MINISTRY OF WATER,
IRRIGATION AND ENERGY
Tana and Beles Integrated Water
Resource Development Project
Sub- Component B1: Watershed Management
TERMS OF REFERENCE
for The Natural Resources and Socioeconomic
Impact Assessment
February, 2015 Addis AbabaContents
1. Background...................................................................................................................................... 2
1.2.      Tana and Beles Integrated Water Resource Development Project, TBIWRDP...................2
1.2.1. Project Development Objective, PDO:............................................................................... 2
1.2.2. Project components and sub-components.........................................................................2
2. Area of focus and Purpose of the ToR.............................................................................................3
3. Objective of the Impact Assessment............................................................................................... 3
3.1. Specific objectives of the impact assessment........................................................................... 4
4. Sub-Component B1, Watershed Management................................................................................. 4
4.1. Objective of the sub-component B1.......................................................................................... 4
4.2. Watershed management area....................................................................................................4
4.3. Expected Outputs/Outcomes of the watershed management sub-component........................ 4
5. Natural Resources and Socio-Economic Impact Assessment.........................................................5
5.1. Natural Resources Impact Assessment, NRIA......................................................................... 5
5.1.1 Key Activities for the NRIA................................................................................................... 5
5.2. Socio-Economic Impact Assessment........................................................................................ 6
5.2.1. Key Activities for the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment............................................... 6
5.3. Profile of the Professionals of the Service Provider................................................................ 8
5.4. Duty Station and Duration of the Study................................................................................... 8
5.6. Methodology.............................................................................................................................8
5.7 Data Management and Processing.......................................................................................... 9
5.8. Skills required.......................................................................................................................... 9
5.9. Deliverables............................................................................................................................. 9
5.10. Time Frame......................................................................................................................... 10
5.11. Reporting Requirements and Accountability..................................................................... 11
5.12. Cost coverage:................................................................................................................... 11
11. Background
1.2.   Tana and Beles Integrated Water Resource Development Project,
TBIWRDP
TBIWRDP is  initiated by  the Ministry  of Water, Irrigation and Energy  and it has  been under implementation since May  2008. Its  original closing date was  September 30, 2013. Since effectiveness, the project has  been restructured four times, the last restructuring being in September 2014. The key  results  are the cancellation of the Growth-Oriented Investment Facilitation (Component C); the revision of the Project Development Objective, key performance indicators and results framework; and extension of the closing date until July 30, 2015.
1.2.1. Project Development Objective, PDO:
The original PDO is  to develop enabling institutions  and investments  for integrated planning, management, and development in the Tana and Beles  Sub-basins  to accelerate sustainable growth
According to the restructuring made in December 2013 the PDO is  revised as; co develop enabling institutions  and investments  for integrated planning, management, and development in the Tana and Beles Sub-basins.
1.2.2. Project components and sub-components
Component   A.   Sub-basin   Resources   planning   and   Management   ($17.61m]:
Develop  the  enabling  institutional  infrastructure  and  capacity  necessary  for  stimulating  and managing sustainable investments in the Tana and Beles sub-basins.
Sub- component Al: Water Resource Information System Development ($11.66m)
Sub- component A2: Resource Planning and Management Capacity-building ($5.95m)
Component B.  Natural Resource Management Investments [$40.83m]: Undertake critical investments  to improve the natural resources  management in the Tana sub-basin, including:
Sub- component Bl: Watershed Development ($35.08m): Sustainable watershed development investments for 85, 026ha in Ribb, Gumara, and Jamma sub-watersheds in Tana sub-basin.
Sub-   component   B2:   Flood   Management   ($5.75m):   Community-based   flood   management and adaptation around the flood-prone areas around Lake Tana.
Component C.  Growth-Oriented Investment Facilitation [$9.17m]: institutional capacity  and investment facilitation required for sustainable development of the Tana and Beles sub-basins to realize the growth vision for the region, including:
2Sub- component Cl: Development Agency Support ($1.43m)
Sub- component C2: Growth-oriented Investment Preparation ($7.74m)
Component  D:  Project  Management  [$2.24mJ:  Overall  project  planning,  coordination, monitoring and adaptive management.
2.     Area of focus and Purpose of the ToR
The Natural Resource Base line Survey, NRBS and Socio Economic Baseline Survey SEBS tasks, for sub component Bl, were awarded to Bahir Dar University  BDU in June 2010. Accordingly, Natural Resource and Socio-Economic baseline data was collected from the 5 weredas and 35 Kebeles  of the watershed management project areas, to get a clear picture of the pre-project scenarios on key natural resources and socioeconomic indicators that will form part of the M&E system. The surveys generated large volumes of data (primary and secondary) using the tools of field surveys, questionnaires and data analysis. These data were the basis for the reports from the two surveys. The two reports include overview of the surveys, objectives, key variables to be quantified and the corresponding methodology, results  on the status  of the indicator variables  identified in the form of tables. The reports  also include GPS locations  of various points of interest from the field survey, soil survey sampling points and the corresponding data, photos, results  of the questionnaire, focused group discussions  and key  informant interviews and other secondary data. Central to the surveys is the generation of the outcome and output indicators  for the before-and -after and with-and-without evaluation of the project using the changes on these indicators.
Today; February 23, 2015, it is about 6 34 years since the project launched and the closure date of the project is approaching very near. Hence, it is found indispensable to assess the changes occurred as a result of the project interventions. On this basis, this ToR is prepared to conduct Project Impact Assessment on the NR & SE for sub-component Bl to measures consequences of the project intervention over the past 6 years. The assessment will conduct by BDU (the same university who conducted the BLS)
Based on the results of the BLS; comparison will made between the situation at the beginning of project intervention and the current situation. It is also made by comparing the intervention area with an area, which did not receive any  intervention during the past 5 years. The parameters  to be measured include changes  in income level, changes  in poverty  levels, and changes  in productivity  of land, animal productivity, reduced food gap, rate of soil erosion, livelihood, vegetation cover/biomass and others. The impact to be determined depends on the indicator outlined at the beginning of the project intervention.
3.     Objective of the Impact Assessment
To evaluate the impacts and trace out the tangible changes over the past 6 years as a result of the project intervention, through comparing past and present based on the results  of the baseline survey  and the objectively  Verifiable Indicators  (OVIs) in the Project Logical Framework that have been set for the Watershed Development Component Bl.
33.1.  Specific objectives of the impact assessment
•     To trace out lessons learnt, good practices and over all experiences that can be used as a reference for other similar projects.
•      Based  on  the  achieved  results;  to  prove  the  importance  of  the  Integrated  Watershed Management    interventions    and    convince    higher    government    officials    in    future decisions.
•     For donors and government; to make informed decision, if there is a need to scale-up and scale out the experience of TBIWRDP.
4. Sub-Component B1, Watershed Management
This  component undertakes  critical investments  to improve the natural resources  management in the Tana sub-basin and includes  support for sustainable watershed development investments covering about 85, 026ha in the Ribb, Gumara, and Jema watersheds in the Lake Tana sub-basin. The main activities  will support activities  under three thematic  areas  - livelihood improvement, natural resources  management (soil and water conservation, afforestation, and agro-forestry), and capacity development.
