Pct39 - Revision history

J Odhong at 16:55, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:55:18Z

J Odhong at 16:50, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:50:05Z

J Odhong at 16:47, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:47:18Z

J Odhong at 16:41, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:41:45Z

J Odhong at 16:39, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:39:35Z

J Odhong at 16:34, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:34:27Z

J Odhong at 16:30, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:30:07Z

J Odhong at 16:19, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:19:48Z

J Odhong at 16:18, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:18:27Z

J Odhong at 16:15, 4 February 2020

2020-02-04T16:15:52Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-=='''Africa RISING PCT #39''' <br />'''29 January 2020'''<br />'''Skype call'''==
+=='''Africa RISING PCT #39''' <br />'''30 January 2020'''<br />'''Skype call'''==
 <br />'''Present'''<br />
 # Bernard Vanlauwe (BV) - Chair

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 :*What next for Africa RISING in light of One CGIAR and the September 2021 end date for phase 2
 ::*JG proposed that the above topic would best be discussed as a focus of physical PCT meeting. Other additional topics that would also be useful to discuss during the meeting could be:
-:::*Systems research within the ONE CGIAR reform process
+:::(1)Systems research within the ONE CGIAR reform process
-::::*Excellence in Agronomy? (is it a big enough “Big Lift” for “systems research”)
+::::(a)Excellence in Agronomy? (is it a big enough “Big Lift” for “systems research”)
-::::* What is the AR perspective/definition of systems research
+::::(b)What is the AR perspective/definition of systems research
-:::* Livelihood analysis of AR communities (IFPRI working on this)
+:::(2)Livelihood analysis of AR communities (IFPRI working on this)
-:::* Advancement of SIAF—how to improve and advance its use
+:::(3)Advancement of SIAF—how to improve and advance its use
-:::* Re-direction of AR strategy?
+:::(4)Re-direction of AR strategy?
-:::* Refocus on USAID mission communication & needs
+:::(5)Refocus on USAID mission communication & needs
-:::* Increased support for regional agriculture innovation systems (e.g., CORAF iREACH)
+:::(6)Increased support for regional agriculture innovation systems (e.g., CORAF iREACH)
-:::* Much greater focus on synthesizing, evaluating, and communicating findings
+:::(7)Much greater focus on synthesizing, evaluating, and communicating findings
-:::* Capturing impact of innovations
+:::(8)Capturing impact of innovations
-:::* “Exit” strategy?
+:::(9)“Exit” strategy for Africa RISING?
 ::::*'''Action: A physical PCT meeting to be held sometime between July – October 2020 to discuss the proposed topics above. Members to firm up an ideal date & venue during the next PCT meeting.'''

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 :::::(vi) cross-regional mechanization paper – Currently the lead couldn’t be reached. No update on it at the moment.
 :::::(vii) a crop-water paper.
-::::*'''Action: Updates on the progress with these papers to be given at subsequent PCT meetings.'''
+::::*'''Action: Updates on the progress with these papers to be given at subsequent PCT meetings by IHZ & PT.'''
 :::*A decision was made during the Chief Scientists & Project Managers meeting that it was no longer necessary to set up a task force on minimum data sets. This is because most scientists within the projects already collect most of the data that were identified as minimum data sets. Also, the fact that scientists and projects are operating/implementing activities at different scales/levels makes having a set of minimum data sets nearly impossible. However, JG’s advice about the relevant minimum data sets needed by Country Missions should always be followed /adhered to whenever these requests arise.

