Organizers AR-NAFAKA rev&plan July 2016

Organizer's page Africa RISING, NAFAKA and TUBORESHE CHAKULA (TUBOCHA) Scaling Project Annual Review and Planning Meeting 4 – 5 July, 2016 Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania

---

AGENDA:

Day 1 (4 July) Start at 8:00 8:30: Registration - Devotha Mawole 9:00 Introduction (We’ll do a hybrid of mistaken identity the Name game introduction)

This is a quick and easy way for participants to get to know one other at the beginning of an event. When they first enter the meeting room at the start of the day, participants receive a name card with someone else’s name on it, and are asked to mingle and find that person.

Ask participants to think about their name, and a short (30 second) story about how they got the name, what their name means, how their name or nickname has varied over the years. Then tell participants to stand in a circle and share their “name stories” with the whole group. We’ll use the first names for this exercise.

Kathy: Tell a story about any f your names 9:10 Overview of agenda for the day 9:15: Welcome & Opening remarks

• Mateete Bekunda
• Thomas Carr?? [OJ3]
• Victor Manyong, IITA?? [OJ2]
• Betty Maeda, USAID Tanzania Mission [OJ1] ?? (Is she coming??)

9:45: Overview of year 2 of project activities & reporting back on requirements from USAID [OJ4] - Harooon Sseguya (add 20 mins) 10:00 Group photo and networking break around coffee/tea 10:30 Implementation progress of each of the teams (20 minutes presentation + 20 minutes discussion for each presentation [OJ5] )//

• maize (30 mins presentation)
• vegetables
• post-harvest [OJ6]
• rice

Haroon to send template for presentation to participants - Jonathan to remind Haroon of this 1:00 Lunch Break 2:00 Lessons learned (We’ll use the VIPP card collection and clustering technique)

VIPP (Visualisation in Participatory Programmes) Card Collection and Clustering is a facilitated process that involves the use of cards to quickly gather and organize ideas from a group of people. It is especially useful in situations where you expect to get a diverse range of answers or inputs, or for addressing potentially sensitive issues in a way that is both safe and equitable.

The process starts with a well-defined open-ended question. Participants write ideas onto cards and then cluster them based on similarities. The clusters can be prioritized as a basis for subsequent action, or they can be used for further discussion and development, as needed. After clustering the participants will be asked to develop recommendations based on those clusters using them.

Do the activity step-wise: - As individuals first(each person get's card, write their lessons learnt); then go into groups(number off) of four all share lessons; come up with group cards, each card talking on a different idea; then go for group exercise to pin up the ideas onto the wall). Have a final exercise of reflection on what is missing from the wall. Then have a final discussion among participants on what next (recommendations) after the lessons learnt.

4:00 Tea Break 4:30 Strategies for project implementation in year 3 [OJ7]

(how do we bring on board some of the partners NAFAKA has been working with in light of new developments there) 5:00 Discussion of protocols and training materials (Mateete and Haroon to lead discussion on protocols which will already have been sent in advance)

After action review meeting

6:30 reception cocktail

Day 2 (5 July) 8:30 Overview of agenda for the day 8:35 Recap of day 1 proceedings 9:00 Presentation by each team on their draft work plans for the year [OJ8] /spanspan stylefont-size: 12pt 10 minutes presentation 10 minutes discussion for each presentation/spanspan stylefont-size: 8pt [OJ9] ) 10:30 Tea Break 11:00 Refinement of team work plans based on feedback received / Project Management Team meeting (running in parallel) 1:00 Lunch Break 2:00 Feedback from Management Team meeting to the whole group Add session on Communication 2:30 Reflections/Meeting evaluation (based on hybrid card collection and spin the bottle exercises) 3:00 Closing and way forward

After action review meeting

Other general observation/questions from my end:

• Are we not having a communication training this time?
• Are we not having an M&E session or even update on how it is progressing within the project? - Not necessary , another M&E training coming up in another two weeks after the event.