4.1.     Objective   of   the   sub-component   Bl   is   "Improvement   of   livelihoods   of   rural households  living  in  upper  catchments  of  Ribb,  Gumara  and  Jema  Watersheds  through enhanced productivity and promotion of sustainable land use practices."
4.2. Watershed management area
The watershed management area is located in Amhara Regional State within the Lake Tana Sub basin (see map on annex 1). There are three catchments: the Gumera, Ribb and Jema. The Ribb and Gumera Sub-watersheds are contiguous and are located in the northeast of Lake Tana Sub Basin, centered on Debre Tabor. The Jema lies in the south east and drains into the Gilgel Abbay and then to Lake Tana. The area lies in six Woredas (Dera, Estie, Farta, Debre Tabor, Mecha and Sekela) and includes some 35 Kebeles. The total watershed area is about 444,000 ha (Gumera 47%, Ribb 42% and Jema 11%). The three watersheds  are further divided into five critical watershed clusters known as Baskura, Enkulal, Kentai, Zefie and Jema. The first four are located in the Rib and Gumara sub-watersheds while the fifth one, as the name also implies, in the Jema sub-watershed. The population of the project area is about 0.95 million (Gumera 49%, Ribb 38%, and Jema 13%). Population densities, whilst averaging 2.15 per ha, are observed to exceed 6.0 per ha in some areas. The selected pilot areas for development, the project area, cover 85, 026ha with an estimated population of 180,189
4.3.      Expected Outputs/Outcomes of the watershed management sub component
• Watersheds treated in targeted sub-watersheds 4•    Increased crop production and improved livestock productivity,
•    Expansion of agricultural surpluses and higher farm household incomes,
•      Enhanced  sustainability  of  future  agricultural  development  due  to  mitigation  of  land degradation and improved soil fertility;
•    Greater fuel wood production;
•    Increased off-farm income;
•     Enhanced  human  and  capital  resources  resulting  from  improved  economic  and  social infrastructure
5. Natural Resources and Socio-Economic Impact Assessment
5.1. Natural Resources Impact Assessment, NRIA
The Natural Resources Impact Assessment will include reports on actual area in hectare of land treated with various  SWC, and forestry /agro-forestry  measures. The land uses on which the various land management practices have been applied and being applied consists of cultivated, grazing, degraded, forest, mixed, and gully lands. Since the start of the project there has been progressive treatment of gullies and presently there is a need to actually survey and document the actual area covered with treatment measures. The various treatment measures applied are: check  dams  with loose stone, gabion, brushwood, bamboo mat, plastic, sand bags, etc. The measurement of treated measures applies to all land uses. The list of the various SWC and forestry  / agro-forestry  measures  applied on the different land uses  including gully  treatment measures.
5.1.1. Key Activities for the NRIA
•     By the help of GPS inventory all the land management practices (SWC and forestry / agro-forestry  measures),  by  type  and  their  aerial  extent,  as  compared  to  the  baseline survey
•     Based  on  the  baseline  values  update  and  verify  the  indicator  table  with  the  relevant units. The indicators Tables are attached in Annex 2;
•     Prepare a digital map indicating area treated and non treated on cultivated, degraded, and gully affected areas;
•      Using  latest  and  freely  downloadable  satellite  irnages  sources  such  as  Landsat_5, process and report Normalized differentiated Vegetation Index (NDVI) for the forest and woody  biomass  cover  in  the  project  watersheds  and  run  change  detection  model  for forest and woody biomass coverage;
51
•     For capturing the incremental biomass, the NDVI analysis should consider track changes over  at  least  three  consecutive  time  points  i.e.  2008,  2010,  and  2015  by  using  free downloadable satellite pictures / images of the project area, all in the dry season; this is to establish trend line using regression analysis.
•      Activities  contained  by  space  such  as  point,  line  and  polygon  (e.g.  point  features  of water  wells  with  and  without  hand  pumps,  developed  springs,  bridges,  diversion  points, Farmers' Training Centres , supported by the project, biogas plants, group beehives; line features  such  as  access  roads  ,  irrigation  canals,  cut  off  drains,  waterways;  polygon features  such  as  irrigated  areas,  closed  areas,  planted  areas)  should  be  captured  with GPS and mapped ; and
•    Based on the BLS; measure and compare (before and after) changes on the Severity and areal extent of gullies, stream bank erosion, slumping and land sliding. The reduction in west lands (gully land, degraded hillsides and grazing lands etc). Improvement in
vegetation cover, increase in surface and ground water. Redaction in the effect of
erosion on the lower lying agricultural fields including irrigated areas.
•     Based on the map developed during the BLS; Compare and explain the current condition and changes on the areas that were delineated as a sensitive areas of erosion and land degradation.
•     Based  on  the  soil  erosion  rate  that  was  identified/calculated  during  the  BLS;  compare and calculate the current changes.
•    Submit the filled indicators table with a written report.
5.2. Socio-Economic Impact Assessment
5.2.1. Key Activities for the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment
On the basis of the BLSS conducted during 2010; the main task of the service provider will be to conduct this impact assessment in the previous community watersheds (micro watersheds) and households  selected during the baseline survey  both in project and non-project (control) community watersheds. This means that as the assessment is an impact assessment it will be conducted on already  identified sample community  watersheds  and sample respondent households.
5.2.2.   Specific  tasks:  the  service  provider  will  carry  out  the  following  specific tasks;
• Comment and agree on the technicality and methodology of the survey, which strictly be followed the previous baseline survey, submit and discuss technical proposal,
6•     Select enumerators and supervisors who are familiar with the culture and language of the area;
•     Train  enumerators  and  supervisors  on  the  techniques  and  ethics  of  conducting  the survey, which is to be supported by a one day pre-testing;
•    Finalize the tools based on the pre-test results;
•    Train qualitative survey facilitators and note takers;
•     Conduct  transect  walk  for  triangulation  and  for  comparison  with  the  previous  transect walk to capture changes over time in the socio-economic and biophysical context,
•     Collect household level primary data on the basis of the questionnaire designed for the purpose from sample households selected,
•     Assess  all  community  benefits  such  as  economic,  environmental,  social,  community attitude  changes,  trends  in  awareness  and  capacity,  especially  related  to  community empowerment.
•     Conduct  focus  group  and  key  informant  discussions  to  collect  qualitative  data  and deduce results based on outlined questions,
•     Collect  and  collate  secondary  data  to  substantiate/validate  the  information  obtained from the HH survey, FG and KI groups;
•     Code,  edit  and  process  the  data  using  appropriate  statistical  software  packages  as indicated below;
•     Analyze the data and produce reliable impact/change information for the project sub watersheds;
•     Conduct a consultative workshop at the end of the field work on preliminary findings at Bahir Dar with key stakeholders & incorporate the recommendations of the workshop in the final document, and;
•    Prepare and deliver other items as detailed under "deliverables" section.
•     Identify  and  analyze  lessons  learnt,  knowledge  disseminated  and  important  parts  of achievements to be scalable to other areas from the project.
Overall, The impact assessment result is expected to show, but not limited to, the important outputs of the assessment like changes in: the income levels of various social segments of the society in the sub watersheds, food security status, productivity levels of crop and livestock, access  and coverage of different social services  like water, primary  education, health & sanitation, access  road, the bio-physical and also the social and institutional impacts  of the watershed development, examine the impacts on farmers livelihood development etc.
75.3. Profile of the Professionals of the Service Provider
Both of the thematic areas of the impact assessment require extensive knowledge in the area of natural resources, GIS and remote sensing, environmental sciences, socio-economic and related field of studies. Therefore the service provider should be familiar and have ample experience on the stated field of studies.
•    An MSc degree or equivalent in Natural resources (land use, forestry, soils, soil and water  conservation),  Environment,  Agriculture,  Water  Resources,  GIS  and  Remote Sensing, Social Sciences, Economics/Agricultural Economics, Sociology or other related fields,
•      Not  less  than  8  years  of  experience  in  the  Natural  resources/socioeconomic implementation and monitoring studies.