@@ Line 90: / Line 90: @@
 :::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
 :::::#
-::#''Lack of a learning agenda around scaling processes.''
+::*''Lack of a learning agenda around scaling processes.''
-:::#IHZ: I responded to this recommendation (with some input from PT & CA). The emergence of SPIA within the CGIAR sort of influenced our thoughts on this and it was apparent that AR didn’t have the resources to focus on this topic at the time.
+:::*IHZ: I responded to this recommendation (with some input from PT & CA). The emergence of SPIA within the CGIAR sort of influenced our thoughts on this and it was apparent that AR didn’t have the resources to focus on this topic at the time.
-:::#BV: This is a terribly complex subject and we should be honest with the review team that we didn’t have the resources to invest in it. In any case, SPIA is already championing this within the CGIAR with a singular focus on it.
+:::*BV: This is a terribly complex subject and we should be honest with the review team that we didn’t have the resources to invest in it. In any case, SPIA is already championing this within the CGIAR with a singular focus on it.
-:::#CA: We (CA, Arkadeep & Beliyou) submitted a proposal for the second SPIA call in September 2019. The proposal focuses on looking at legume adoption and impact in 2 Africa RISING countries – Tanzania and Malawi. Initially, they were a little reluctant, but we had a call 2 weeks ago, and they encouraged us to submit a full proposal. They would like to use some of the Malawi data to show the diffusion of legume varieties.
+:::*CA: We (CA, Arkadeep & Beliyou) submitted a proposal for the second SPIA call in September 2019. The proposal focuses on looking at legume adoption and impact in 2 Africa RISING countries – Tanzania and Malawi. Initially, they were a little reluctant, but we had a call 2 weeks ago, and they encouraged us to submit a full proposal. They would like to use some of the Malawi data to show the diffusion of legume varieties.
-::#There is no monitoring of whether we are answering our program-level research questions.
+::*There is no monitoring of whether we are answering our program-level research questions.
-::#No exit strategy developed yet for the program considering September 2021 end line date for phase 2.
+::#''No exit strategy developed yet for the program considering September 2021 end line date for phase 2.''
 :::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
 :::::# '''The topic to be discussed further during the proposed physical PCT meeting in mid-year.'''
-::#More training required on the SIAF.
+::*''More training required on the SIAF.''
 ::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
 ::::#

