[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
IMPACT ASSESSMENT – DAIRY AND WATER SECTORS
Introduction
Kenya Markets Trust has scheduled a series of evaluations and assessments for its interventions to measure and
report progress against set target over the program period, but also use the findings from such evaluations to
inform or improve sector or intervention strategies. The evaluations are sector and sometimes even intervention
specific. They are commissioned based on the performance of intervention/s - when on-going monitoring activities
indicate that desired changes are being realized. KMT conducted baseline surveys in the Dairy and Water sector
among others in 2013. This assignment is focused on midline evaluation of our work in Dairy and Water sector using
the methodology used in the baseline survey and measuring the same indicators measured at baseline.
Terms of Reference
1.
BACKGROUND
1.1. The Kenya Markets Trust
The Kenya Gatsby Trust (KGT) was founded in 1993 as one of four independent country trusts set-up across
Africa by the UK-based Gatsby Charitable Foundation to support enterprise development and wealth creation. In
2011, KGT realigned its organizational mission to focus on transforming the functioning of markets, and in doing
so to make markets work better for the poor. This shift in KGT’s organizational mission was in response to a
growing understanding among development partners around the importance of market “systems” as a
transmission mechanism for economic growth and poverty reduction. In support of this shift in organizational
focus, the Board of KGT also took the decision to change the name of KGT to the Kenya Markets Trust (KMT).
KMT’s mission is embodied in its new motto: “better markets, better lives.”
Water and Dairy sectors form part the core “portfolio” of KMT’s current activities. KMT is funded by the UK
Department for International Development (DFID) and the Gatsby Charitable Foundation (GCF).
KMT aims to improve the performance of selected market systems in order to boost overall competitiveness
whilst strengthening the performance and position of poor people participating in markets whether as
producers, employees or consumers. The main focus of KMT is on agricultural markets, although the programme
also includes a basic services component designed to address inefficiencies in the delivery of clean safe, potable
water to low income Kenyan households. The current KMT portfolio consists of interventions in water, dairy,
agricultural inputs and seed, extensive livestock and aquaculture.
The overall objective of KMT is measured against three key outcomes:
1.
Major systemic change achieved within a “portfolio” of 4 to 8 market systems, resulting in the average
proportion of the net attributable income change for farmers and entrepreneurs (disaggregating men
and women) increasing by 20% over the life of the programme;
2.
At least 148,000 poor people (as producers, employees, consumers) positively affected at the end of
KMT measured in terms of increasing incomes, new jobs created and access to new and improved
services;
Page |1
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
3.
A 30% increase in peer perceptions of partners’ effectiveness and in stakeholders’ awareness and
understanding of the approach.
KMT will achieve these outcomes through application of an approach known as making markets work for the
poor (M4P). M4P is based on facilitating the realignment of the incentives, capacities, relationships and rules
which govern how markets work. In doing so, KMT will also be looking to catalyse private sector innovation,
and support the emergence of more inclusive business models which deliver a better return to the poor.
Programme interventions are already under way in dairy, rural water markets, agricultural inputs supply,
seeds, aquaculture and Livestock. All interventions are articulated in the form of a theory of change. Below
is the format of KMT’s theory of change.
1.2.
The assignment
1.1
The theory of change for the Kenya Markets Trust is shown in figure 1.
1.2
This assessment focuses on the KMT Water and Dairy sector interventions after 3 years of
implementation. It is necessary to validate the output level results of the programme and demonstrate
how the programme has achieved this and also understand the relationship between programme
activities and the resulting impact on the lives of programme beneficiaries.
1.3
KMT Water and Dairy sector strategies were crafted to address those Issues through various
interventions stated below. Work commenced in Sept 2012 led by KMT’s implementing partner SNV and
TechnoServe respectively.
