Powerpoint Templates

From Zero to HeroEvaluation Studies in The Application Of Big Gun Sprinkler Technology At Akar-akar, West Nusa Tenggara

Nanang Rianto & FX. Hermawan

IAL CONFERENCE,Adelaide, June 27 2012

Research Institute for Social Economy and Environment

(RISEE) Ministry of Public Works Republic of Indonesia1

AKAR-AKAR VILLAGE

WEST NUSA TENGGARA PROVINCE

REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA

WEST LOMBOK REGENCY

INTRODUCTION2

• Approximately 2,5 hour driving from Lombok

• Dry land typology (sandy)

• Land ownership (<0,5 Ha)

• Seasonal harvesting

• Average rainy day: 10,75 day/year

• Rainfall : 147,72 mm/year• Pre-presporous family: ± 71%

• Vulnerable to malnutrition

• lack of community active involvement- about innactive 29 institution in the area

INTRODUCTION (2)

• Groundwater pump – 90 pumps (Irrigation Directorat, 2008)

• Inefficient water use for irrigation - 49,8 % more wasteful than big gun sprinkler irrigation (Dadang et al, 2010

3

4

ParameterLocation: Arungan Bali Pump Station

Irrigation Area 18.1 Ha

The distance between the riser

33 m

Broad research sites

6.26 Ha

Well Pump SPB-233

Discharge 20 lt/det

The well depth 118 m

Pump position 34.1 m

RPM is permitted 1500 RPM

Type of system Square

Mine line Pipa PVC AW 5”

Lateral line Pipa PVC AW 4”

Riser Pipe Pipa Galvanized 3”Network connection

System Solvent Cement shittim network connection (Lem)

Wind speed (km / h)

> 5 km / h • Big gun sprinkler implementation &

Community empowerment in 2006-2008

• Monitoring and evaluation 2009-present day

INTRODUCTION (3)

Question

Hows to evaluate this technology implementation related to the stakeholders involvement?

Build a tool/instrument to

evaluate the program

Objectives

5

Theory ( Dale, 2004: Evaluating Development Programmes and Projects)

Dimensions Indicator Evaluating target according to accompaniment step

Means-Ends Structures  

Inputs: Strengthening institution process

Implementation tasks; Socialization steps, institution establishment steps.

Outputs institution establishment steps, Making action plan

Relatively direct changes, Economic enchancement

Effects for people institution establishment steps, Result of institution strengthening

Main Analytical Categories:  Relevance

Program relevance with priority existing problem

Effectivenessinstitution establishment steps, Demoplot, asisstance process

Sustainability Program sustainability

ReplicabilityApplication possibilities on other place & society

6

Methods and material

Quantitative and descriptive

approach

Methods Observation Unit ExplanationQuestionnaire Survey

institution member Using questionnaire instrument. It’s recommended to be fill by evaluator by asking the member separately.

Facilitated Group Discussion

institution administrator Gathered the administrator on a forum and evaluator ask them the question in the instrument. If there any differecies between administrator in the forum, then the evaluator must lead the forum to collective conclusion approved by everyone.

Standardised Key Informant Interviewing

institution companion (NGO “KONSEPSI)

implementer agencies (West Lombok Public works & mineral resources agencies)

Using interview guide consist just several question and asked to the people who really connected to the project an represent the implementation agencies and companion institution.

7

Strengthening Institutional Models on Big Gun Sprinkler Technology Applications in Akar-akar

Yes

No

Yes

No

Formulation Application Guidelines for Technology End

No

Tidak

Ya

Yes

Preparation of action plan

OK? Inventory of action plan weaknesses

Begin

Social economy and environment mapping

OK? Community empowerment

OK? Inventory of the weaknesess

Implementation of action plan

OK? Input for Guidelines Mapping for Social Economic & Env

Focus of Evaluation

1• Institution

member

2• Institution

administrator

3• Institution

companion

4• Implementer

agencies

8

No

Yes

Results and findings

Dimensions Indicator Evaluating target according to

accompaniment step

Member Administrator Companion Implementer agencies

Means-Ends Structures  

Inputs: Strengthening institution process

√ √

Implementation tasks; Socialization steps, institution establishment steps.

√ √ √ √

Outputs institution establishment steps, Making action plan

√

Relatively direct changes,

Economic enchancement

√ √ √ √

Effects for people institution establishment steps, Result of institution strengthening

√

Main Analytical Categories: 

RelevanceProgram relevance with priority existing problem

√ √ √

Effectiveness

institution establishment steps, Demoplot, asisstance process

√ √ √

Sustainability Program sustainability√ √ √ √

Replicability

Application possibilities on other place & society

√

9Very less (0- < 21)

Less (21 - <41)

Quite good (41- < 61)

Good (61 - <81)

Very good (81 – 100)

Value of the Dimension and IndicatorIndicators

Member Administrator Companion Implementer agency

Weight Weight Weight Weight

Means-Ends Structures (MES)

Input 10 10 na naImplementation Tasks 15 15 15 15Output na na 10 naRelatively direct change 15 15 15 15Effect na na 10 naImpact* Dimension Total Score M-ES 40 40 50 30

Main Analytical Categories (MAC) Relevance 12.5 12.5 12.5 naEffectiveness 10 10 10 naImpact*Sustainability 10 10 10 10Replicability na na na 2.5 Dimension Total Score M-AC 32.5 32.5 32.5 12.5

DIMENSION TOTAL SCORE(M-ES + M-AC) 72.5 72.5 82.5 42.5

MAXIMUM VALUE(OBSERVATION UNIT) 40 30 20 10

EVALUATION SCORE RESULT 10

Evaluation score (Member & administrator score)

Dimensions / Indicators Weight Indicator conversion score

Score Total ScoreConversion Score

Conversion score

Dimensions Indicator

Sub-Dimension

Evaluation dimension

Observation unit

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)Member =40

MES Inputs 10 75.59 7.559

Implementation tasks; 15 86.56 12.984 Relatively direct changes, 15 34.45 5.1675 25.72 MAS Relevance 12.5 79.67 9.9587 Effectiveness 10 71.88 7.19

Sustainability 10 102.9 10.29 27.43 73.31 29.324Administrator =30

MES Inputs 10 110.6 11.06

Implementation tasks; 15 77.28 11.592 Relatively direct changes, 15 47.01 7.0515 29.7035 MAC Relevance 12.5 78.02 9.7525 Effectiveness 10 75.23 7.523

Sustainability 10 69.7 6.97 24.2455 74.41 22.32311

Evaluation score (companion & implementer agencies)

MES

Implementation tasks; 10 56.15 5.615

Output 15 125.4 18.814

Relatively direct changes, 15 113.6 17.043

Effects for people 10 115 11.504 52.9752221 MAC

Relevance 12.5 89.47 11.184

Effectiveness 10 93.73 9.3723

Sustainability 10 92.03 9.203 29.7597379 100.2848 20.05696Implementer agencies =10 MES

Implementation tasks; 15 23.56 3.534

Relatively direct changes, 15 31.56 4.734 8.268 MAC

Sustainability 10 29.81 2.981 3.939 28.722 2.8722

Replicability 2.5 38.32 0.958

Total Score 74.5812

Lesson learned & Conclusion

• The success achievement that shows by the scoring category (74.58/Good) is resulted from good contribution and coordination of every stakeholder in the program/project.

Evaluation Result

13

Member (29.3

)Administra

tor (22.3

) Companio

n (20)Implement

er agencies (2.8)

Thank You

14