•     Proven experience in NDVI and Universal Soil Loss Equation /USLE/ modeling for vegetation classification and calculation of soil erosion rates, respectively.
•     Experience in development and use of participatory approaches in watershed and natural resources monitoring
•    The service provider should have access to the latest high resolution of Quick Bird or GeoEye/IKONOS or WorldView-1 multispectral satellite imageries (imagery products) covering all areas of the project Weredas.
•    Experience in valuation of ecosystem services will be an advantage
5.4. Duty Station and Duration of the Study
The service provider carries out the assessment in the Amhara National Regional State, in five weredas namely Sekela, Mecha, Dera, East Estie and Farta (including Watershed Kebeles in the Debere Tabor Town) covering an area of 85, 026ha; 163 community watersheds/ micro watersheds. The time available for the assessment is two months, and planned to start by late April. The whole IA including delivering of the final assessment result/documents is expected to be finalized within six months.
5.6. Methodology
The methodology will be followed the previous baseline survey approach. (For clarity reason, the methodology used for NRBS and SEBS is attached here as Annex 4&5).
For better convenience of the data collection work the SP advised to conduct the following initiation activities in each community watershed before start the field work.
Establish thorough contacts with concerned woreda offices including woreda Administrations;
8•     Make  meetings  and  discussions  regarding  the  implementation  of  impact  assessment  of the watershed;
•     Conduct  village  level  meetings  with  available  villagers to  brief  them  about  the  purpose of   the   study   and   to   clarify   doubts,   thus   avoiding   any   expectations   among   the beneficiaries.  Watershed  community  members,  committees,  women,  youths,  elders  etc should be participated in meetings.
5.7.  Data Management and Processing
Following the accomplishment of field data collection, the structured questionnaires  will be checked for consistence, edited, coded and entered into CSPro (Census  and Survey Programming) software/database. The encoded data will be exported to SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) for further analysis and tabulation. Before the analysis is done the data should again be checked to minimize encoding errors.
Depending  on  the  volume  of  the  information,  the  qualitative  data  will  be  either  manually analyzed or qualitative data analysis software will be used.
5.8. Skills required
The task  requires  experience of conducting similar activities  to effectively  discharge responsibilities. Accordingly  the Service Provider (and its  participating team members)should have good understanding of the subject matter, both theoretical knowledge and practical field level experience in conducting extensive similar assessment in similar environment, conducting PRA tools  in rural context, etc). Moreover, familiarity  with the socioeconomic  and cultural condition of the area in which the survey is to be conducted is also highly desirable.
5.9. Deliverables
•     Within 30 days of the signing of the contract the service provider will submit inception report   to   TBIWRDP/NPCU   and   the   Regional   Watershed   Management   Coordination Office  with  the  inception  report  describing  in  detail  the  methodology,  activities  and expected results and timeline including the detailed filed work and survey crew required. Service provider will submit 3 hard copies and a soft version. The inception report will also be presented on a half-day workshop in Bahir Dar.
•     Once comments on the inception report are incorporated, accepted and a go-ahead is given  the  actual  fieldwork  will  start  by  Service  provider  within  one  week  and  continue working and compiling lsl  draft report for a period of two months. The findings and interim report  will  be similarly presented to the TBIWRDP/NPCU and the Regional Watershed Management Coordination Office and reviewed in half-day workshop in Bahir Dar as that of the inception report.
9•     Based on comments and improvements to be suggested on the 1M  draft report the service provider   will   submit   final   assessment   report/result,   with   the   indicator   tables   filled accurate and up to date and all necessary digital maps within 30 days. In hard (six copies) and  electronic  copy  which  showing  sampling  frame,  key  findings,  executive  summary, conclusions  and  key  problems/constraints  encountered  in  the  course  of  conducting  the assessment and the way forward, etc. Four CD copies, containing the full text of the final report and graphics with all the associated annexes, must be submitted together with the hard copies of the final report,
•      Submit  completed  questionnaires,  lists  of  respondents,  which  are  useful  for  future reference and similar impact assessments;
•    Coding procedures and an electronic copy of coded data sheet (both the CSPro and SPSS) should be delivered at the end of the task.
•     Submit different photo albums, images, map albums, GPS data and filled questioners (if any).
5.10.   Time Frame
The tentative time frame is outlined as follows;
•     TBIWRDP/NPCU and the Regional Watershed Management Coordination Office finalize the draft ToR for the Impact Assessment, by February 24, 2015 and send to The World Bank for no objection by February 25, 2015.
•    The World Bank send back the document to NPCU by March 03, 2015.
•     NPCU  incorporate  the  comments,  prepare  the  final  plan  and  submit  the  document  to the ministries bid indorsing committee for final approval by March 05, 2015.
•     The  Ministry's  bid  indorsing  committee  approve  the  document  and  send  back  to  the NPCU by March 09, 2015.
•    NPCU send the ToR to BDU by march 10, 2015
•    BD University comments the ToR by March 16, 2015.
•    Final TOR accepted, by March 18, 2015
•    Contract signed between BD University and TBIWRDP/NPCU, by March 20, 2015
•    BDU, Preparations for the field work until April 20, 2015.
•     BDU, submit the inception report including detailed methodology, half day workshop on the inception report in Bahir Dar and a go ahead by April 22, 2015
10•     Field work starts, latest by April 27, 2015 and finalized by June 27, 2015 (two months). Here the SP should work early in the areas that that can no accessed during the rainy season and lately to the easily accessible areas, this is crucially important to avoid the delay owing to inaccessibility)
•    First draft report submission by July 27, 2015 (one month).
•     Half day debriefing workshop on the draft findings will be held in Bahir Dar by July 31, 2015.
•    Stakeholder comments and feedbacks by August 10, 2015,
•    Final Report and other deliverables submission by August 31, 2015,
5.11. Reporting Requirements and Accountability
The SP is  accountable to the TBIWRDP/NPCU under the Ministry  of Water, Irrigation and Energy. The final report will be written in English. The report should be vetted by the Team Leader NPCU/RWSCO. The report should include all the annexes and an Executive Summary, lessons learnt and good practices. The main text should be in MS Office. The CD must bring together all the reports, maps, materials  and related source documents  and must organize them thematically. All deliverables  mentioned in "deliverables” section has  to be submitted within the agreed time frame Moreover, the SP is  not mandated to make any  promises  to communities and others in the course of the Impact Assessment.
5.12. Cost coverage:
The service provider should cover all kinds of costs related to the survey during field work. To resolve the problem related to transportation, the client will allocate two vehicles  for the two consecutive months of the data collection. All costs related to the vehicles including fuel and drivers allowance should covered by the SP.
11Annex 1. Map of the project area
12Annex 2: Indicator Tables for Status Assessment
Tablet. GOAL and DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE indicators
Goal.      Objec indicators
Baseline 2010
Code
Result From
IA
Description or explanation
Note
1
GOI
1.956
in Birr/cap. Per capita income growth of 3% to 4% per annum, in real terms
1.2
2
GO2
42%
% of population below poverty line continues to fall by approximately 2.5% -units per inr
12
3
GO3
3.024
Household income rises by 75% in real terms (ETB 4,000 to 7,000 between 2008 and 201!
)I2.3
4
DOI
S3.757 ha of vulnerable Tana sub-basin micro-w aicrsheds rehabilitated and well-managed
4.5
7
DO3
33%
% of food insecure households in normal year reduced from 39 % in 2008 to 10 % in 201 J*
1.2.8
Notes BL data Brought by the Bahir Dar University study: Baseline for Tana-Bcles Watershed Development
1        Baseline data refers to Elh year 2002 (Eur year 2010/2011), Bahir Dar university survey
2        Status data from 30 11.2010 same as baseline data, from Bahir Dar university survey
3         Logical framework data (ETB 4000) from ENTRO / Halcrow socio-economic study before the project
4         Updated project area 83.757 hectares, based on WME projcci GIS-analysis. B-A value from WME database
5        Here baseline data 8169 ha refers to September 2011 Also part of this area has been rehabilitated during project lifetime
6         Baseline period 1.8 2009-31 7.2010. Status period (moving average) 1.4 2010-31.3.201 •
7        Tentative baseline value for annual sediment load, this and status value to be redefined after 2011 rainy season measurcme 8         Logical framework data (39 % for 2008) from ENTRO / Halcrow socio-economic studv before the project
