Systems Research and Extension" is a series
of case studies designed primarily for the training of
agricultural researchers. The series will also be used to train
other development practitioners and interested students.
Currently, eight case studies are being prepared.
The FSSP is developing a training case study based on experiences
in the FSRVE project carried out in the extension department of the Ministry of Agriculture in Paraguay. This case provides a
variety of participant practicums and can be used as the basis for
on-farm design and analysis exercises in a short course.
v. Documentation
The project, through a number of documenting efforts, provides information on available documentation relevant to FSR/E. The
Bibliography of Readings in Farming Systems, available in English,
French, and Spanish, lists an annotated selection of one hundred key FSR/E documents and is published annually. Bibliographies of

French FSR/E materials, Livestock, and Wmen in Agriculture have
been produced. The bibliography on Livestock is intended as a
resource base for FSR/E practioners in areas where animal traction
is being introduced or where livestock is already an important
part of the farming systems. The bibliography on Wmen in
Agriculture, and a subsequent annotated bibliography on Rnmen in Farming Systems, conpliments a larger collection effort underway
at the University of Florida. Documentation holdings are being transferred to micro fish at Kansas State University and can be moved to libraries and training centers such as the University
Center at Dschang.
vi. Reports on previous workshops
Reports of previous workshops including agenda, objectives,
evaluation cooments, and materials used are kept on file and can
serve as a useful tool for assisting trainers in designing course
outlines. Training workshops have been delivered in English,
French, and Spanish.
c. Have appropriate and competent trainers
The choice of trainers can often make or break a training effort. It is important that appropriate trainers are chosen. Trainers should be fluent in the language of delivery, should be knowlegable in FSR/E, and possess basic skills of training delivery. The FSSP strategy in assuring ccmpetency in trainers should include developing a pool of individuals knowlcdgable in FSR/E, selecting appropriate individuals based on the needs of the training effort, informing trainers about the training units and other training materials, and orienting trainers to the course and country in which the training will be delivered.
i. Providing a pool of individuals knowledgable in FSR/E
The FSSP has a program of domestic training workshops which serve
to increase the pool of personnel knowledgable in FSR/E. Domestic
workshops, attended by FSSP program associates and others in the domestic institutions, address three major topics in FSR/E. The
initial domestic workshop, which is a pre-requiste to the
following two workshops, serves as an introduction to FSR/E
methodology and emphasizes the diagnostic stage. Two additional
workshops address the specifics of the design and analysis of
on-farm trials and management and administration issues in FSR/E.
FSSP designs and delivers the initial workshop on each of the
above mentioned topics, and encourages the participants in these
workshops to deliver follow-up workshops in their own
institutions. The objective of the FSSP is to have these
workshops delivered on a continuing basis from one or more of the
support institutions (depending on demand). Virginia State
University has responded by offering to host the domestic workshop
on FSR/E orientation in the future.
ii. Select appropriate trainers
The FSSP maintains a biodata file from which potential trainers can be located. It is important that trainers be qualified in
FSR/E knowledge, language skill and training skills. As mentioned