@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 :*IHZ informed PCT members that the review team is currently conducting field visits in Malawi (26 – 31 Jan.). They will head next to Tanzania (1 – 11 Feb.). The review team recently shared a slightly modified timeline from the original one that was in the contracts. They are also planning for a debrief with the PCT around mid-March.
 :*PCT members picked out the following critical recommendations from the report and recommended some short-term action points as captured under each recommendation.
-::*Funding allocation in the program is heavily biased towards productivity. Other SI domains are neglected. There is limited value chain analysis and feed supply systems. PCT should work to correct this.
+::*''Funding allocation in the program is heavily biased towards productivity. Other SI domains are neglected. There is limited value chain analysis and feed supply systems. PCT should work to correct this.''
 ::::*IHZ: This was an issue in phase 1 of AR projects, however, this was already resolved because the composition of the AR research team is now no longer only comprised of biophysical scientists, but also now includes socio-economic specialists. Although it is not yet 50:50 distribution, we currently have more socio-economic studies ongoing. This happened because we also followed our logframe which also capture these issues.
-::::*'''Short-term action: AR project managers & Chief Scientists to more deliberately facilitate/provide support for the work of the scientists dealing with socio-economic topics.'''
+:::::*'''Short-term action: AR project managers & Chief Scientists to more deliberately facilitate/provide support for the work of the scientists dealing with socio-economic topics.'''
-:::*JG: The reviewers pointed out the ‘lack’ of systems research/assessment. It’s always challenging to know exactly what is meant in this context. Probably we should seek more details about what they feel like systems research would entail. If we could distill down a common understanding (at whatever level) what they mean by that and compare it with what Africa RISING’s understanding of systems research is, then I think we can make some progress.
+::*''JG: The reviewers pointed out the ‘lack’ of systems research/assessment. It’s always challenging to know exactly what is meant in this context. Probably we should seek more details about what they feel like systems research would entail. If we could distill down a common understanding (at whatever level) what they mean by that and compare it with what Africa RISING’s understanding of systems research is, then I think we can make some progress.''
-:::*'Lack of harmonization across the regions to achieve higher-level outcomes.
+::*''Lack of harmonization across the regions to achieve higher-level outcomes.''
 :::*BV: This is something that we have also internally been discussing and have concluded that some actions are necessary. IHZ updated us about publications being developed. The PCT has to keep an eye on this to ensure program harmonization. This is still a work in progress.
 :::*JG: This to be linked to the issue I raised earlier about systems research and also the use of the SIA Framework. To the extent that harmonization has not been perceived is to some extent due to the lack of a common understanding of what systems research is and what some of the outcomes are. As IHZ pointed out, the SIA Framework is being used by the 3 projects, but in different ways.
@@ Line 80: / Line 80: @@
 :::::*'''PCT to get regular updates from IHZ & PT on the cross-regional publications being worked on by AR partners from the 3 projects.'''
 :::::*'''PCT to have a further discussion (during the proposed physical meeting) on how the SIAF can be applied for stronger harmonization within Africa RISING program.'''
-::*Lack of integration of the M&E team into other program functions…. Africa RISING M&E currently only focused on collating data for FtF indicators, no basic research, needs a dedicated donor liaison to elicit program level insights and there is no consistent use of the beneficiary tracking tool.
+::*''Lack of integration of the M&E team into other program functions…. Africa RISING M&E currently only focused on collating data for FtF indicators, no basic research, needs a dedicated donor liaison to elicit program level insights and there is no consistent use of the beneficiary tracking tool.''
-::*CA: This is a fair comment from the review team. It’s probably related to our inability to have consistent M&E officers and data managers in place. Especially in critical circumstances and transition moments. For example, now we are still struggling to recruit a replacement M&E Officer after the departure of the previous one last year. We also are faced with the challenge of reluctance by some researchers to share data, although I see improvements on this in general. For example, uploads on DataVerse has improved. However, these differ by region and I am curious to see the reviewers’ findings from ESA – which I think would be different from what they have from Ethiopia and West Africa. The Ethiopian highlands are still a matter of concern because there hasn’t yet been an M&E officer recruited to date.
+:::*CA: This is a fair comment from the review team. It’s probably related to our inability to have consistent M&E officers and data managers in place. Especially in critical circumstances and transition moments. For example, now we are still struggling to recruit a replacement M&E Officer after the departure of the previous one last year. We also are faced with the challenge of reluctance by some researchers to share data, although I see improvements on this in general. For example, uploads on DataVerse has improved. However, these differ by region and I am curious to see the reviewers’ findings from ESA – which I think would be different from what they have from Ethiopia and West Africa. The Ethiopian highlands are still a matter of concern because there hasn’t yet been an M&E officer recruited to date.