** These figures are expected to be found out by the follow up survey
13Tabic 2. O UTCOME indicators
Outcome
indicators
3aselin<
2010
•/ Code
Result From
A
Description or explantation
Note
I OC1II
85.3 %
Improved SWC pract adopted by all (100%) 44380 households in targeted kebeles by 2013
1.2
2 0CH2
4.500
All community forests (ha) within targeted watershedsonserved in their entirety by 2013
1.5
3 0CH3
0%
Appropr modern and susl. foresIry.'agroloccMry adopted by 75 % of ccmmunilies in uiicnhcd*
1,2
4 00 14
0
Susi hydrol monii system esiabhshed, tuncboning, providing timely and accurate data by 2010
9
5 0CH5
0.04
Dry season baseflow (m3/min) increased at micro-watershed outlets
3
6 0016
0%
10 % households adopting renewable energy innovations by 2013
1.4
7 OC20I
46.3 %
All (100%) 38275 farmers have access to effective agric. extension services by 2013
12
8 OC202
1,485
Average yields for cereals increased by at least 25 % by 2013
1,2
9 OC203
1.332
Average yields for pulses increased by at least 25 % by 2013
1.2
10 OC204
765
Average yields for oilseeds increased by at least 25 % by 2013
1.2
11 OC205
5.640
Average yields for horticultural crops increased by at least 25 % by 2013
12.J
12 OC206
56
Increased production (tn/y) of vegetables on 400 SSI sites covering tot 1.500 ha and increases
1.6
13 OC20"
0
Increased production (tn/y) of fruits on 400 SSI sites covering total of 1.500 ho and increases
1.6
14 OC20^
22%
Cereals: share reaching market raises to 29 % in targeted kebeles by 2013
12
15 OC20S
29%
Pulses share reaching market raises to 38 % in targeted kebeles by 2013
12
16 OC21
70%
Oil seeds share reaching market raises from 70% to 91% in targeted kebeles by 2013
12
17 OC2E
1166
Income (Birr) from crop production increased by 20 % between 2008 and 2013, in real terms
12
18 OP2K
51%
In % of total (Livestock extension services improved in all targeted kebeles by 2013)
12
19 OC2U
1 36%
Incidence of preventable liveslock diseases in the targeted watersheds reduced to 5 4 % by 20
312
20 OC21
5    582
Value of Livestock &. L. produces sales (Bin/yr/farm, in real terms) increased by 20 % in by ‘
oqj.2
21 OC30
10
A group, or number of individual fuel efficient stove production enterprises established by 20
31 4
22 OC30
2 27%
Share of HHs engaged in ofT-farm enterprises m targeted watersheds increased to 35 % bv 20
31.2
23 OC40
1    1:41
In hrs: Improved access to markets, inputs and social services in targeted kebeles bv 2013
12
24 OC40
2    1:34
In hrs Improved access to cducat and health services / facilities in targeted kebeles by 2013
,
1 ?.
25 OC40
3 41%
Access lo potable water in targeted kebeles increases from 4 i % in 2008 to 80 % bv 2013
1.7
Noles
BL data
1
2
3
4
5
Brought by the Baliir Dar University study: Baseline for Tana-Bclcs Watershed Development Baseline data refers to Elh year 2002 (Eur year 2010/2011). Bahir Dar university survey Total number of households 44.380 Baseline survey 853 % of households within improved SWC Dry season baseflow estimated by the TA-tcam
Status data same as baseline data, from Bahir Dar university survey Status data from WME project database
6                       To be measured in tonnes where increased production of fruits or vegetables has been observed
7
Logical framework data (41 %) front ENTRO / Hnlcrow socio-economic study before the pro,eel
8                        Horticultural crops include: potato, onion, pepper, other vegetables (BD University baseline survey) 9                        Microwatershed Monitoring Programme (MMP) M&E system delivered in December 2010
** These figures are expected to be found out by the follow up survey
14Tabic 3.   OUTPUT indicators
Output Basclii c
indicate s A
// Code
Status I
1
Usult From A
Description or explanation
Target
Nolt
1 OPIII
0
CBPWDP’s and CAP’S prepared for all (163) CWS in project area by 2013
163
L2
2 OPI21
0
1370 additional hectares of gullies rehabilitated by 2013
1.37C
3.2
3 OP 12:
0
SWC measures implemented on 51,409 ha of cultivated land by 2013
51,40?
1.4
4 OP 12'
0
SWC measures implemented on 30,978 ha of grazing land by 2013
30,978
1.4
5 0PI3
0
User groups & mgment plans made for forest conscrv, in 75 % of CWS by 2013
122
1.2
6 OPI4 1
29
20 tree nurseries established and run by 2013 to supply communities and houschok
s 20
1.2
7 OPI4:
4,500
3,000 ha of (new) community forests planted by 2013
3,0OC
3,4
8 OPI4.
900
2,000 ha (new) household woodlots planted by 2013
2,OOC
3
9 OPI51
23.232
Fuel efficient stoves adopted by 50 % of HHs (19,138) in 163 watersheds by 2013
19,138
5.2
io op15:
0
Renewable energy innovations adopted by 10 % (3828) of HHs by 2013
3,828
1,2
11 OPI6
0
DA’s in NR offices of targeted kcbelcs (35) provided with cquipm. and motorcycles by 2010
35
1,2
12OP21I
0
Farmers Training Centres upgraded / rehabilitated in all 35 targeted kcbelcs by 201
3      35
1.2
13 OP23!
56
1500 ha of Small Scale Irrigation established by 2013
1,500
3.4
I4OP251
0
DA’s Crops & Livestock in 35 kcbelcs provided with fumit, cquipm., motorcycles by 2010
35
15 OP25:
0
2100 farmers trained in FTC’s in improved agricultural inputs & technologies by 2(
13,10C
1.2
1.4
I6OP26
0
Veterinary services improved and constructed in all 35 targeted kebeles by 2013
35
1,2
I7OP27
2392
25 % of households(9569 HH) have adopted improved fodder production by 2013
9569
6,2
I8OP27I
0
20 % of households (7655 HH) have adopted controlled grazing & stall feeding by
20^5
6,2
I9OP28
2171
10 % oi households (3828 HH) have adopted improved animal breeds by 2013
3828
6,2
20 OP31
73
One fully functioning flour mill established in each (35) targeted kebcle by 2013
35
1.2
21 OP32
0
Fuel efficient stoves produced in the households of 35 targeted kcbelcs by 2013
38,275
1,2
22 OP41
5
10% households (4430) establish waler harvest struct, microponds, hand dug wells, hind pur
H2
23 OP41
:    178
657 additional springs or handdug wells developed by 2013
657
1.4
24 OP4I
9
166 additional improved sanitation units provided in targeted 35 kebeles by 2013
166
1.4
25 OP42
10
Primary education and health services or facilities in 35 targeted kcbelcs supported
70
1.4
26 OP43
28
100 km of additional access roads constructed or upgraded by end of project in 201
3 100
1.4
27 OP43
' 95
192 km of additional internal access paths constructed or upgraded by 2013
192
1.4
28 OP42
r 17
232 addinonal footbridges / culverts constructed by 2013
232
1.4
^|op<
\      24
1 Additional telephone posts established in 35 targeted kebeles by 2013
35
1.4
Notes              BL data            Brought by the Bahir Dar University study: Baseline for Tana-Belcs Watershed D< 1                  Baseline data refers to estimated situation before the project
2                  Status data refers WME project database
:vclopn i:nt
3
4
5
Baseline data refers to satellite imagery from 2007 (before die project), BD university survey
Status data refers to BD University survey l.l 1 2010 and WME project datubusc
Baseline data from sample households, extrapolated to total of 70400 households in the project.
6                  Baseline data from 1.11.2010, refers to Eth year 2002 (2009/2010). BD university                   suncy
** These figures are expected to be found out by the follow up survey
151
Annex 3. List of all Project activities including Natural Resources Under each Output and Outcome
Output 1,1 Community Based Participatory Watershed D
evelopment Plans (CBPWDP) and Annual Action Plans prepared
No
1.1.0 Community Watershed plans prepared-
No
1.1.1 Community Action plans prepared No
1.1.2 Female fanners trained on watershed planning & CAP preparation No
1.1.3 Male fanners trained on watershed planning & CAP preparation
Output L2 Soil and water conservation measures undertaken on cultivated lands 1.2.0 Slone bunds                       km
1.2.1 Soil bunds                   km 1.2.2 Stone faced soil bund
No
Ha
km
1.2.3 Fanya-juu
1.2.4 Bench Tenace km 1.2.5 Trenches 
1.2.6 Waterways 
1.2.7 Cut-off drains 
.1.2.8 Maintenance of Bunds
km
No
i
*
I
1.2.9 Watcrways/cut-off drain maintenance
Output 13 Gully Treatment and Rehabilitation
I. 3.0 Gabion checkdam constructed
J.             3.1 Stone checkdam constructed
1.3.2 Sack checkdam constructed
1.3.3 Brush-wood checkdam constructed
1.3.4 Gully reshaping and leveling
1.3.5 Gully Planting
1.3.6 Checkdam Maintenance
1.3.7 Brush-wood chcckdam maintenance
1.3.8 Replanting
Output 1.4 Degraded landjltillsid^grazing andforestry land) treated
1 4.0 Area closure
1.4.1 Hillside terracing 1.4.2 Trenches
11.44..43 MEicryeobbraosi wnbasin 16
km km km Km Ha' M3 M3 M3 M
M2 ha M3 M
No Ha I ha km No No No» I
1.4.5 Stone faced soil bund
1.4.6 Waterways                  _______________________________
1.4.7 Cut-off drains_ ,___________________________________________________________________________ Output 1.5 Existing natural andplanted community forests protected and sustainably managed
1.5.1 Existing forest conserved by the community___________________________
.
1.5.2             Develop             by             laws             to             protect             and             wise             use             of             existing             forest Ou7putT.6 Newareaplanted by community forestry and agro-forestry systems to stabilize landscape and produce fuel wood and timber 1.6.0 Establish Group Nursery 
1.6.1 Run Group Nursery
tl.6.2 Establish Project Nursery 
1.6.3 Run project Nursery 
1.6.4 Seeds supplied to nurseries
1.6.5 Supply Polythcn Tube
1.6.6 Supply other nursery materials 
1.6.7 Seedlings raised on private nursery ____________________ 1.6.8 seedlings raised on group nursery 
1.6.9 seedlings raised on project nursery 
.
I
1.6.90 Fruit seedlings raised
__________________
km km km Ha
ha No
Ha
No No No . No 1 Kg I Qi
No i No No ha ha
ha
I
1.6.91 Planting seedlings on communal/closed areas_____________________ _