above, FSSP addresses the issue of developing a potential pool of
individuals knowledgable in FSR/E. FSSP does not provide language
training. The last area mentioned is one of great importance and
FSSP is concerned with providing potential trainers with necessary
training skills. Although it is important to note that this is
not, and cannot be, the main emphasis of the training program, it
is an important element that has been and must be addressed. FSSP
has provided a "training for trainers" workshop which helped to
develop training skills in potential trainers. This type of
activity should be continued.
iii. Inform trainers about training units and other materials
Along with trainer skills development workshops, it is important
that trainers be informed about the training units and other
available materials and their potential uses. The training units
will include a preface statement indicating the suggested uses and
philosopy of their development as training materials. A feedback
mechanism will be developed to ensure the integration of suggested uses and application of the training units and materials. Toward
this purpose, it may be useful to encourage an idea/technique
sharing workshop for "experienced" FSR/E trainers. Participant
Add-Ons should be encouraged to attend training activities to
increase the "trainer pool" as much as possible. All FSSP
trainers should be required to report back experience and adaptive
d. Ensure the attendance of appropriate trainees
The success of a training effort is often a function of the ability to focus on and respond to the appropriate audience. It is essential that participants have the necessary background to allow for maximum benefit during the workshop. Each participant should be pre-screened for his or her background in FSR/E, and a general information sheet should be filed by each participant to help the trainers focus on their particular audience.
As has been suggested previously, the trainers should make preliminary visits to appropriate locations in order to "market" the training course and target specific audiences. This will involve one-on-one meetings, and it is important that as much information as possible be shared. Before such meetings occur, the FSSP should send course offerings to pools of potential participants. A brochure or flyer will serve this purpose well.
Another way to contact potential participants is through project design and implementation teams. As a fundamental part of the FSSP training strategy, technical assistance in project design should be offered and a FSR/E training element should be included in designs to the degree possible. This is particularly important to ensure a continued FSR/E component improvement throughout the life of each project. Given current budgetary constraints of the project (see the technical assistance section of the Africa section), these activities must be paid for by Mission buy-ins.
The participants should be given every opportunity to pre-plan for
their participation in any workshop and be adequately prepared for their

participation. This means that they should be given a copy of the agenda and any required reading materials in advance of the workshop.
Participants need approximately two weeks to review the proposed agenda and background reading materials.
1986 Delivery Strategy
This delivery plan is based on an FSSP core planning workshop,
interactions with AID Missions, dialog with various FSSP support entity representatives, input fran FSR/E practitioners who participate in FSSP activities in Africa and representatives from the Africa Bureau and Science and Technology Bureau, USAID. It embodies programed follow-up to various activities implemented, particularly in the West and Central African regions.
Thus, several activities have been part of long-term planning and
development processes, and are on the agenda of FSSP. Other activities are just beginning as continuing implementation of the project. These are under scrutiny to determine their accordance with the Africa strategy of the Africa Bureau. The delivery strategy is divided into four sections to agree with the four technical areas defined in the FSSP mandate: Training, Networking, Technical Assistance and Synthesis and Analysis.
a. Training Strategy
The FSSP training strategy for Wst Africa is designed to implement and initiate the institutionalization of regional practitioner-level FSR/E short term training in English and French. Criteria for the selection of a location in the region for a training center include the following:
1. Compatability with the Africa Bureaus West Africa strategy.
2. Ability to provide hands-on activities within on-going FSR/E projects
enabling practical experience in applying methods learned in the
3. Delivery capability in English and French.
4. A university context where extension and research personnel are
5. High Ppotential for good logistical support, transportation, airline
access, and training facilities.
6. Interest and ccammittment towards institutionalization within the
indicated educational institution explicitly detailed prior to short
course initiation, and evaluated following first course delivery.
7. Willingness of indicated location to accept partial enrollment in
course of non-national regional participants.
Using these criteria, Cameroon has been identified as the best potential site for holding the regional short courses and establishment of a regionally based support program. Negotiations for this activity should be discussed in 1986 to make provisions for the final year (1987) of the present FSSP Cooperative Agreement. From time to time other countries will be selected for delivery of selected courses as regional circumstances dictate. Courses designed for practitioners frcm only one country will be delivered in that country.
The University Centre Dschang (UCD) is the site specified within
Cameroon as appropriate for regional courses for several reasons along with