-::*BV: The main question by the reviewers is to also establish how we (the program) is learning from all the M&E information being collected – beyond filling the FtF indicators?
+:::*BV: The main question by the reviewers is to also establish how we (the program) is learning from all the M&E information being collected – beyond filling the FtF indicators?
-::::*'''Short-term action:'''
+:::::*'''Short-term action:'''
-:::::*'''PCT to seek further clarity from the reviewers about the recommendation for a donor liaison during the meeting with reviewers in mid-March.'''
+::::::*'''PCT to seek further clarity from the reviewers about the recommendation for a donor liaison during the meeting with reviewers in mid-March.'''
-::*Poor efforts for program-wide analysis to generate evidence that the program level outputs are being achieved.
+::*''Poor efforts for program-wide analysis to generate evidence that the program level outputs are being achieved.''
-::*CA: In my discussion with the reviewers, they mentioned that they would like to see a more consistent approach in the data analysis in general from the 5 countries. This is something we are currently starting to do from one country to the next. Currently, there are ongoing efforts that we initiated in Ghana together with JG and hopefully, this model will be replicated in other countries. It is essentially an analysis of food security in relation to poverty and to the agricultural innovation that aims to improve productivity. Its more or less looking at the market participation by different groups in relation to their yield and their poverty and food security. This work doesn’t have the ambition of explaining the outcome of the project but would be kind of a baseline analysis and once we have the follow-up data, we can refine it, taking into account the difference from the baseline.
+:::*CA: In my discussion with the reviewers, they mentioned that they would like to see a more consistent approach in the data analysis in general from the 5 countries. This is something we are currently starting to do from one country to the next. Currently, there are ongoing efforts that we initiated in Ghana together with JG and hopefully, this model will be replicated in other countries. It is essentially an analysis of food security in relation to poverty and to the agricultural innovation that aims to improve productivity. Its more or less looking at the market participation by different groups in relation to their yield and their poverty and food security. This work doesn’t have the ambition of explaining the outcome of the project but would be kind of a baseline analysis and once we have the follow-up data, we can refine it, taking into account the difference from the baseline.
-::*JG: The activity mentioned by CA comes out of a previous small exercise that I surveyed the AR scientists about the steps through pathways of sustainable intensification. The foundational unit is at the farm system level. I passed around some PowerPoint slides for people to comment on and I tried to match those stepwise increases in sustainable intensification with food security and market orientation and trying to see better approaches for targeting innovations to specific levels of farming. It’s a little hard to explain without showing you the framework, but possibly we can delve into this at the proposed physical PCT meeting. I would love to test your impressions of this model and then also probably see a way forward with it if there is one. If it pans out, this could be a very significant way for us to guide USAID mission investments in development – it could even go well beyond USAID.
+:::*JG: The activity mentioned by CA comes out of a previous small exercise that I surveyed the AR scientists about the steps through pathways of sustainable intensification. The foundational unit is at the farm system level. I passed around some PowerPoint slides for people to comment on and I tried to match those stepwise increases in sustainable intensification with food security and market orientation and trying to see better approaches for targeting innovations to specific levels of farming. It’s a little hard to explain without showing you the framework, but possibly we can delve into this at the proposed physical PCT meeting. I would love to test your impressions of this model and then also probably see a way forward with it if there is one. If it pans out, this could be a very significant way for us to guide USAID mission investments in development – it could even go well beyond USAID.
-::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
+:::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
-::::#
+:::::#
-::#Lack of a learning agenda around scaling processes.
+::#''Lack of a learning agenda around scaling processes.''
 :::#IHZ: I responded to this recommendation (with some input from PT & CA). The emergence of SPIA within the CGIAR sort of influenced our thoughts on this and it was apparent that AR didn’t have the resources to focus on this topic at the time.
 :::#BV: This is a terribly complex subject and we should be honest with the review team that we didn’t have the resources to invest in it. In any case, SPIA is already championing this within the CGIAR with a singular focus on it.
@@ Line 96: / Line 96: @@
 ::#There is no monitoring of whether we are answering our program-level research questions.
 ::#No exit strategy developed yet for the program considering September 2021 end line date for phase 2.
-::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
+:::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
-::::# '''The topic to be discussed further during the proposed physical PCT meeting in mid-year.'''
+:::::# '''The topic to be discussed further during the proposed physical PCT meeting in mid-year.'''
 ::#More training required on the SIAF.
 ::::*'''Short-term actions:'''