The key interventions/Initiatives areas are:
Page |2
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
Water

Building Knowledge and Confidence: KMT is improving professional operation of water
services in rural areas by catalysing public private partnerships. The entry of private entities
into these nascent water markets is expected to harness the drive, resources and know-how of
businesses towards the sustainable growth of the sector. Improved knowledge, understanding
and confidence of CGs, WSBs, WSPs and WUAs on private sector engagement and PPPs will
result in improved business practices of WSPs and WUAs, which in turn will lead to improved
services delivery to the consumers. Not only will the improved water services improve human
health but reduce the heavy burden on women and girls in collecting water for their families.
Improved capacity, knowledge and experience of PS in water services delivery will result in
better, faster, reliable and affordable services and open the opportunities for more PS as
operators of water utilities in both rural and urban areas. Key systemic changes KMT wants to
achieve through this intervention are  The key public sector institutions recognise the role of PS and proactively engage with
them
 Contractual models, tools and guidelines for engagement of PS are in place
 Public utilities (WSPs) in the urban areas improve their management efficiency by
partnering with private sector
 WUAs transform themselves into commercial WSPs or partner with PS firms as
Operators

Business Strategy Support: KMT is improving professional operation of water services in rural
areas by catalysing public private community partnerships. The entry of private entities into
these nascent water markets is expected to harness the drive, resources and know-how of
businesses towards the sustainable growth of the sector. Moreover, reliable access to safe
water will pay dividends by improving human health and reducing the burden on women and
girls in spending long hours collecting water. Through introducing sustainable management
models KMT has succeeded in engaging private firms as managers and operators of water
projects to improve reliability, quality, and affordability of water services for underserved and
un-served consumers. Not only will the improved water services improve human health but
reduce the heavy burden on women and girls in collecting water for their families. Improved
capacity, knowledge and experience of PS in water services delivery will result in better, faster,
reliable and affordable services and open the opportunities for more PS as operators of water
utilities in both rural and urban areas. Key systemic changes KMT wants to achieve through this
intervention are  Private sector operators improve their management capacity and deliver effective and
efficient services
 PS deliver incremental performance changes and effectively utilize resources for
growth and expansion
 PS enhance peer learning and knowledge sharing to improve services delivery
 More effective and interactive communications, media pushing reforms process

Enabling Environment Improved enabling environment and availability of appropriate financial
products in the market will attract private firms as managers of water systems, leading to more
Page |3
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
water systems managed by competent private firms as Lease Operators or Management
Contractors. Key systemic changes KMT wants to achieve through this intervention are  Policy and regulatory framework incentivises private sector participation/finance
 CG prioritise PS participation and market finance including BOT, BOOT models
 Appropriate financing products (e.g. blended) for water sector are in place
 Key donors prioritise sustainability in their sector financing leading to no operational
subsidies or only SMART subsidies
PPP Unit, Ministry of Environment Water and Natural Resource (MEWNR), Water and Sanitation Regulatory Board
(WASREB), Water Services Board (WSB)s; County Governments (CGs) are the major partner in this intervention.
Furthermore, Donor Group/NRW Group at national level: World Bank, SIDA, DFID, AFD.IRC and RWSN at
international level are also important stakeholders for donor coordination.
Dairy
 Commercial Hay production
The milk yield of most small holder dairy cows in Kenya is significantly below their potential because the
nutrient intake of the animals is insufficient in both quantity and quality. The main reason for not using
commercial feeds and hay is their high cost, with a significant percentage (30%) being attributed to
transport costs. As a result, small scale farmers typically only buy hay during the height of the drought
when the cows have to survive and there is no grass in the open pastures. Even then, the quality of hay
purchased by farmers is poor and lacks nutritional value because regulations on the feed industry are
weak, allowing substandard hay to be sold.
Past programs have encouraged smallholders to produce their own hay. However, based upon a theory of
change that uptake will grow faster if large scale, commercial hay production develops, TechnoServe is
developing a commercial hay market to produce affordable products that meet the nutritional standards
required by farmers.

Formal Supply Chain
One of KMT’s primary interventions in dairy is catalysing the improvement of practices and skills of supply
chain management. A key early lesson has been that the dairy industry has a substantial number of
underperforming businesses and assets. As a result, KMT has focused a component of its supply chain
intervention on identifying turn-around opportunities. There are over 350 milk collection centers in Kenya.
