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; to 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 [$40.83mJ: 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 % 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/Outcomcs 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  images  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;
5•     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
1
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  1st   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
Tabic 1. GOAL and DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE indicators
Goal,   Objcc indicators
Basclim
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 ann
1.2
3
GO3
3.024
Household income rises by 75% in real terms (ETB 4,000 to 7,000 between 2008 and 201 ’
) 1.2.3
4
DOI
83,757 ha of vulnerable Tana sub-basin micro-w atersheds rehabilitated and well-managed
4.5
7
DO3
33%
% of food insecure households in normal year reduced from 39 % in 2008 to 10 % in 201b
I.2.S
Notes BL data Brought by the Bahir Dar University study. Baseline for Tana-Belcs Watershed Development
1        Baseline dnta refers to Elh year 2002 (Eur year 2010/2011). Bahir Dar university survey
2        Status data from 30 11.2010 same as baseline dnta, from Bahir Dar university survey
3         Logical framework dnin (ETB 4000) from ENTRO1 Halcrow socio-economic study before the project
4         Updated project area 83,757 hectares, based on WME project GIS-nnalysis, 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 2011
7        Tentative baseline value for annual sediment load, this and status value to be redefined after 2011 rainy season mcasurcmc 8        Logical framework datn (39 % for 2008) from ENTRO / Halcrow socio-economic study before (he project
** These figures are expected to be found out by the follow up survey
13Tabic 2. OUTCOME indicators
Outcome
indicators
Baselin 2010
Code
Result From
IA
Description or explantation
Note
I
OCII1
85.3 %
Improved SWC pract adopted by all (100%) 44380 households in targeted kebcles by 2013
1.2
2
OC112
4,500
All community forests (ha) within targeted watershedsonserved in their entirety by 2013
1.5
3
OCI13
0%
Appropr modern and susi forest ry/agro fores 1 ry adopicd by 75 % of communities in watersheds
1.2
4
OC114
0
Susi hydrol monit system established, functioning, providing timely and accurate daia by 2010
9
5
OC1I5
0.04
Dry season baseflow (m3/min) increased at micro-watershed outlets
3
6
OC116
0%
10 % households adopting renewable energy innovations by 2013
1.4
7
OC20I
46.3 %
All (100%) 38275 fanners have access to effective agric. extension services by 2013
1.2
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 al least 25 % by 2013
1.2
IO
OC204
765
Average yields for oilseeds increased by at least 25 % by 2013
1.2
II
OC205
5.640
Average yields for horticultural crops increased by at least 25 % by 2013
I.2J
12
OC206
56
Increased production (tn/y) of vegetables on 400 SSI sites covering lot 1,500 ha and increase.'
1.6
13
OC207
0
Increased production (tn/y) of fruits on 400 SSI sites covering total of 1,500 ha and increases
1.6
14
OC20S
22%
Cereals share reaching market raises to 29 % in targeted kebcles by 2013
1,2
15
OC209
29%
Pulses: share reaching market raises to 38 % in targeted kebcles by 2013
1.2
16
OC21I
70%
Oil seeds share reaching market raises from 70% to 91% in targeted kebcles by 2013
1.2
17
OC212
1166
Income (Birr) from crop production increased by 20 % between 2003 and 2013, in real terms
1.2
18
OP213
51%
In % of total (Livestock extension services improved in all targeted kebcles by 2013)
1.2
19
OC214
36%
Incidence of preventable livestock diseases in the targeted watersheds reduced to 5 4 % by 20
31,2
20
OC215
582
Value of Livestock & L products sales (Bin/yr/farm, in real terms) increased by 20 % tn by '
3 Ip,2
21
OC301
0
A group, or number of individual fuel efficient stove production enterprises established by 20
31,4
22
OC302
27%
Share of HHs engaged in off-farm enterprises in targeted watersheds increased to 35 % by 20
31.2
23
OC401
1:41
In hrs Improved access to markets, inputs and social services in targeted kebcles by 2013
12
24
OC402
1:34
In hrs Improved access to cducat. and health services / facilities in targeted kebcles by 2013
12
25
OC403
41%
Access to potable water in targeted kebcles increases from 41 % in 2008 to 80 % by 2013
1.7
Notes                            BL data
Brought by the Balur Dar University study: Baseline for Tnna-Bcles Watershed Development
1                         Baseline data refers to Elh year 2002 (Eur year 2010/2011), Bnhir Dar university survey
2
lotal number of households 44,380 Baseline survey. 85.3 % of households within improved SWC