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 ::::*'''Action: CA to communicate the decision not to require AR project partners to upload their data to DDL (for now).'''
-:*Harmonization across the AR program==
+:*Harmonization across the AR program
 ::*IHZ provided the following updates:
 :::*A Skype meeting between Chief Scientists and Project Managers was held on 5 December 2019. The following “harmonization outputs” are at various stages of development:
@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 :::::(vi) cross-regional mechanization paper – Currently the lead couldn’t be reached. No update on it at the moment.
 :::::(vii) a crop-water paper.
-::::*Action: Updates on the progress with these papers to be given at subsequent PCT meetings.
+::::*'''Action: Updates on the progress with these papers to be given at subsequent PCT meetings.'''
-:::*A decision was made during the meeting that it was no longer necessary to set up a task force on minimum data sets. This is because most scientists within the projects already collect most of the data that were identified as minimum data sets. Also, the fact that scientists and projects are operating/implementing activities at different scales/levels makes having a set of minimum data sets nearly impossible. However, JG’s advice about the relevant minimum data sets needed by Country Missions should always be followed /adhered to whenever these requests arise.
+:::*A decision was made during the Chief Scientists & Project Managers meeting that it was no longer necessary to set up a task force on minimum data sets. This is because most scientists within the projects already collect most of the data that were identified as minimum data sets. Also, the fact that scientists and projects are operating/implementing activities at different scales/levels makes having a set of minimum data sets nearly impossible. However, JG’s advice about the relevant minimum data sets needed by Country Missions should always be followed /adhered to whenever these requests arise.
 :*Annual Africa RISING program activity synthesis document
 ::*JO provided the following updates:
 :::*Outline of the document was developed and shared with PCT members. Feedback received and now the document is being drafted.
-::::*Action: JO to provide further updates on progress during the next meeting.
+::::*'''Action: JO to provide further updates on progress during the next PCT meeting.'''
 :*What next for Africa RISING in light of One CGIAR and the September 2021 end date for phase 2
@@ Line 61: / Line 61: @@
 :::* “Exit” strategy?
-::::*Action: A physical PCT meeting to be held sometime between July – October 2020 to discuss the proposed topics above. Members to firm update & venue during the next PCT meeting.
+::::*'''Action: A physical PCT meeting to be held sometime between July – October 2020 to discuss the proposed topics above. Members to firm up an ideal date & venue during the next PCT meeting.'''
 ----
@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 :*IHZ informed PCT members that the review team is currently conducting field visits in Malawi (26 – 31 Jan.). They will head next to Tanzania (1 – 11 Feb.). The review team recently shared a slightly modified timeline from the original one that was in the contracts. They are also planning for a debrief with the PCT around mid-March.
 :*PCT members picked out the following critical recommendations from the report and recommended some short-term action points as captured under each recommendation.
-::#Funding allocation in the program is heavily biased towards productivity. Other SI domains are neglected. There is limited value chain analysis and feed supply systems. PCT should work to correct this.
+::*Funding allocation in the program is heavily biased towards productivity. Other SI domains are neglected. There is limited value chain analysis and feed supply systems. PCT should work to correct this.
-:::*IHZ: This was an issue in phase 1 of AR projects, however, this was already resolved because the composition of the AR research team is now no longer only comprised of biophysical scientists, but also now includes socio-economic specialists. Although it is not yet 50:50 distribution, we currently have more socio-economic studies ongoing. This happened because we also followed our logframe which also capture these issues.
+::::*IHZ: This was an issue in phase 1 of AR projects, however, this was already resolved because the composition of the AR research team is now no longer only comprised of biophysical scientists, but also now includes socio-economic specialists. Although it is not yet 50:50 distribution, we currently have more socio-economic studies ongoing. This happened because we also followed our logframe which also capture these issues.
- ::::*Short-term action: AR project managers & Chief Scientists to more deliberately facilitate/provide support for the work of the scientists dealing with socio-economic topics.
+::::*'''Short-term action: AR project managers & Chief Scientists to more deliberately facilitate/provide support for the work of the scientists dealing with socio-economic topics.'''
-::#JG: The reviewers pointed out the ‘lack’ of systems research/assessment. It’s always challenging to know exactly what is meant in this context. Probably we should seek more details about what they feel like systems research would entail. If we could distill down a common understanding (at whatever level) what they mean by that and compare it with what Africa RISING’s understanding of systems research is, then I think we can make some progress.
+:::*JG: The reviewers pointed out the ‘lack’ of systems research/assessment. It’s always challenging to know exactly what is meant in this context. Probably we should seek more details about what they feel like systems research would entail. If we could distill down a common understanding (at whatever level) what they mean by that and compare it with what Africa RISING’s understanding of systems research is, then I think we can make some progress.