However, the majority of the active collection centres are primarily driven by donor subsidies. Whether the
donors are crowding out commercial investments because the private sector has become reliant on donors
to make the investment, or there is an underlying return on investment problem is unclear. Key to this is a
better understanding of the return on capital from the relatively expensive collection centre model
supported by donor efforts. At the same time, KMT recognises that it is important to investigate and
support alternative supply chain investment models, such as processor directed models, independent
business models, and some form of mixed ownership models to increase formal milk sales.

Informal supply Chain
Informal milk supply chain is the flow of milk from the producer to the end consumer without undergoing
any type processing. The milk in the informal sector is sold raw which according to the regulator is illegal.
The informal markets are concentrated in the urban to semi-urban areas and handles 80% of the marketed
milk in the country.
Page |4
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
Empirical evidence show that 80% of the marketed milk in Kenya is sold through the informal traders who
service markets dominated by millions of consumers with low purchasing power and provide market for
most of the smallholder farmers especially where the formal milk marketing co-operatives have collapsed.
These informal traders sell raw milk and safety concerns have been raised prompting the regulator to
increase restrictions on this trade. Taking cognizant of the key role the informal traders play by providing
market to the farmers, employment to poor people and better priced and characteristic milk to the
consumers, KMT is developing and facilitating business strategies to support the sale of safe, affordable
milk by traders as well as enabling and increasing access to quality dairy inputs by the farmers delivering to
the informal chain.

Improving Artificial Insemination(AI)
Stimulating greater demand for AI and veterinary services: Work under this intervention includes: Support
AI and Vet service providers adapt customer focused business models using feedback loops; improving the
efficiency of liquid nitrogen distribution strategies for freezing genetic resources. Support AI service
providers to bundle their services in a “Herd Management Plan”; Support equipment and breeding
suppliers to develop payment plans and credit options
1.4
2.
The output from the study will also inform the development of a mechanism for the routinely tracking of
the KMT program progress and set basis for comparison with the end-line to assess the attributable
change in the said sectors.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this assignment is to support the Kenya Markets Trust in conducting an impact evaluation
of the Water & Dairy sector interventions.
The objectives of this assessment are:



To identify and measure impact among programme beneficiaries of the water and dairy
sector work through an assessment of the selected Market actors
To measure and validate outcomes among programme beneficiaries of the said sectors
interventions through this assessment of the selected market actors and beneficiaries.
To measure and validate outputs among the selected market actors of the Water and Dairy
sectors interventions through this assessment.

To validate the framework provided from the baseline surveys and propose improvement if
any for future impact assessment/evaluations(End-line evaluation)

To identify lessons learned and make recommendations to inform current KMT Dairy and
water sector strategies, and future programming in the application of market systems
approaches in Kenya and other countries.

To inform KMT’s logical framework targets.
Page |5
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
3.
EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
This is an assessment done for the purpose of determining whether and to what extent KMT water and
Dairy interventions are making progress toward achieving their outcome and impact level results.


4.
Desk/secondary data review
The data collection techniques will adopt those detailed in the Water and Dairy baseline
survey research design documents. These however do not limit the proposal of more
efficient and effective methodologies within the time given.
EVALUATION TASKS AND DELIVERABLES
The assignment should ideally be completed by June 2016. The specific deliverables are:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
Revised water and dairy evaluation research design (If any revisions are done)
Workplan including specific interview schedule and other timelines
Data Collection Instruments
Summary highlighting the key findings as per the objectives
Two PowerPoint presentation of the findings
Two draft Reports (Dairy and Water) for KMT input
Two Final Reports (Dairy and Water)
Cleaned survey data set for each market sector
KMT together with implementing partners SNV and TNS will facilitate the interviews with the market actor and
provide required information – customer lists, contact persons representing the market actors, relevant monitoring
data. KMT will also provide respondents lists and all other materials from the baseline survey.
5.
QUALIFICATIONS OF THE CONSULTANT
5.1
The Consultant will possess the following qualifications.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
6.
