Jan 07, 2016
Yuriy Nesterov, M.Sc.University of Arkansas / Heifer International
Over half century of experience in the rural development field
A unique approach to rural development through Passing on the Gift (PoG)
Similarity of the past and future projects Opportunities for replication of things that
work
The Passing of the Gift (POG) process does not have end date on many older projects
Little or no data is currently collected on projects after the monitoring phase
Former project participants report the ongoing POG process on completed projects
As with many other projects, most of the impact is visible only after the project is closed
How a typical Heifer International project looks like:◦ Targets one rural community (village)◦ The total budget is several hundred USD◦ More than half of the funds are used for providing
animals and plants◦ Passing of the gift is required for all tangible
assistance and knowledge◦ Several years of active phase + two years
monitoring phase◦ After the monitoring phase the project is called
‘historic’
Inputs Activities Outputs Short term outcomes
Intermediate outcomes
Long term outcomes
1. Funding2. International
expertise3. Local expertise4. Local HR5. Livestock and ag.
supplies market6. Responsible
project participants
7. Socio-economic climate
1. Provide funds for livestock
2. Provide funds for ag supplies
3. Conduct trainings
4. Control adherence to the rules
5. Provide networking opportunities
6. Assist community in procurement and delivery of animals & supplies
1. High-quality livestock purchased
2. Ag. Supplies purchased
3. Trainings conducted
4. Project implemented according to the budget and the cornerstones
5. Participants share information within and among communities
1. Some highly productive livestock in the community
2. Improved nutrition of the families
3. Improved knowledge of agricultural technologies
4. Improved knowledge of environment-friendly/sustainable agriculture
1. Increased percentage of highly productive livestock in community
2. Participants are aware of and apply modern ag techniques
3. Improved marketing skills of the project participants
4. Surpluses are sold and revenues are used to cover basic needs
5. Community practices environment-friendly agriculture
1. The community is sustainable and prosperous
2. Community members benefit from cooperation in their production and marketing efforts
3. Improved genetic quality of local livestock
4. Absence of significant environmental problems
After detecting what works and what does not, the new interventions might be adjusted
The best practices might be easy to replicate in the Heifer International system
Other organizations might be willing to adopt POG and other Heifer International practices
If the projects have a persistent impact in rural communities, getting funding will be easier
Experimental design is not possible High level of attrition Multitude of external factors
Availability of baseline data collected by Heifer International staff at the beginning of projects
Availability of governmental statistics data Possibility of use of similar rural
communities without intervention history as a comparison
Availability of key informants for collection of qualitative data
One of the possible designs: O₁ X O₂◦ 10-50 years between X and O₂◦ O₁ immediately precedes X
Another option – comparative post-test:
X O₁ O₂◦ Controls are needed to ensure comparability
Former project participants (quantitative & qualitative)
Key informants (qualitative) Governmental statistics (quantitative)
Your questions and suggestions are welcome!