1.6.92 Planting seedlings on backyard __                        __
1.6.93 Planting seedlings on wood lots,
1.6.94 Allay cropping
1.6.95 Enrichment planting
1.6.96 Roadside planting
1.6.97 Planting fruit trees 
1.6.98 Planting on Bunds
1.6.99 Demonstration sites conducted on multi purpose bamboo
aanapancn _
Output 2./ Demonstration sites for improved cropping practices A. systems established 2.1.0 On improved cropping practices
2 1.1 On irrigation waler management 2.1.2 On high value crops (fruit, vegetables) 2 I 3 On malt barely 
172.1.4  On stabilization of physical structures 
2.1.5  Demonstration on new crop varieties ________
2.1.6  Farmers participated on different demonstrations
2.1.7  Female Farmers trained on different demonstrations
No
No
No
No
2.1.8  Male Farmers trained on different demonstrations 
2.1.9  Farmers adopted Enset production
2.1.90  Improved seeds distributed for demonstration
2.1.91  Improved fruit trees distributed for demonstration
2.1.92  Fertilizer supplied for demonstration plots
No
No
Qt
No
Qi
2.1.93 Chemical supplied for demonstration plots
Lt
2.1.94 Volume of compost prepared
2.1.95 HHs participated in compost making
Output 2.2 Area developed with small scale irrigation
2.2.0 Diversion schemes constructed
2.2.1 Irrigation channel constructed ______________________
2.2.2 Water pumps distributed to organized farmer groups 
2.2.3 Community ponds Constructed
2.2.4 Springs developed for irrigation use
2.2.5  Private hand dug wells constructed for irrigation use
2.2.6 Private water harvesting structures constructed for demon
2.2.7 Households participated in micro & small scale irrigation
Output 2.3 Farmers trained on unproved agricultural extension services (with curricutumandpackages) 2.3.0 New FTC constructed
2.3. £ Mode I FTCs upgraded^
2.3.2 FTCs provided with furniture, equipment, training mils 
2.3.3 DA offices & houses constructed/upgraded
2.3.4 DA offices provided with furniture and equipment
2.3.5 Motor cycles provided
2.3.6 GPS provided
2.3.7 Farmers trained on improved cropping practices 
2 3.8 Farmers trained on improved livestock practices
2.3.9   Farmers trained on improved natural resource mangl
2.3.90 Total female farmers trained on improved practices
2.3.91 Total male fanners trained on improved practices 
Output 2.4 No of animats vaccinated/ treated for improved veterinary Services
18
M3 No Ha No km No 'No No No No No No
No No No No No No No No No No No No No2.4.0 New animal health posts constructed
2.4.1 Existing animal health posts upgraded
2.4.2 Animal health posts equipped with facilities
2.4.3  Animals vaccinated
2.4.4 Animals treated______________________________
No
No
No
No
No
Output 2.5 Area covered with improvedforage management and livestock feed development
Ha
2.5.0 Forage seedling multiplication site established
2.5.1 Forage seeds supplied
No
Kg
2.5.2  Forage seedlings/cuttings distributed
2.5.3 Forage demonstration sites established
2.5.4 Grazing land excluded from free grazing/ciosed
2.5.5 Farmers adopted unproved fodder
2.5.6  Fanners adopted controlled grazing or stall feeding
No
No 
,ha
NO
No
2.5.7 Crop residue/Hay treated with UREA
2.5.8 Silage Feed prepared
Output 2.6: Households participated in enhancing production of meat, milk, eggsand honey 2.6.0 Improved breeds of sheep distributed
2.6.1 Improved poultry distributed
2.6.2  Day old hay box distributed
2.6.3 Cattle served through Al services 2.6.5 Calves borne through Al service
____
2.6.6 Households participated in animal (cattle & sheep) fattening
2.6.7 Number of cattle fattened
2.6.8 Number of sheep and goats fattened
2.6.9 Modem beehive distributed
2.6.90  Bee colony distributed
2.6.91 Apiculture equipment distributed
2.6.92 Bee wax distributed
2.6.93  Female Farmers participated in different income generating activities 2.6.94 Male fanners participated in different income generating activities
Output 3. / Community Flour Mills Established and managed 3.1.0 New community flour mills established
3.1.1. User groups established and well functioning
19
tone tone
No
No
No
No
No No No JNo No No
No set kg iNo jNo
W1
No
No
No3.1.2 Flour mill technicians_trained_
3.1.3 Female committee members trained on business management and bookkeeping skills
3.1.4 Male committee members trained on business management and bookkeeping skills
3.1.5 Ensure well functioning of community flour mills
Output 3.2 HHs adopted renewable energy innovations, and fuel efficient technologies 
3.2.0 Self help groups established on production of fuel saving technologies
3.2.1 Fuel efficient stoves produced
3.2.2 HHs adopted fuel efficient stoves
3.2.3 HHs adopted biogas plant
3.2.4 Female HHs trained on production and use of fuel saving technologies
3.2.5 Male HHs trained on production and use of fuel saving technologies 
Output 3.3 Self help groups established and functioning on income generating activities 
No
No
No
No
Ho
No
No
No
No
No
No
Ho
3.3.0 Self help groups organized on beekeeping 3.3.1 Self help groups organized on weaving 3.3.2 Self help groups organ ized_on tannery
3.3.3 Self help groups organized on spinning
No
No
No
No
3.3   .4 Self help groups organized on tailoring
3.3.5 Self help groups organized on forestry
3.3.7 Self help groups organized on bamboo making
3.3.8 Female members participated in all groups_
3.3.9 Male members participated in all groups
3.3.90 Female committee members trained on business management and bookkeeping skills
3.3.91 Male committee members trained on business management and bookkeeping skills 
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Output 4.1 Improved potable water constructed
I
cm
Ho
4.1.0 Hand dug wclls/hand pumps constructed
4.1.1 Springs developed and protected
4. J .2 Female farmers (rained water management
4.1.3 Male farmers trained water management
4.1.4 Total beneficiary population
4.1  5 Establish water supply distribution network for rural centers
4.1.6    Toilet constructed
Output 4.2 Renovation of buildings am! provision offurniture, equipment and materials for primary' schools and health posts
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Ho
204.2.0 Primary schools renovated
4.2.1 Primary schools equipped with furniture & equipments
4.2.2  Health posts renovated
4.2.3 Health posts equipped with furniture and equipments 
Output 43. Improved access and co nununi cations 
4.3.0 Access road maintained / upgrade
4.3.1  Internal access paths constructed
No
No
No
No
Km
Km
Km
4.3.2 Internal access paths maintained
4.3.3  Footbridges maintained
km
No
4.3.4 Culverts constructed
4.3.5 Fords constructed
4.3.6 New telephone posts installed
Capacity Building Interventions 
5.1.0 Woreda experts trained
No
No
No
5.1.1 Development Agents trained
No
5.1.2 Vet Technicians trained
5.1.3 Kebele and Community Watershed Team members trained
5.1.4 Fanners participated on exposure visits 
[No
No
No
5.1.5 Development Agents participated on exposure visits 
5.1.6 Woreda experts and management teams participated on exposure visits trained
5.1.7 Fanners participated on awareness raising workshop
5.1.8 Total female fanners trained
5.1.9 Total male farmers trained
'No
No
No
No
No
21Annex 4: Survey Methodology used for the Socio-economic Baseline Survey
1. Methodology'
Both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods will be applied in order to establish baseline information against which to measured achievements in the middle or end of project implementation will be evaluated. Besides, relevant documents  should be reviewed to substantiate the information. The procedures  / techniques  of applying the quantitative and qualitative methods  arc  outlined as  follows. Moreover the SP may  participate in the finalization of the ToR, example by proposing on methodological issues.
Quantitative Data Collection Method
Of the three themes  of the project, particularly  the livelihood improvement requires measuring changes  at household level. The changes  are related to targeted households’ access to social services such as health and education, annual income by sources, natural resources, etc. These require the collection of primary  data at household level. Thus, representative sample of households will be drawn to collect these and related quantitative information.
Domain of estimation refers io the geographical level, by which the survey findings are to be reported. Gumera, Ribb and Jema sub-watersheds are the domains of estimation. In other words, statistical inference can be drawn to the level of the sub-watersheds and not for a geographical level beyond this.
The survey  will consider households  directly  benefiting from the project and as  a control group households  outside of the project area to make comparisons  with/without besides measuring changes before/after project interventions. To minimize the biasness in sampling, multiple stage sampling method will be applied. Each domain will be sub-grouped into the physical proximity  of households  in terms of residential location and their farm land within the micro-watersheds. The sub-groups will be stratified by the households’ wealth status and from each stratum a representative sample proportional to size will be systematically selected for the study. Note that, the wealth ranking result of the qualitative survey will be used here.
The Household Survey Questionnaire is attached with the ToR
Sample Design and Size