Experience developing and implementing mixed‐methods research designs.
Experience implementing qualitative and quantitative field research in rural Kenya that includes
survey research, in‐depth semi‐structured interviews, and focus group discussions.
Demonstrated skills in qualitative and qualitative research, data capture and analysis, including the
use of SPSS
Experience working with a wide range of individuals in the private sector and government.
Strong writing and verbal communication skills.
Experience evaluating private sector development programmes,
Experience interviewing high level personalities in society.
Understanding of the Market systems approach is an added advantage.
REPORTING
The consultant shall report to the Knowledge and Results Manager in charge of Impact Evaluation work and
Page |6
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
7.
the Knowledge and Results Lead
TIMELINES
The consultant will be required to develop a detailed work plan including the timelines. The table below
presents an indicative time schedule.
Activity
Inception discussion
Review of research design documents and prepare tools
Testing tools and training
Field Work
Data cleaning and analysis
Draft report
Final report
8.
Time
1 week
2 weeks
1 week
5 weeks
4 weeks
2 week
2 week
BUDGET
The consultant will be required to develop a reasonable budget to enable them carry out this budget.
9.
RESPONDING TO RFP
The proposals should include the following:
 A brief description of the consultant’s background including details of length of professional
experience especially in similar assignment to date (minimum 3 years).
 Detail their understanding of the ToR and in doing so provide an appropriate
evaluation/assessment design and plan.
 A detailed workplan with clear timelines.
 Copy of CV, including three referees.
 Financial proposal
Proposals can be sent via email to procurement@kenyamarkets.org or physically dropped to the address
below on or before 17th February, 2016. Interested eligible bidders may obtain further information from:
Email: procurement@kenyamarkets.org
Kenya Markets Trust,
14 Riverside, Cavendish Block, 3rd Floor, Suite B, Riverside Drive.
T: (+254) 588343/2588323/444582/4445830/4445847 Office
Page |7
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
Annex 1:
Indicators to be assessed
In general we would like to assess market system level indicators, Enterprise performance and Impact level
Indicators where applicable. But for the changes at this level to happen activity level indicators must have been
realized for causality purposes.
We are also interested for interventions where applicable in understanding the emergence of
1. Quality partnerships among market actors and
2. Pro poor innovations that have been adopted because of KMT work.
3. Additional investments by the market actors for expansion, adaptation, deepening of the
innovations adopted during partnership with KMT
Below are Results and indicators of change for the two sector interventions:
Water- Building knowledge and confidence of market actor in the role of private sector
Level
Impact/Target
Group Change
level
Results
Increased disposable income for
underserved and unserved consumer
Farmers increase farm production by using
water for agriculture and livestock
Reduction in water-borne disease and illness
(leading to increased savings that would be
invested )
Increased use of water in agriculture and
livestock sectors
Market
systems
Change
Indicators
No of people recording change in disposable
income
Yield per acre
Litres produced per cow per day
Average cost of livestock sold in KHz
No. of water borne diseases reported
% decrease in water borne diseases reported
Increased consumption of safe (quality)
water
Number of HHs use water for agriculture and
livestock
Litres of water used for agriculture and livestock
No. of connections,
Revenue collected per month
Increased access to quality water by the
consumers
Number of new connections to unserved
Number of repaired connections underserved
Increased demand for quality, safe and
affordable water
No. of new connections per service area
Amount of water billed in Kshs
No. of connection applications made
No. of other WSP/WUAs adopt the PPP model
Other WSPs/WUAs Crowd-in around the
model
Other donors in the water sectors focus
their investment on sustainable
interventions in the water sector
WSPs Increase revenue/surplus from supply
of quality water.
WSPs/WUAs are delivering quality, safe and
affordable water WSPs/WUAs increase efficiency in service
delivery (reducing the unit cost of water)
No. and name of donors change their strategy
on investment
Revenue in Ksh. Per month
% increase in revenue
Residual chlorine in mg/litre
micro-organisms per 50ml of water
Unit cost of water per cubic metre in KSH.