the above criteria. This setting allows the integration of UCD faculty into the course, as well as researchers, extension specialists and administrators from the region at large. The course levels for practitioners can be differentiated by the University level (BA/BS), and the field support (research and extension) levels. Job description and experience will be mitigating factors for selection of participants. Locating courses in
Cameroon takes advantage of the University of Florida contract with UCD and builds on the interest of the UCD administration and faculty to incorporate interdisciplinarity and on-farm research methods in the new curriculum. Expansion of the UCD library through the UF contract will allow for incorporation and availability of FSR/E documents for trainees. These will be obtained frcm the Kansas State University holdings and others.
Operation of the short course program at UCD can build linkages with on-going FSR/E activities, particularily those within the NCRE (National Cerials Research and Extension) program, supported by IITA and USAID. Location of one of the NCRE's TLUs (Technical Liaison Units-the Fs equivalent) at Dschang can further support such linkages. UCD as a bilingual university provides a unique setting for additional linkages among other African universities and should facilitate better exchange of methods, concepts and results among both francophone and anglophone FSR/E practitioners. Additionally, Cameroon's ecological environment provides for exploration of FSR/E approaches in the lowland humid African tropics (similar to much of the western coastal belt and interior of central Africa), the. highland humid tropics (similar to other highland areas of central Africa), as well as the tropical savanna (similar to other areas of the sudan region).
FSSP envisions that short courses offered at the center can be of two to three week's duration. The courses will be divided into three parts. Part one will focus on diagnostic methods. Part two will be a practicum in diagnosis within an actual FSR/E project. Part three will focus on the design of on-farm experimentation and analytical methods, including discussion of implementation and management issues. FSSP training materials will be the backbone of the courses. Currently, these are available only in English. However, selection of existing French materials and translation of others is
Operationally, FSSP plans to deliver the first course in English in The Gambia (tentatively in April) because the University of Cameroon will not be prepared to host the effort due to locational changes. The second in French will be offered in Cameroon later in 1986. Evaluation following these deliveries will determine further programming needs relative to site and language. Based on considerable consultation, FSSP advises against translation during training. However, English-speaking participants from francophone countries, and vice-versa, could be considered in each course.
Two three-person trainer teams are needed for the two courses. However, at least one, and better two, of the three persons should belong to both teams. This individual would have to be a bilingual FSR/E training specialist, and would provide continuity between the courses, even though they are pitched at different levels. In the switching of languages for the courses conducted in alternate years (or biannually), it will also be advisable to maintain at least one constant trainer within the teams. The trainer team organization is presented below, with "T" indicating the

bilingual training specialist, "E" the English speaking trainer and "F" the French speaking trainer.
First cycle: Field support level- University levelEnglish: EET French : FFT
Second cycle: Field Support level University level-French: FFT English: EET
The following calender checklist of activities and deadlines indicates how
FSSP needs to proceed to deliver these courses:
CALENDER CHECKLIST OF TRAINING PLANNING AND DELIVERY IN WEST AND CENTRAL AFRICA Key to calendar: T=0 is the time (month) intended for the delivery of the training activity. "T-" indicate the months lead time required prior to an activity in which certain support and development actions must take place. "T+" indicate the months following a training activity for scheduled follow-up contacts.
T-7 --Request ccmitments from host country mission and goverment
--Contact trainers
--Deliver training materials to trainers
--Begin to develop agenda/schedule for course
--Write/adapt brochure announcing course for potential candidates
T-6 to T-4 --Mail brochure and letter to potential missions, projects and
national program administrators
--Begin country visits by FSSP trainers/Core to identify trainees
T-3 --Lead trainer and other trainers if possible make planning visit
to training site
--Determine logistical needs and support
--Determine field practicums
T-2 --Deadline for receiving candidate submissions for course
--Mid-month mailing of relevant background materials to trainees
T-1 --Final schedule prepared for course
--Final briefing and consultation with FSSP
--Arrival at training site 1-2 weeks in advance of course
T+2 --Prepare report on training course (lead trainer responsibility)
T+6 --Begin follow-up training technical assistance in-country with
participants from course who should be engaged in on-farm
activities and analysis.
T+12 --Begin follow-up evaluation of effectiveness of training for
lab008 :30dsk4