3                          Dry season base flow estimated by the TA-team
4 Status data same ns baseline data, from Bnhir Dar university survey
5                         Status data from WME project dninbasc
6
7
To be measured in tonnes where increased production of fruits or vegetables has been observed Logical framework data (41 %) from ENTRO/1 laicrow socio-economic study before the protect
8                          Horticultural crops include potato, onion, pepper, other vegetables (BD University baseline survey) 9                          Microwalcrshcd 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
0
in
tl
utput dicatc
Code
Basel i
SA
eStatus
Result Front
IA
Description or explanation
Target
Note
l
OPII
0
CBPWDP’s and CAP’S prepared for all (163) CWS in project area by 2013
163
1,2
2
OPI2
0
1370 additional hectares of gullies rehabilitated by 2013
1.37C
3,2
3
OPI2:
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
OPI3
0
User groups & ingmcni plans made foi forest conserv, in 75 % of CWS by 2013
122
1.2
6
OPI4
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
3,00C
3,4
8
op m
: 900
2,000 ha (new) household woodlots planted by 2013
2.00C
3
9
OPI5I
23,232
Fuel efficient stoves adopted by 50 % of HHs (19,138) in 163 watersheds by 2013
19,138
5.2
10
OPI5:
0
Renewable energy innovations adopted by 10 % (3828) of HHs by 2013
3,826
1.2
11
OP16I
0
DA’s in NR offices of targeted kcbclcs (35) provided with cquipm. and motorcycles by 2010
35
1.2
12
OP2II
0
Farmers Training Centres upgraded / rehabilitated in all 35 targeted kcbclcs by 201
3      35
1.2
13
OP23I
56
1500 ha of Small Scale Irrigation established by 2013
l,50C
3.4
14
OP25I
0
DA’s Crops & Livestock in 35 kcbclcs provided with fumil., 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
16
OP26I
0
Veterinary services improved and constructed in all 35 targeted kcbclcs by 2013
35
1.2
17
OP27I
2392
25 % of households(9569 Illi) have adopted improved fodder production by 2013
9S6S
6.2
18
OP27."
0
20 % ol households (7655 HH) have adopted controlled grazing & stall feeding by
2O&5
6.2
19
OP281
2171
10 % of households (3828 HH) have adopted improved animal breeds by 2013
3828
6.2
20
OP3II
73
One fully functioning Hour mill established in each (35) targeted kcbclc by 2013
35
1.2
21
OP32:
0
Fuel efficient stoves produced in (he households of 35 tnrgcted kcbclcs by 2013
38,275
1.2
22
OP411
5
10% households (4430) establish water harvest struct, microponds, hand dug wells, hand pui
iKX2
23
0P4i:
178
657 additional springs orhanddug wells developed by 2013
657
l.l
24
0P4i:
9
166 additional improved sanitation units provided in targeted 35 kcbclcs by 2013
166
25
DP42I
0
Primary education nnd health services or facilities in 35 targeted kebclcs supported
70
1.4
1.4
26
□P-131
28
100 km of additional access roads constructed or upgraded by end of project in 201
J 100
1.4
27
DP43:
95
192 km of additional internal access paths constructed or upgraded by 2013
192
28 (
□P-13.
17
232 additional footbridges/culverts constructed by 2013
232
□P43-
24
Additional telephone posts established in 35 targeted kcbclcs by 2013
35
l.l
l.l
l.l
Notes              BL data             Brought by the Baltir Dar University study; Baseline for Tann*Belcs Watershed Development
1                      Baseline data refers to estimated situation before (he project
2                  Status dula refers WME project database
3                  Baseline data refers to satellite imagery from 2007 (before the project), BD university survey
4                       Status data refers to BD University survey 1.11 2010 and WME project database
5                  Baseline data from sample households, extrapolated to total of 70100 households in the project.
6                      Baseline data from l.l 1.2010, refers to Eth year 2002 (2009/2010), BD university survey
★★ These figures (ire expected to be found out by the follow up survey 15Annex 3. List of all Project activities including Natural Resources Under each Output and Outcome
■nr
i
Output 1.1 Community Based Participatory Watershed Development Plans (CBPIVDP) and Annual Action Plans prepared
I
1.1.0    Community    Watershed    plans    prepared
1.1.1 Community Action plans prepared
1.1.2    Female farmers trained on watershed planning & CAP preparation
1.1.3    Male farmers trained on watershed planning & CAP preparation
Output 1.2 Soil and water conservation measures undertaken on cultivated lands
1.2.0 Stone bunds 
1.2.1    Soil bunds 
1.2.2    Stone faced soil bund
1.2.3  Fanya-juu
1.2.4  Bench Terrace
1 .Z^JIrenches
1.2.6  Waterways
1.2.7  Cut-off drains 
1.2.8 Maintenance of Bunds
1.2.9 Waterways/cut-off drain maintenance