Page |8
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
National Government and County
Government policies, regulation standards
for PPPs/PSP developed
No. of policies, regulations and standards
developed for the water sector
Clearly defined mechanism for PPP arbitration
Refinement of legal framework based on the
lessons
Amount invested by CG/NG WSP in PPP process
guideline
Water- Business strategy support to private operators
Level
Results
Indicators
Impact/Target
Group change
Level
Increased disposable income for underserved and
unserved consumer
Change in income from productive activity;
Amount saved from less disease;
change in income from agriculture production
No. of HH using project water for other
economic activities;
Change in productivity;
No. of new connections per service area;
No. of connection applications made to the
WSP
No. of connections
Volume of water delivered
Revenue collected in Kshs per month
No. of consumers reporting faults.
Consumers are satisfied with the water quality
(SCI)
No. of consumers knowledgeable about
quality;
No. of consumers recording satisfaction with
the information on quality water
Unit cost in Kshs per m3.
Amount invested by operators (SCI)
PO/LO investing technical inputs for service
improvement
No. of WSPs accessing financial products;
Total Amount accessed to the WSPs;
POs concerted efforts to bring sustainability in
service delivery
No. of WSPs reporting on KPIs to the
board/WASREB and the CGs
No. of functional partnerships formed;
No. of legislations/policies /strategies
developed to embed the PPP innovation
No. of PPCP contracts renewed by the County
Governments
No. of events/channels providing information
on quality water.
No. of WUAs transformed into WSPs;
WUAs satisfied with the partnership (SCI);
Efforts made by the PO/LO to refine
contractual obligations;
Farmers increase farm production by using water for
agriculture and livestock
Increased demand for quality, safe, affordable water
Increased consumption of safe (quality) water
Consumers are more responsive to pay for quality
water
Consumers have increased knowledge and access to
information on the value of quality water
Market
system
change
WSPs/LOs/POs increase efficiency in water service
delivery
LOs/POs and WSPs have access to finance for utility
expansion
WSPs/LOs/POs comply with KPIs and governance
requirement
Functional partnership between public sector (WSP &
CG) & PS enhanced
LOs/POs use various platforms to provide information
on quality water
WUAs transform into WSPs through own initiative or
partner with private players
Page |9
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
Partner satisfaction and intent to continue
Water- Enabling environment and creating business opportunities for private sector
Level
Results
Indicators
Impact/Target
Group change
Time spent collecting water diverted to productive
(revenue-generating) activity
Market
System
Change
WSPs Increase revenue/surplus from supply of quality
water
Revenue in kshs per month
% increase in revenue
WSPs/NG /CG engages PS in water asset development /
water service provision
No. of WSPs/NG/CG who are engaging PS in asset
development
7.NG and CGs provide incentives for PPP/PSP such as
blended finance, viability gap financing, tax exemptions
No. of PI accessing the incentives/products
No. of products developed.
PPP nodes within the Ministry /CGs coordinate PPP/PSPs
activities
PPP secretariat offering advice on a regular basis for
adoption of PPP/PSPs in WASH
No. of activities the node is undertaking.
Number of HHs save time in collecting water;
Amount of time saved compared to without water
connection
The rest as the above intervention
No. of Functional PPP/PSP advisory group
Dairy- Formal Supply Chain
Level
Results as in the results chain
Indicators
Impact
New jobs created
Number of new jobs created
Farmers increase income
Revenue in Kshs. from the sale of milk
% increase in income from sale of milk
Volumes of milk sold in litres
% increase in milk sales
Yield per day per cow
% increase in production per cow
Yield per day per cow of non-target farmers
% increase in production per cow
No. of farmers accessing information and
inputs
Level of satisfaction of services being offered
and relationship with service providers
% of milk sold through DHs and formal
channels
No. of farmers who are active members and
accessing improved supply chain services.