Communication team to do interviews - Gloriana to advise on this; Jonathan to bring Camera, Stand, Microphone

AFTER ACTION REVIEW MEETINGS Day 1 (4 July) Chaired – Jonathan Present - Haroon, Mateete, Irmgard, Gloriana, Catherine

• Discussion of issues on parking lot/session on strategies for project implementation: Seed accessibility; Seeds; Cost-benefit analysis; paying farmers / ethical standards; If NAFAKA doesn’t get staff how do we proceed with project activities
• Add Session by Gloriana on gender integration framework to day 2 agenda

Reflections on the day:

• o Some of the presentations were not up to standard – especially maize team

- A separate meeting with the maize team and Mateete and Haroon to express concerns about late submission of deliverables - Mateete to discuss with Bright Jumbo on having a work plan ready for tomorrow

• o People were active, but also several new people in the group
• o Quality for presentation in the morning sessions were high and informative
• o There was no clarity on the information needed in the protocols presented
• o Lunch breaks – 1 HOUR is too short / time is restrictive
• o Simple presentations – with graphs…encourage participants to have these and put them in their reports etc.
• o

Day 2 (5 July) Chaired – Jonathan Present - Haroon, Mateete, Irmgard, Gloriana, Catherine The organizer’s overall reflections on the following broad areas of the meeting were as follows:

• o Venue

- Venue was fine, but some people got sick (at least 4 participants….not sure whether they got contaminated at hotel or outside) - Internet was really good; working very well - Gave us a thank you cake - Promoted some participants to better rooms - Complementary room was provided - Meals were ok - Overall, can be considered as possible venue for the next meeting

• o Agenda (both content-wise

- Was okay generally - Time allocation for some of the activities was too little (e.g. team presentations) - Consider having a learning event - Consider showing videos during breaks

• o Facilitation

- Was excellent - Time keeping / participants’ discipline was in issue to work on next time - Having a variety of presentation modes was good for meeting - The meeting secretariat was well run by Beauty Liundi

• o Participation

- Some team were not serious with their presentations – were done as if it were an emergency - We had the right mix of participants; Tom Carr commented that the NAFAKA team was under represented in terms of ratio to Africa RISING implementing partners - Partners (more so NAFAKA) are starting to appreciate the value of the project and what it brings to the table - Numbers presented by the team were impressive and provide information/insight that is good for showcasing project success/challenges in terms of implementation - Post-harvest team had only 1 person participating in the meeting. Maybe next time this should be emphasized on the representation at the meeting. - The composition of the participants – the mix was just right

• o What went wrong/right ( 2nd Day)

- Ticketing for participants departure was not done with the meeting agenda in mind. This resulted to a majority of participants leaving before the meeting was officially over. Next time probably this aspect should be keenly overseen by Haroon. - The teams preparing and bringing work plans prepared in advance was a big positive that should be one for the next meetings

• o Any Other Business (AOB)

- Haroon to keep track of the deadlines agreed upon for delivering technology write ups (protocol); revised work plans - Minutes of the PMT meeting - Gloriana to check on topics for USAID success stories; send guidelines for writing success stories

---

[OJ1]Is she coming? [OJ2]Is he coming? [OJ3]Is he coming too? [OJ4]Last year you gave this presentation, do you want to give a similar one this year? [OJ5]This is the time we allocated last year forthe presentations and Q&A afterwards....do you think we should keep as they are? [OJ6]For these presentations, wouldn't it be better to provide the people who will be presenting with an outline to work with? [OJ7]What is the aim of this session? It fels to me like its a duplication of the lessons learned session [OJ8]I propose this session because I assume they already have draft workplans on which all the participants can give them feedback on before they can go ahead to refine it. In case they don't have drafts then this session can be moved to the back......where they can present the draft workplans they've come up with and the other participants can give them feedback on what to refine/adjust....let's discuss. Feedback on the workplans is really important [OJ9]This is the time we allocated last year forthe presentations and Q&A afterwards....do you think we should keep as they are?