As  mentioned above, multiple stage (cluster-stratificd-systematic) sampling techniques  will be employed to include a household in the study. Complete list of strata along with their estimated household size and criteria for wealth ranking will be produced to use as  a sampling frame. The information will then be analyzed to form wealth strata. Once the households  in the strata are serially  numbered, the sampling units  will be systematically chosen by selecting every klh element of the population, where k is the sampling interval. The first number of the sample will be selected randomly from within the first k elements. This method ensures that the sample is more spread across the population. To optimize (he reliability  ot the information and for triangulation purpose, the Central Statistical Authority (CSA) 2004 population census enumeration areas will be considered in drawing the sample.
22Due to the wide scope of the project, though it is difficult to choose one indicator and use as a determinant variable of measuring changes relevant to project intervention, most of them are proportions. In such a situation, in estimating proportions, the maximum sample size can be achieved when one applies  the following formula with a proportion value P=0.5. As shown below, setting the population proportion (p) equal to 0.5 and assuming a design effect of 2 to make an adjustment for non-random sampling effect, sample size of 202, 202, 201 households  for Gummara, Ribb and Jima, respectively, could suffice to attain a 95% confidence with a margin of error of 10%.
7 (Zo/2) *p(l-p)
d------- --------- 5------------- "o
n = -------------- --------—
2
l+ Where,
Adjusted sample size
N           =        is the total number of households in a specific sub-watershed n °         =        non-adjusted sample size
n                 =        adjusted sample size
/2
-        value for normal distribution      (its value for  two  tailed distribution
with 95% confidence interval is 1.96
p           =        the indicator with proportion value (for           the sake of   having the maximum sample size, the p value is considered to be 0.5)
e                 =        margin of error (10% in our case)
d           =        anticipated design effect (2 in our case)
For a small sample size the non-response rate is normally very        minimal.      However, we propose  to  add  5%  of  the  adjusted  sample  households  for  possible  non-respondents.  In general, the sampling distribution is as shown in the following table.
23Household survey sample size by project area;
Project
Area
Total Number
of households
2
Adjusted sample size
Non
response rate of 5%
Proposed sample size
Gumara
210,332
191.9
9.6
201.5
Ribb
184,530
191.9
9.6
201.5
J ema
48,797
191.3
9.6
200.9
Total
443,659
575.1
28.8
603.9
Qualitative Survey
In order to substantiate, complement and/or supplement the information obtained from the household survey, qualitative data will be collected from target beneficiaries  (project participants), line regional bureaus, and other relevant stakeholders. Appropriate Participatory  Rural Appraisal (PRA) techniques  like Focus  Group Discussion (FGD) with women and Key  Informant Interview (KI1) with elders, local leaders, and BoWRD and BoARD experts  will be used to collect qualitative information. This  process  will help to make the M&E activities participatory at the outset.
Three PRA tools are found particularly important in obtaining relevant information regarding the five target sub-watersheds. These are:
Transect Walk: Transect provides  mapping information beyond that collected during initial reconnaissance and verifies  the information on die sketch map. It adds  detail on specific characteristics (slope drainage, vegetation, water, soils and other sources) that further verifies the PRA team understanding of the area.
The natural resource endowment, land-use and settlement patterns, the degradation features will be sketched on rough hand maps. The transect walk  exercise will be done with the development agents responsible for the extension activities of the respective community and with the micro-catchment residents. In general, the transect walk is supposedly important to create common understanding about the settlement pattern, natural resources  and social services distribution of communities. The result will be feed into GIS to make comparisons in the future.
Wealth Ranking: This method ranks household according to well-being or wealth, including those considered poorest or worst off. It is used to explore perceptions of wealth differences and inequalities. It is  also known as  Vulnerability  Analysis, a technique for the rapid collection and analysis of specific data on social stratification al the community level. This visual tool minimizes wealth, literacy and language differences of participants as it considers factors such as ownership and rights to productive assets, life cycle stages of members of the
2 Project implementation plan. Volume I-Main Report. Page 2
24productive unit, relationship of the productive unit to locally powerful people, availability of labor, indebtedness  and so on. It is  also useful for gauging the relative positions  of households in the community and indicators of wealth. This visual is achieved by asking persons to describe the characteristics of a rich household then a poor household, and after the criteria for rich and poor households have been established respondents are then asked to sort households  into various  categories  from rich to poor. The information for a wealth ranking is usually presented in a matrix. Besides mapping the households by their wealth status, the information will be used for stratifying communities for the quantitative survey. Accordingly, the SP has to identify such stratified groups and conduct the qualitative HH survey on simple random basis from each strata as outlined above.
Key Informant Interview (KII): A semi-structured interview (also called an interview brief) engages respondents in a conversation through a series of guided questions. It has a pre-determined focus, but flexibility in how the questions are structured and allows for open- ended discussion of the answers. The interviewer is able to probe so as to amplify responses and gain greater clarity.
A checklist is developed to guide the semi-structured interview with key informants (woreda OoARD including DAs, woreda OoWRD, religious  leaders, community  elders  and kebele leaders). The livelihood sources  of the community, population dynamics, trend in socio economic situation of residents under investigation, natural calamities affecting households and their frequency, role of different stakeholders participating in development activities, and trends in off farm activities will be the major areas of focus.
Questionnaire for the KII is attached with the ToR.
Focus Group Discussion (FGD): A focus group discussion is used to explore a particular group (which has similar interest on a particular issue) attitudes, feelings, or preferences, and to build consensus. A checklist of themes and open-ended questions is used to focus and guide the interview to obtain the data needed. The moderator and note taker will be of the same sex as the members of the focus group. In each focus group 8-12 eligible persons will be invited to take part in the discussion.
Women headed households, households from each wealth group, households residing outside the sub-watershed catchments but have farm land within, and households residing inside the sub-watersheds might be considered for the discussion. The survey tools will comprise a number of issues including access to basic services (health, education, water supply, energy, credit services, flour mill services), access  to extension and veterinary  services, labor divisions, decision making and control, daily routine calendars of men and women in peak and slack seasons, off-farm income generating activities and asset ownership and evaluation of local institutions and participation of groups in local institutions. This tool is meant to capture community livelihood systems, and focus group discussants role and capabilities as well as potential to influence development activities.
25Field Organization
Enough number of enumerators and field supervisors experienced in primary data collection, familiar with the cultures  of the target community, and can speak  the local language (Amharic) should be hired for the household survey. RXVMCO staff will share responsibilities in overseeing and coordinating the overall process.
The questionnaires should be translated in to Amharic. A three-five days training should be organized to those participating in the data collection. The training should concentrate on harnessing enumerators and supervisors on the contents of the questionnaire, techniques of primary  data collection and briefing on the ethics  of the survey. The training will be supported by one day pre-test.
During the actual survey, at the end of each survey day, the supervisors should collect the completed questionnaires, check for error and give her/his feedbacks to enumerators before the start of the following day survey. Pertinent issues coming out from the survey will be communicated in due time to RWMCO for action and future considerations.
The FGD and KJI will be organized parallel to the household survey. To ensure the quality of the data, the qualitative survey  should be done by  carefully  selected equal number of facilitators  and note takers  who have experience in the area. This  will minimize missing important information during report writing. Depending on respondents’ willingness, the discussions and interviews could be tape recorded.
Secondary Data Collection
As it is known, the whole 35 project kebeles are not expected to be covered in this impact assessment. However, the baseline situation on at least key issues is required from all project kebeles. To incorporate such situation in the final report, the SP is  expected to design appropriate formats lor collecting secondary data on issues such as population disaggregated by sex and age category, current land use practice in the project areas, number of landless households, number and service coverage on health, education, water& sanitation, school age children, credit services, extension &. veterinary services, data on the natural resources, etc.