Level of satisfaction of farmers on supply
chain services and relationship with DH or
processor
Perception of utility by non-target
DHs/processors on providing quality services
Target
Group
change
Farmers increase milk sales at farm level
Farmers increase milk volumes at farm level
Other farmers increase milk volumes at the farm level
Farmers access better information and inputs through improved
distribution and retail channels
Farmers access better market for their milk
Farmers have increased access to better supply chain services
Market
system
Other DHs and processors improve their supply chain services to
their farmers
Page |10
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
Change
to customers/farmers
DHs and processors increase sales through improved customercentric distribution channels
DHs and Processors have increased access to retail markets for
their products
Other DH and processors crowd in and invest in improved
customer-centric distribution and retail strategies
DH and processors invest in innovative products and/or new
marketing strategies targeting different customer segments
DH and processors invest in energy efficiency upgrades through
technology firms
DHs and processors negotiate agreements with finance providers
for debt, equity, and/or private investment
DHs and processors invest in ICT solutions for improved
operational efficiency
DHs and processors invest in improved supply chain management
practices
Sales of inputs through the use of customercentric distribution channels
Amount of additional DH/processor revenue
generated from the sale of new products or
new retail channels.
No of DHS with increased access to retail
market
No. of non-target DHs and processors
investing in improved customer-centric
distribution and retail strategies.
Amount invested in improved customercentric distribution and retail strategies.
No. of target DHs and processors renewing
or continuing their investment in improved
customer-centric distribution and retail
strategies after initial engagement
No. of DHs/processors with new product
innovations and/or marketing strategies.
Amount invested in innovative products
and/or new marketing strategies targeting
different customer segments
No. of DHs/processors that have purchased
new or additional energy efficiency solutions.
Amount invested in energy efficiency
upgrades through technology firms.
Extent to which DHs and processors are
continuing to invest in energy efficiency
upgrades in new locations/other
infrastructure.
No. of DHs and processors who utilize annual
energy audits.
No. of contract agreements signed between
DHs/processors and finance providers.
Amount of debt, equity and/or private
investment mobilized by DHs/processors
No. of DHs/processors that purchased new
or additional ICT solutions.
Amount invested in ICT solutions for
improved operational efficiency.
Extent to which DHs and processors
integrate the ICT platforms into business
operations.
No. of DHs and processors investing in
improved supply chain management
practices.
Amount invested in improved supply chain
management practices.
No. of target DHs and processors renewing
or continuing their investment in improved
supply chain management practices after
initial engagement/contract.
Page |11
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
Extent to which DHs and processors value
and continue to invest in professional
management services
Dairy-Informal Supply Chain Intervention
Impact
Results as in the results chain
Indicators
As the above intervention
Target
Group
change
Market
system
change
Farmers Increasing quantity of milk produced and sold
Yield per cow per day
Other farmers increasing the use of inputs and services through
milk traders
No. of farmers accessing inputs through
arrangements facilitated by the trader
Farmers increase use of of quality inputs and services through
traders
'Other Traders increase demand for quality milk from farmers
and sale of milk to processors
No. of farmers using quality inputs through
arrangements facilitated by the trader
No. of non-target farmers accessing inputs
through arrangements facilitated by nontarget traders (SCI)
No. of non-target traders adopting branding,
new products and new retail models (SCI)
No. of non-target traders utilizing improved
supply chain management practices
Litres of milk sold per day
Other traders invest in branding, new products and new retail
models
Other traders crowd in on improved supply chain management
practices
Traders increase sales of milk due to improved supply chain
management
Traders increase efficiency in business operations and quality of
production
Traders have improved supply chain management
Traders invest in processing and food grade handling equipment
Processors utilise traders for procurement and retail
Traders invest in the food and safety standards
Qualitative assessment of the business
operations; amount of quality milk produced
Level of satisfaction of suppliers on
relationship with trader
No. of traders with Improved supply chain
management
No. of traders purchasing food grade
handling and processing equipment.
No. of traders who continue to
independently invest in food grade handling
and processing equipment
No. of traders supplying to processors
No. of traders adopting standards with the
support of certification firms.