-::#Lack of harmonization across the regions to achieve higher-level outcomes.
+:::*'Lack of harmonization across the regions to achieve higher-level outcomes.
-::#BV: This is something that we have also internally been discussing and have concluded that some actions are necessary. IHZ updated us about publications being developed. The PCT has to keep an eye on this to ensure program harmonization. This is still a work in progress.
+:::*BV: This is something that we have also internally been discussing and have concluded that some actions are necessary. IHZ updated us about publications being developed. The PCT has to keep an eye on this to ensure program harmonization. This is still a work in progress.
-::#JG: This to be linked to the issue I raised earlier about systems research and also the use of the SIA Framework. To the extent that harmonization has not been perceived is to some extent due to the lack of a common understanding of what systems research is and what some of the outcomes are. As IHZ pointed out, the SIA Framework is being used by the 3 projects, but in different ways.
+:::*JG: This to be linked to the issue I raised earlier about systems research and also the use of the SIA Framework. To the extent that harmonization has not been perceived is to some extent due to the lack of a common understanding of what systems research is and what some of the outcomes are. As IHZ pointed out, the SIA Framework is being used by the 3 projects, but in different ways.
-::#BV: The more you use the SIA Framework, the more you realize how complex it is, especially when you amalgamate various dimensions and even within dimensions. However, conceptually it is a good thing, but these technicalities don’t mean that we should not continue gaining experience with the framework because there aren’t many alternatives at the moment.
+:::*BV: The more you use the SIA Framework, the more you realize how complex it is, especially when you amalgamate various dimensions and even within dimensions. However, conceptually it is a good thing, but these technicalities don’t mean that we should not continue gaining experience with the framework because there aren’t many alternatives at the moment.
-::#JG: I would be open to a more simplified approach if one is feasible. Currently, as I see it the alternative is to go back to focusing on 1 domain e.g. productivity. This is not really the way to go. To me this is like the concept of justice, we never achieve it 100%, but we stay focused on it, we are better off.
+:::*JG: I would be open to a more simplified approach if one is feasible. Currently, as I see it the alternative is to go back to focusing on 1 domain e.g. productivity. This is not really the way to go. To me this is like the concept of justice, we never achieve it 100%, but we stay focused on it, we are better off.
-::::*Short-term actions:
+::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
-::::#PCT to get regular updates from IHZ & PT on the cross-regional publications being worked on by AR partners from the 3 projects.
+::::*'''PCT to get regular updates from IHZ & PT on the cross-regional publications being worked on by AR partners from the 3 projects.'''
-::::#PCT to have a further discussion (during the proposed physical meeting) on how the SIAF can be applied for stronger harmonization within Africa RISING program.
+::::*'''PCT to have a further discussion (during the proposed physical meeting) on how the SIAF can be applied for stronger harmonization within Africa RISING program.'''
-::#Lack of integration of the M&E team into other program functions…. Africa RISING M&E currently only focused on collating data for FtF indicators, no basic research, needs a dedicated donor liaison to elicit program level insights and there is no consistent use of the beneficiary tracking tool.
+::*Lack of integration of the M&E team into other program functions…. Africa RISING M&E currently only focused on collating data for FtF indicators, no basic research, needs a dedicated donor liaison to elicit program level insights and there is no consistent use of the beneficiary tracking tool.
-::#CA: This is a fair comment from the review team. It’s probably related to our inability to have consistent M&E officers and data managers in place. Especially in critical circumstances and transition moments. For example, now we are still struggling to recruit a replacement M&E Officer after the departure of the previous one last year. We also are faced with the challenge of reluctance by some researchers to share data, although I see improvements on this in general. For example, uploads on DataVerse has improved. However, these differ by region and I am curious to see the reviewers’ findings from ESA – which I think would be different from what they have from Ethiopia and West Africa. The Ethiopian highlands are still a matter of concern because there hasn’t yet been an M&E officer recruited to date.
+::*CA: This is a fair comment from the review team. It’s probably related to our inability to have consistent M&E officers and data managers in place. Especially in critical circumstances and transition moments. For example, now we are still struggling to recruit a replacement M&E Officer after the departure of the previous one last year. We also are faced with the challenge of reluctance by some researchers to share data, although I see improvements on this in general. For example, uploads on DataVerse has improved. However, these differ by region and I am curious to see the reviewers’ findings from ESA – which I think would be different from what they have from Ethiopia and West Africa. The Ethiopian highlands are still a matter of concern because there hasn’t yet been an M&E officer recruited to date.
-::#BV: The main question by the reviewers is to also establish how we (the program) is learning from all the M&E information being collected – beyond filling the FtF indicators?