26Tablei: Number of Sample Household for the baseline survey by CWS for both Project Area and Control Group
WATERSH
ED
SUB-
WATERSHE
D
PROJECT
BENEFICIARY
CONTROL GROUP
CWS
count
Control CWS
count
----------------------]
TOTAL
SAMPLE
HHS
Gosgie
31
Timket Bahir
30
61
Baskura
Deledelie
46
Worka
42
88
Rib
Chimichimit
42
Mcher Wonz
42
84
Kentai
Amba Wonz
36
Fuafuat
35
71
Gualic
45
Dabzuit
44
89
sub total
200
193
393
Gcdam
32
Meskel Tsion
30
62
Zefie
Belew Bet
32
Libase Wonz
36
68
Zefic
29
Agazo
32
61
Gumara
Zeba
34
Gidmiva Tsion
33
67
Gumara 5
29
Mimita
Enkulal
29
58
Enkulal
27
Muyu
28
55
Shibrila
28
Agar
27
55
sub total
211
215
426
Mowalel
50
Woga
48
98
Washaw
Jemma
21
Enguli
Bosa
22
43
Shebayta
48
Asanat
51
99
Toma
82
Feres Bet
82
164
Sub-total
201
203
404
Total sample HHs
612
611
1223
27Anex  5:  Methodology  used  during  the  BLS  for  the  Natural  Resources  Baseline Study
The Natural Resource baseline study will be carried out within the 82 micro-watersheds of the project area. The study  will be carried out using a variety  of tools, mainly  satellite imagery analysis, map analysis, field studies, participatory GIS and other information collection methods. The study should be based on the satellite image, GIS and remote sensing with the combination of field work for ground truthing are essential for data collection. It will require certain in-depth studies, including land use land cover assessments, forestry  and agro forestry, soil erosion rates, soil and water conservation, and irrigated areas. The NR baseline study should consider ground-truthing after the satellite imagery and other desk work have taken place at the initial phases of the assignment.
The study also needs review of existing data in Regional and Federal level. As descnbed above, the forest and woody biomass will be done with the aid of Normalized differentiated Vegetation Index (NDVI) techniques and for soil erosion rate using of Universal Soil Loss Equation /USLE, RUSLE/ or other later versions. Besides desk work, the service provider (team of consultants) arranges field work for ground truthing of land use and capability classification, verification of gully affected areas and agro forestry analysis. Development of a Geodatabse is necessary for the collected spatial data and utilization of some database for non-spatial data. Finally the two data should be joined for analysis purpose.
As the major disciplines are woody biomass, land use, soils, soil and water conservation, land degradation, and environment, among others, the mix  of professionals is expected to include these disciplines both in qualification and related experiences. Besides, the service provider will work  in close consultation with the Regional Project Coordination Unit (RPCU) and the Watershed M&E TA team. The RPCU consists  of a Project Coordinator and a number of experts assigned within the B1 component of the TBIWRDP. The M&E TA team consists of one Team Leader, one Water Resources  Monitoring Advisor, one GIS Advisor, one Watershed Monitoring and Evaluation Advisor and one Capacity  Building and Networking Advisor. The service provider should have access  to the latest high resolution of QuickBird or GeoEye/IKONOS or WorldView-1 multispectral satellite imageries  (imagery  products) covering all areas of the project Weredas
In addition to satellite imagery  and GIS technologies, key  informant interviews, focus  group discussions, transect walk and other primary information collection methods, will also be applied for baseline establishment of the Natural Resources. With this respect the methods described in the socio-economic baseline study such as secondary data collection and review and qualitative survey methods would also be applied as well. Transect walks across reasonable sections of the micro-watersheds will be necessary. Using satellite imagery, and if possible aerial photos in combination with Participatory  GIS/Remote sensing methods, should be used for mapping of land use and land cover, including deforestation/afforestation and vegetative trend monitonng, based on “before” and ‘present” situations by identifying changes to be realised over the project period. By this, as much as possible closed areas through community efforts and government efforts need to be identified and mapped. Through GIS/Remote sensing analyses it would also be possible to depict hot spots" concerning soil erosion (as  interpreted from development in frequency and rate of gully growth, exposure of bare soil, etc.), those areas that have lost their fertility, shallow soils and stony areas or rock outcropped areas, and areas prone to undesirable sedimentation and siltation.
28The natural Resource base line study should answer such questions like: What is the existing land use and land cover? How much natural and planted forestry is there now (in hectares and biomass)? How much agroforestry  and trees  in the farms  is  there now (in hectares  and biomass)? Which soil and water conservation measures  (physical/ biological, indigenous  or introduced) are there already in place in the project watershed? What is the extent and intensity of sheet, rill, and gully and river channel erosion? Where are the water supplies (surface and ground water)? How much land has  been irrigated (especially  through traditional or project based schemes)? What ecosystem services  prevail and their future potential in the project areas.
In addition to computer work and desk work ground truthing is also needed for woody biomass, ecosystem service areas, irrigated areas, erosion hotspots (sheet and rill), gully affected areas, and other problem areas  in the field. Through GIS methods  it is  also possible to analyse baseline information on slopes  from topographic  maps, make preliminary  soil loss  estimates, and identify hotspots. The use of Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE), Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE), or other models could be applied. Due to these aspects it might be best to conduct these studies after the rainy season, when erosion effects, as well as land cover through vegetation, is clear in the field. Many of these forestry and woody biomass parameters can be determined through NDVI-techniques  (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) from properly timed satellite images.
The satellite imagery  and GIS/Remote sensing methodology  applied as  part of obtaining the baseline information will be included in the overall M&E system to provide a means to follow-up and evaluation of the impacts  of the project interventions  at community  watershed level by creating a spatial visualization of project achievements as they evolve during implementation.
29The Natural Resource and Socio-Economic Impact Assessment tasks, for sub component Bl, is planned to be awarded to Bahir Dar University through Single Source Selection.
Major reasons for the need of single source selection are cited bellow;
•  In  first  place,  the  proposed  contract  is  a  natural  continuation  of  the  work  done originally  by  Bahir  Dar  University  as  they  carried  out  the  Baseline  Survey  in  2009. Hence, now in the need of measuring the changes over the past 6 years, the same university   who   conduct   the   BLS   is   crucially   important   ,   to   make   appropriate comparison between past and present using the same sample plots, focus groups and key informants and finally to bring out the tangible changes as a result of the project intervention.
•     Secondly, in the above mentioned baseline survey, the university was submitted all the required deliverables in the expected forms and ways as per the agreed ToR and signed agreements. Hence, we are confident for the university's next work as well.
•     Finally, the proposed contract is very small, being estimated at less than US$100,000; therefore, SSS is proposed in order to facilitate timely delivery of this important work. The assessment work needs to be completed in short period, earlier before the rainy season and before termination of the project.Justification for SSS
The Natural Resource and Socio-Economic Impact Assessment tasks, for sub component Bl, is planned to be awarded to Bahir Dar University through Single Source Selection.
Major reasons for the need of single source selection are cited bellow;
•   In   first   place,   the   proposed   contract   is   a   natural   continuation   of   the   work   done originally  by  Bahir  Dar  University  as  they  carried  out  the  Baseline  Survey  in  2009. Hence,  now  in  the  need  of  measuring  the  changes  over  the  past  6  years,  the  same university   who   conduct   the   BLS   is   crucially   important   ,   to   make   appropriate comparison between past and present using the same sample plots, focus groups and key informants and finally to bring out the tangible changes as a result of the project intervention.
•      Secondly,  in  the  above  mentioned  baseline  survey,  the  university  was  submitted  all the required deliverables in the expected forms and ways as per the agreed ToR and signed agreements. Hence, we are confident for the university's next work as well.
•     Finally, the proposed contract is very small, being estimated at less than US$100,000; therefore, SSS is proposed in order to facilitate timely delivery of this important work. The  assessment  work  needs to  be completed in short  period, earlier before the rainy season and before termination of the project.I. I I I I
I
»
k