Amount of investment (initial and
subsequent) by traders in becoming
compliant to food and safety standards
Dairy- Improving and promoting AI service
Level
Impact
Target
group
change
Results as in the results chain
Indicators
Same As the intervention above
Farmers receive higher price from the sales of the improved bulls
and heifers
Revenue generated in Kshs annually
Revenue generated in Kshs annually
Other farmers increase use of AI from well-rated AI providers
% of non-target farmers who used
accredited AI for last AI service
Page |12
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
Farmers increase use of AI from well-rated accredited AI
providers
Target
Group
Change
AI providers offer improved quality services
Other AI providers offer improved quality services
AI providers adopt private accreditation components to promote
AI services
Other AI providers adopt private accreditation components to
promote AI services
Other AI providers have consistent access to affordable liquid
nitrogen
AI providers have consistent access to affordable liquid nitrogen
AI providers have improved customer service and business skills
to build farmer confidence in the service
AI providers investing in formal feedback loops through ICT
providers to authenticate, provide information and rate AI
providers
Liquid nitrogen dealers invest in improved distribution strategies
Average price per insemination from
internal/independent service providers
Proportion of farmers who used accredited
AI for last AI service.
Proportion of farmers purchasing breed
services from an accredited AI service
provider.
Proportion of farmers who "strongly agree"
that they are receiving affordable, quality,
available, trustworthy services from AI
providers (average)
% change in insemination success rate
% change in awareness of existence of
"accredited" AI services by farmers.
% change in insemination success rate
% change in awareness of existence of
"accredited" AI services by farmers
No. of internal/independent AI providers
who are privately or self-accredited, or have
adopted private accreditation components
No. of non-target internal/independent AI
providers who are privately or selfaccredited.
No. of non-target internal/independent AI
providers adopting private accreditation
components to promote AI services.
No. of non-target internal/independent AI
providers following-up with marketing firms
after mandatory training.
% decrease in the retail price of liquid
nitrogen in non-target areas
Average number of deliveries per month by
the dealer to local distributor.
% change in the retail price of liquid nitrogen
in target regions
Extent to which internal/independent AI
providers integrate customer service
practices into normal business operations.
No. of internal/independent AI providers
investing in customer service training from
relevant market actors
No. of Internal and independent providers
using ICT platforms to authenticate and rate
AI providers.
Amount invested in ICT platforms.
Extent to which internal and independent AI
providers integrate the ICT platforms into
business operations
No. of additional sales points contracted or
established by target dealer.
Amount invested in additional storage
Page |13
[Request for Proposal (RFP) for 2016 Impact Assessment of KMT’s Dairy and Water Sector]
capacity by local distributors
Dairy-Commercial Hay Production
Level
Results as in the results chain
Impact
Target
Group
Change
Same as the intervention above
Other farmers increase use of quality assured fodder, both during No. of non-target farmers accessing quality
the dry and rainy seasons
assured fodder, both during the dry and
rainy seasons
Farmers increase use of quality assured fodder, both during the
Proportion of farmers claiming to purchase
dry and rainy seasons
and use "very good" quality hay.
% of farmers who "strongly agree" on the
satisfaction of price, quality and availability
of hay; including future investments in hay.
No. of farmers accessing quality assured
fodder, both during the dry and rainy
seasons
Other CHPs sell more affordable and high quality fodder
No. of non-target farmers selling more
affordable and high quality fodder
Other CHPs invest in soil testing
No. of Other CHPs investing in soil testing
Market
systems
change
Indicators
CHPs investing in soil testing
No. of CHPs investing in soil testing
Other CHPs increase distribution and customer service to farmers
No. of non-target CHPs with supply
arrangements with DHs
No. off CHPs with increased sales
CHPs improve distribution and customer service to farmers
Other CHPs invest in co-branding of fodder
CHPs invest in co-branding of fodder
CHPs access to working capital, asset-financing and/or equity
No. of non-target CHPs investing in cobranding
No. of CHPs investing with labs in cobranding.
Amount invested by CHPs and labs in cobranding.
No. of CHPs who renew or extend their
contracts with labs for co-branding.
No. of CHPs accessing working capital/assess
financing and/or equity.
Amount accessed by CHPs in working
capital/asset financing and/or equity
Page |14