+::*BV: The main question by the reviewers is to also establish how we (the program) is learning from all the M&E information being collected – beyond filling the FtF indicators?
-::::#PCT to seek further clarity from the reviewers about the recommendation for a donor liaison during the meeting with reviewers in mid-March.
+::::*'''Short-term action:'''
-::#Poor efforts for program-wide analysis to generate evidence that the program level outputs are being achieved.
+::::*PCT to seek further clarity from the reviewers about the recommendation for a donor liaison during the meeting with reviewers in mid-March.
-::#CA: In my discussion with the reviewers, they mentioned that they would like to see a more consistent approach in the data analysis in general from the 5 countries. This is something we are currently starting to do from one country to the next. Currently, there are ongoing efforts that we initiated in Ghana together with JG and hopefully, this model will be replicated in other countries. It is essentially an analysis of food security in relation to poverty and to the agricultural innovation that aims to improve productivity. Its more or less looking at the market participation by different groups in relation to their yield and their poverty and food security. This work doesn’t have the ambition of explaining the outcome of the project but would be kind of a baseline analysis and once we have the follow-up data, we can refine it, taking into account the difference from the baseline.
+::*Poor efforts for program-wide analysis to generate evidence that the program level outputs are being achieved.
-::#JG: The activity mentioned by CA comes out of a previous small exercise that I surveyed the AR scientists about the steps through pathways of sustainable intensification. The foundational unit is at the farm system level. I passed around some PowerPoint slides for people to comment on and I tried to match those stepwise increases in sustainable intensification with food security and market orientation and trying to see better approaches for targeting innovations to specific levels of farming. It’s a little hard to explain without showing you the framework, but possibly we can delve into this at the proposed physical PCT meeting. I would love to test your impressions of this model and then also probably see a way forward with it if there is one. If it pans out, this could be a very significant way for us to guide USAID mission investments in development – it could even go well beyond USAID.
+::*CA: In my discussion with the reviewers, they mentioned that they would like to see a more consistent approach in the data analysis in general from the 5 countries. This is something we are currently starting to do from one country to the next. Currently, there are ongoing efforts that we initiated in Ghana together with JG and hopefully, this model will be replicated in other countries. It is essentially an analysis of food security in relation to poverty and to the agricultural innovation that aims to improve productivity. Its more or less looking at the market participation by different groups in relation to their yield and their poverty and food security. This work doesn’t have the ambition of explaining the outcome of the project but would be kind of a baseline analysis and once we have the follow-up data, we can refine it, taking into account the difference from the baseline.
-::::*Short-term actions:
+::*JG: The activity mentioned by CA comes out of a previous small exercise that I surveyed the AR scientists about the steps through pathways of sustainable intensification. The foundational unit is at the farm system level. I passed around some PowerPoint slides for people to comment on and I tried to match those stepwise increases in sustainable intensification with food security and market orientation and trying to see better approaches for targeting innovations to specific levels of farming. It’s a little hard to explain without showing you the framework, but possibly we can delve into this at the proposed physical PCT meeting. I would love to test your impressions of this model and then also probably see a way forward with it if there is one. If it pans out, this could be a very significant way for us to guide USAID mission investments in development – it could even go well beyond USAID.
 ::::#
 ::#Lack of a learning agenda around scaling processes.
@@ Line 95: / Line 96: @@
 ::#There is no monitoring of whether we are answering our program-level research questions.
 ::#No exit strategy developed yet for the program considering September 2021 end line date for phase 2.
-::::*Short-term actions:
+::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
-::::# The topic to be discussed further during the proposed physical PCT meeting in mid-year.
+::::# '''The topic to be discussed further during the proposed physical PCT meeting in mid-year.'''
 ::#More training required on the SIAF.
-::::*Short-term actions:
+::::*'''Short-term actions:'''
 ::::#

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-==Africa RISING PCT #39 <br />29 January 2020<br />Skype call==
+=='''Africa RISING PCT #39''' <br />'''29 January 2020'''<br />'''Skype call'''==
 <br />'''Present'''<br />
 # Bernard Vanlauwe (BV) - Chair
@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 :::*A follow up discussion with JG on this issue took place and it was resolved that in the meantime, only data from the IFPRI baselines surveys will be uploaded to the DDL - with a copy still retained on DataVerse under a confidential agreement.
 ::*JG added that for the moment project partners should continue to upload their data to DataVerse.
-::::*Action: CA to communicate the decision not to require AR project partners to upload their data to DDL (for now).
+::::*'''Action: CA to communicate the decision not to require AR project partners to upload their data to DDL (for now).'''
 : *Harmonization across the AR program