Summery

TBIVRDP Summary

Tana and Beles Integrated Water Resource Development Project

Natural Resources and Socioeconomic Impact Assessment - Terms of Reference

Project Overview

Ministry: Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy, Ethiopia

Project Duration: Since May 2008, extended until July 30, 2015

Original PDO: Develop enabling institutions and investments for integrated planning, management, and development in the Tana and Beles Sub-basins to accelerate sustainable growth

Revised PDO (2013): Develop enabling institutions and investments for integrated planning, management, and development in the Tana and Beles Sub-basins

Project Components

Component	Budget	Description
A: Sub-basin Resources planning and Management	$17.61m	Develop institutional infrastructure and capacity
B: Natural Resource Management Investments	$40.83m	Improve natural resources management in Tana sub-basin
C: Growth-Oriented Investment Facilitation	$9.17m	Institutional capacity and investment facilitation (later canceled)
D: Project Management	$2.24m	Overall project planning and coordination

Sub-Component B1: Watershed Management

Objective: Improvement of livelihoods of rural households living in upper catchments of Ribb, Gumara and Jema Watersheds through enhanced productivity and promotion of sustainable land use practices.

Area Coverage: 85,026ha in Ribb, Gumara, and Jema watersheds (Amhara Regional State)

Population: Approximately 180,189 people

Expected Outputs/Outcomes:

Watersheds treated in targeted sub-watersheds
Increased crop production and improved livestock productivity
Expansion of agricultural surpluses and higher farm household incomes
Enhanced sustainability of future agricultural development
Greater fuel wood production
Increased off-farm income
Enhanced human and capital resources

Impact Assessment Objectives

Primary Objective: Evaluate impacts and trace tangible changes over past 6 years by comparing baseline (2010) with current situation using same methodology.

Specific Objectives:

Trace out lessons learnt and good practices for future reference
Prove importance of Integrated Watershed Management interventions
Provide evidence for donors/government decisions about scaling up

Assessment Components

1. Natural Resources Impact Assessment (NRIA)

Key Activities:

GPS inventory of land management practices (SWC, forestry/agro-forestry measures)
Digital mapping of treated/non-treated areas
NDVI analysis of forest/woody biomass cover (2008, 2010, 2015)
Assessment of gully treatment measures and erosion changes
Comparison of soil erosion rates with baseline

2. Socio-Economic Impact Assessment

Key Activities:

Household surveys using same sample as baseline (603 households)
Focus group discussions and key informant interviews
Assessment of changes in income levels, poverty, food security
Evaluation of access to social services (water, education, health)
Analysis of livelihood improvements

Methodology

Follows same approach as 2010 baseline survey conducted by Bahir Dar University:

Quantitative Methods:

Household surveys with systematic sampling (603 households)
Statistical analysis using CSPro and SPSS software

Qualitative Methods:

Transect walks for physical verification
Wealth ranking for social stratification
Key Informant Interviews (KII) with local leaders/experts
Focus Group Discussions (FGD) with community members

Technical Methods:

GIS and remote sensing analysis
NDVI for vegetation assessment
USLE/RUSLE for soil erosion modeling

Key Indicators for Assessment

Comparison will be made against baseline values for indicators including:

Category	Example Indicators
Economic	Per capita income, household income, % below poverty line
Agricultural	Crop yields (cereals, pulses, oilseeds), livestock productivity
Natural Resources	Area treated with SWC, gully rehabilitation, forest cover
Social Services	Access to water, education, health services
Infrastructure	Access roads, footbridges, irrigation schemes

Implementation Details

Service Provider: Bahir Dar University (same as baseline survey)

Justification for Single Source Selection:

Continuity with baseline survey for valid comparisons
Proven capability from previous work
Small contract value (<$100,000) requiring timely completion

Duration: 6 months (April-August 2015)

Duty Station: Amhara Regional State (5 weredas, 35 kebeles)

Deliverables

Inception report (30 days after contract signing)
First draft report (after 2 months fieldwork)
Final assessment report with:
- Updated indicator tables
- Digital maps
- Photo documentation
- Raw data and analysis files
Stakeholder workshops for feedback