Output 1.3 Gully Treatment and Rehabilitation
1.3.0 Gabion checkdam constructed
1.3.1    Stone checkdam constructed
1.33 Sack checkdam constructed
1.3.3    Brush-wood checkdam constructed
1.3.4     Gully reshaping and leveling
1.3.5    Gully Planting
13.6 Checkdam Maintenance
1.3.7     Brush-wood checkdam maintenance
1.3.8    Replanting
Output 1.4 Degraded land (hillside, grazingand forestry land..) treated
1.4.0 Area closure
i
1.4.1    Hillside terracing
I
1.4.2  Trenches 
1.4.3  Microbasin
1.4.4     Eyebrow basin
16I I
1.4.5  Slone faced soil bund
1.4.6  Waterways
1.4.7  Cut-off drains
Output 1.5 Existing natural and planted community forestsjjrotected and sustainably managed
1.5.1  Existing forest conserved by the community
L5.2 Develop by laws to protect and wise use of existing forest
Output 1.6 New area planted by conununity 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 
11.6.2 Establish Project Nursery 
1.63 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 
1.6.90  Fruit seedlings raised
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
km km km
Ha
ha No
Ha
No No No No Kg Qt set No No No No | ha ha | ha ha No km no km
No
improved past ure TH
VTT
I I
f■*
* iv
Output 2.1 Demonstration sites for improved cropping practices & systems established 2.1.0 On improved cropping practices 
2.1.1 On irrigation water management 2.13 On high va 1 ue crops (fruit, vegetables) 2.1.3 On malt barely 
17
No
No
No
No
NoI
I
2.1.4   On stabilization of physical structures 
No
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 
2J .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  Jmprovcd fruit trees distributed for demonstration
2.1.92   Fertilizer supplied for demonstration plots 
2.1.93   Chemical supplied for demonstration plots 
2.1.94   Volume of compost prepared
2.1.95   HHs participated in compost making
No
No
No
No
No
Qi
No
Qt
Lt
M3
No
Output 2.2 A rca developed with small scale irrigation
2.2.0 Diversion schemesj:onstructed
2.2.1   irrigation channel constructed
Ha
No
km
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
iNo
•No
No
No
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 improved agricultural extension services (with curriculum and packages)
2.3.0 New FTC constructed
No
iNo
No
No
2.3.1 Model FTCs upgraded
23.2 F FCs provided with furniture, equipment, training mtls
2.3.3 DA offices & houses constructed/upgraded
I
2.3.4 DA offices provided with furniture and equipment
I
2.3.5 Motor cycles provided
2.3.6 GPS provided
2.3.7 Fanners trained on improved cropping practices
2.3.8 Fanners trained on improved livestock practices
2.3.9 Farmers trained on improved natural resource mangt
2.3.90 Total female farmers trained on improved practices
2.3.91 Total male farmers trained on improved practices
Output 2.4 No of animals vaccinated/ treatedfor improved veterinary Services
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
182.4.0 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
Output 2.5 Area covered with improved forage management and livestock  feed development
No
No
No
No
No
Ha
2.5.0 Forage seedling multiplication site established
2.5.1   Forage seeds supplied  _   _  Kg
2.5.2   Forage seedlings/cuttings distributed
2.5.3   Forage demonstration sites established
2.5.4   Grazing land excluded from free grazing/closed
2.5.5   Farmers adopted improved fodder
2.5.6   Fanners adopted controlled grazing or stall feeding 2.5.7   Crop residue/Hay treated with UREA
2.5.8   Silage Feed prepared
No
No
No NO
No
ha
Output 2.6: Households participated in enhancing production of meat, milk, eggs and honey 2.6.0 Improved breeds of sheep distributed
2.6.1   Improved poultry distributed
tone tone
Ko
No No
No
2.6.2
Day old hay box distributed
No
2.6.3
Cattle served through Al services 
2.6.5
Calves bome through Al service
2.6.6
Households participated in animal (cattle & sheep) fattening
No
No
No
2.6.7
Number of cattle fattened
No
22..66..98 MNoudmembebreoefhshiveeedpistarnibdugteodats fattened
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 3.1 Community Flour Mills Established and managed
3.1.0 New community flour mills established
3.1.1. User groups established and well functioning
19
a-
No No set
kg
No No
rm
.’ft ■ ,ILlJ 
Ko
No No■BHBBBF
3.1.2 Flour mill technicians trained
M P |i 1 1 1 1
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 _\vell 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
No
No 
No 
No 
No
3 2.1 Fuel efficient stoves produced
No 
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
3 3 .0 Self help groups organized on beekeeping
3.3.1 Self help groups organized on weaving
3.3.2 Self help groups organized on tannery
3.3.3 Self help groups organized on spinning
3.3.4 Self help groups organized on tailoring 
3.3.5Self help groups organized on forestry
3.3.7 Self help groups organized on bamboo making
33.8 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 
No
No 
No
No No
No
No
No
No
No
Output 4. I Improved potable water constructed No 
4.1.0 Hand dug wells/hand pumps constructed No 
4.1.1 Springs developed and protected 
4.1.2 Female farmers trained 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  No
No
No
No
No
No
Output 4.2 Renovation of buildings and provision of furniture, equipment and materials for primary schools and health posts
20■LE-JJ
4.2.0 Primary schools renovated
4.2.1 Primary schools equipped with furniture & equipments
4.2.2 Health posts renovated
No
No
No
4.2.3 Health posts equipped with furniture and equipments
Output    4.3.    Improved    access    and    communications
4.3.0 Access road maintained / upgrade
4.3.1 Internal access paths constructed 
No
Km
Km
Km
4.3.2 Internal access paths maintained________________
4.3.3 Footbridges maintained 
4.3.4 Culverts constructed 
km
No
No
4.3.5 Fords constructed 
No
No
Capacity Building Interventions^
No
5.1.0 Woreda experts trained                  _____________   _ No 1
5.1.1 Development Agents trained 
5.1.2 Vet Technicians trained 
5.1.3 Kebelc and Community Watershed Team members trained 5.1.4 Farmers participated on exposure visitsNo
5.1.5 Development Agents participated on exposure visitsNo
No | |No
No ,
5.1.6 Woreda experts and management teams participated on exposure visits trained                 No 5.1.7 Farmers participated on awareness raising workshop 
No
5.1.8 Total female fanners trained 
5.1.9  Total male farmers trained 
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 I techniques of applying the quantitative and qualitative methods are 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 to 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 anil 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 (he strata are serially  numbered, the sampling units  will be systematically chosen by selecting every k"' 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 the reliability  of 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%.
JZ^j^pd-p)
n 0 = d------- '------- ------------
«o
n = --------------------- -—
1 + ( o ~ 1)/^ Adjusted sample size
n
Where, N
is the total number of households in a specific sub-watershed
"o
non-adjusted sample size
M=
adjusted sample size
Z“Z =
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.
23I
I
I
I
I e t c E
E E E E E B
E E E
E
Household survey sample size by project area;
Project
Arco
Total         Number of households2
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
Jema
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 (KII) 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 the 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. Il is  also known as  Vulnerability  Analysis, a technique for the rapid collection and analysis  of specific  data on social stratification at 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. Il 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. Il 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 lake 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. RWMCO 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 Kll 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 kebclcs 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 for 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, watcr& sanitation, school age children, credit services, extension & veterinary services, data on the natural resources, etc.
26Table!:  Number  of  Sample  Household  for  the  baseline  survey  by  CWS  for  both  Project
Area and Control Group
_______________
PROJECT
BENEFICIARY
^ ^==
________  =
CONTROL GROUP
WATERS!!
ED
SUB-
WATERSHE
D
CWS
count
Control CWS
count
TOTAL
SAMPLE
HHS
Gosgie
31
Timket Bahir
30
61
Baskura
Deledelie
46
Worka
42
88
Rib
Chimichimit
42
Meher Wonz
42
84
Kentai
Amba Wonz
36
Fuafuat
35
71
Gualie
45
Dabzuit
44
89
sub total
200
193
393
Gedam
32
Meskel Tsion
30
62
Ze fie
Belew Bet
32
Libase Wonz
36
68
Zefie
29
Agazo
32
61
Gumara
Zeba
34
Gidmiya Tsion
33
67
Gumara 5
29
Mimita
29
58
Enkulal
Enkulal
27
Muyu
28
55
Shibrila
28
Agar
27
55
sub total
211
215
426
Mowalel
50
Woga
48
98
Washaw
21
Bosa
22
43
Jemma
Enguli
Shebayla
48
Asanat
51
99
Toma
82
Feres Bel
82
164
Sub-total
201
203
404
Total sample IIIIs
612
611
1223
27Ancx  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 described 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 monitoring, 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   BI_S   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.

Summery

Summary of Tana and Beles Integrated Water Resource Development Project

Tana and Beles Integrated Water Resource Development Project Summary

Project Overview

The Tana and Beles Integrated Water Resource Development Project (TBIWRDP) is an initiative by the Ethiopian Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy, operational since May 2008. The project focuses on integrated planning, management, and development in the Tana and Beles Sub-basins to accelerate sustainable growth.

Project Components

Component	Budget	Description
A: Sub-basin Resources Planning and Management	$17.61m	Develop institutional infrastructure and capacity for sustainable investments
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
D: Project Management	$2.24m	Overall project coordination and monitoring

Focus of This Document: Sub-Component B1 - Watershed Management

This Terms of Reference focuses on the Natural Resources and Socioeconomic Impact Assessment for the Watershed Management sub-component (B1), which covers:

85,026 hectares in Ribb, Gumara, and Jema watersheds
35 kebeles across 5 woredas
Estimated population of 180,189

Objectives of the Impact Assessment

Evaluate impacts and changes over 6 years of project intervention
Identify lessons learned and good practices
Demonstrate the importance of Integrated Watershed Management
Provide data for decision-making about scaling up the project

Methodology

        Natural Resources Impact Assessment (NRIA)
        GPS inventory of land management practices
Digital mapping of treated/non-treated areas
NDVI analysis for vegetation cover changes
Soil erosion rate comparisons
GIS mapping of infrastructure points


        Socio-Economic Impact Assessment
        Household surveys using same sample as baseline
Focus group discussions and key informant interviews
Comparison of project vs. non-project (control) areas
Analysis of changes in income, food security, productivity, etc.

    

Key Deliverables and Timeline

Deliverable	Timeline
Inception Report	Within 30 days of contract signing
Field Work Completion	2 months (April-June 2015)
First Draft Report	July 2015
Final Report Submission	August 2015

Justification for Single Source Selection (Bahir Dar University)

Continuity with the same institution that conducted the baseline survey
Ability to make accurate before/after comparisons using same methodology
Proven performance in previous deliverables
Small contract value (<$100,000) requiring expedited process

Expected Outcomes

The assessment will measure changes in:

Income levels and poverty reduction
Agricultural productivity (crops and livestock)
Soil erosion rates and land degradation
Vegetation cover and biomass
Access to social services (water, education, health)
Community empowerment and capacity building