This document discusses performance indicators for assessing agricultural extension agencies globally. It defines performance indicators and their characteristics. It then examines several frameworks for evaluating extension programs, including indicators of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability. Global approaches from organizations like GFRAS, FAO, and the US are overviewed. Demand-side models and conclusions on developing optimal, specific indicators for agencies like KVKs in India are also presented.

1. Thursday, September 15, 2016
Indicators for Assessing Performance of
Extension Agencies: A Global Review
Suresh Babu
P.K. Joshi
Roundtable Brainstorming Meeting on
“Developing Transparent Performance Indicators on Functioning of KVKs”
5 August, 2016
NASC Complex, Pusa, New Delhi 110012

2. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Organization of the Presentation
• Basic definitions of Performance indicators
• The context of KVKs
• Conceptual Framework
• Four Set of Approaches
• Global Forum of Rural Advisory Services
• FAO
• US – Cooperative Extension Model
• Demand side models
• Conclusions – Next Steps
2

3. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Definition of Performance Indicators
• Measure how well the organization is doing
towards its goal
• Used for Bench marking and Monitoring
• Measures long term success / failures
• Indicators are specified for various factors
• Methods of analysis will determine their
scale and timing of collection
• Collectively - a performance measurement
tool
3

4. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Characteristics of PIs
• Key Drivers of Decision Making
• Overview of Organizational performance
• Key factors to keep track
• What areas of organization need change
• Indicators that help to put th eorganiztions back
on track

5. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
KVK Mandate
• Creation of valuable resources in terms of
technical manpower and assets
• Confirmation of technologies to suit local
specificity
• Showcasing the frontier technologies
• Capacity building among stakeholders
• Front runner in technological application,
information and inputs
• Participatory approaches in planning,
implementing, executing and evaluation
Page 5

6. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Activities of KVK
• On-farm testing - location specificity of agricultural
technologies
• Frontline demonstrations to establish its production
potentials on the farmers’ fields.
• Training of farmers and extension personnel to update
their knowledge
• Work as resource and knowledge center of agricultural
technologies
• Produce and make available technological products
• Organize extension activities to create awareness
Page 6

7. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
A conceptual framework for Selecting
Performance Indicators
Inputs
• Physical
• Financial
Process
• organizational
• Institutional
Outputs/outcomes/
impact
• measures of
benefits
• Resource saving
• extend of Impact

8. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
GFRAS Framework for Evaluating Extension
Programs – Core Concepts
• Relevance
• Effectiveness
• Efficiency
• Sustainability
• In the context of – inputs, process, outputs,
outcomes, impacts

9. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Relevance:
• Indicators to match what farmers need and how
they are met?
• Relate this to the demand side of services
• What services requirements
• What is being addressed ?
• How to increase the relevance to various
stakeholders?

10. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Relevance indicators
Inputs/
Activities
Process Outputs Outcomes Impact
What is needed
by the farmers –
indicators of
relevant
activities?
Inputs can
include financial
and
human
resources;
availability of
facilities and
equipment;
goods and
services
purchased by
the extension
Indicators of
how the
relevance is
maintained to
reach the target
audience?
Process
indicators show
how
inputs are put to
use to achieve
the desired
outcomes. They
include the
organization,
management,
environment,
and internal
What are the
stated relevant
outputs? How
they are
delivered?
What are the
relevant
outcomes? How
they are met?
What indicators
will reflect the
impact made in
increasing the
relevance?

11. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Effectiveness: ability to achieve stated
extension goals.
Effectiveness of extension can differ among various
categories of farmers; across geographical areas and
over time;
Effectiveness may depend upon the extension outcome
being examined.
Agencies that improve farmer reach from year to year
may be considered effective, but they may improve in one
outcome and fail in others

12. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Effectiveness Indicators
Inputs/ Activities Process Outputs Outcomes Impact
Have the activities
and inputs
achieved?
1.how many farm
visits per year
2.how much money
was spent on
extension?
3. How many
activities
implemented?
Did the process of
extension happen
the way it was
supposed to
happen?
Standards and
Accountability
Extension content;
alignment of
extension to needs
of farmers; agencies
have M&E system;
uses incentives and
Sanctions to rectify
the goal reaching
and learning
processes
Was the outputs of
extension approach
reached as set in
the work plan?
1.At least 95
percent of all
Students met the
extension agent in
the last 6 months;
2. Targeted farmers
attain same level of
yield as the large
fares;
3. Women farmers
attain same yield as
men;
4. All these are
maintained for at
least 2 out of last 3
years in a row.
Have the yield levels
reached?
Production target
achieved?
Cropping pattern
change achieved?
Input delivery
(seedlings
distributed)?
DO the farmers
have better
production plans?
Credit levels
achieved?

13. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Efficiency
Achieving maximum possible Performance for any
given expenditure of resources.
Example:
efforts to improve performance with current level
of resources;
and the efforts to improve performance through
changes in expenditure levels.

14. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Efficiency Indicators
Inputs/ Activities Process Outputs Outcomes Impact
1.sources of
extension resources
2. extension
spending per farmer
3. Salary of
extension frontline
4.spending on
extension Vs
extension support,
and administration
5.How have the
above indicators
Changed over time?
6. ranking of the
states and
municipalities for
the study states?
Indicators of
process change to
improve efficiency?
Indicators of changes
in the allocation of
resources to various
activities to improve
the performance?
Efforts to increase
extension quality?
Indicators of
improved
organizational
environment?
State & municipal
Expenditures;
State share in total;
Expenditure per
farmer;
Desired Extension
Outcomes:
Farm level adoption
of technology;
reduced risk levels;
increased market
access; better
adaptability to
climate change;
Impact achieved
efficiently? What are
the indicators that
will show that the
impact is achieved
efficiently? What
indicators convert
outcomes into
impact?
Fundamental
question to ask is:
How do states and
municipalities that
achieve higher level
of impact allocate
their limited
resources. how high-
performing
States and

15. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Sustainability
• Implies financial and ecological sustainability
• Sustainability of human and physical resources
• Sustainability of the inputs, process, and outputs
/ outcomes.

16. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Sustainability Indicators
Inputs/ Activities Process Outputs Outcomes Impact
Sustainability of
the extension
system as a first
step require
development of a
fair and effective
accountability
System and
related indicators
that are
clear, specific,
and within the
management
of those make
decisions and
accountable.
review of
operations in
areas such as
transportation,
services, facilities,
personnel systems
and
benefits,
technology
management, and
staff retention
Benefits to
farmers and
stakeholders flow
continuously;
Consistent
achievements of
the performance
indicators in the
relevance,
effectiveness and
efficiency fronts
Some indicators
of sustainable
outcomes; 1. local
leadership,
organization, and
management;
2. extension
service delivery;
3. community
involvement;
4. human
resources
management;
5. facilities
construction, use,
and management;
6. asset and risk
System is self-
sustaining; able to
generate
resources to meet
the vagaries of
funding;
involvement of
local communities
/ local
governments in
sustaining the
agency

17. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
USA – Extension Performance Indicators –
(Kuchinke et al)
• Program Accomplishments
Professional Competencies
• Interpersonal Effectiveness
• Organizational Development and Leadership
and
• Scholarship of Engagement.
Page 17

18. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
FAO Approach to Performance
Measurement – Indicators (D.C. Misra)
• Capability, effectiveness, and efficiency fall in the monitoring domain. Impact falls in the
evaluation domain.
• Capability is the command that extension has over physical, financial, and human resources,
enabling it to serve its clients (the farmers). It is reflected by extension's outreach, intensity,
technical competence, and physical and financial resources. Extension performance depends
directly upon its capability.
• Effectiveness is defined by a handbook on productivity management as "the degree to which
goals are attained" (Prokopenko, 1987, p. 9). Agricultural extension has many goals such as
social goals (e.g., farmer welfare) and economic goals (e.g., increased income).
• Among these, operational goals (e.g., physical and financial targets) are of special
significance because their attainment makes realization of other goals possible.
• Efficiency in extension is usually measured by the rates at which farmers adopt
recommended practices. Adoption rates of varying degrees of complexity can be conceived
(Casley & Lury, 1982, p. 37).
• Impact in extension can be measured by a simple indicator, like yield of a crop per hectare, or
by constructing simple productivity indices. Such indicators provide ultimate tests for the
success of extension programmes.
Page 18

19. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Demand Side Performance Indicators
(Parasuraman et al)
Dimensions Specifications
TANGIBLE
(or Physical characteristics)
It includes physical evidence of the service – supply of seeds,
demonstration plots etc.,
RELIABILITY
(Promised delivery)
Dependably, accuracy, and consistency of performance. Can the
stakeholders rely on KVK for their needs?
RESPONSIVENESS
(or Readiness to provide services)
It includes willingness to help farmers and provide prompt services.
ASSURENCE
(Confidence and trust on skill and
capability)
Knowledge and curtsey of KVKs and their ability to inspire trust and
confidences
EMPATHY
(Giving Importance and respect
to customer)
It includes caring, individualized attention KVKs provide to the farmers
and other clients
COST EFFECTINESS
(Reasonable and Fair Prices)
This relates to coverage of farmers with the given level of resources.
INCLUSIVENESS
(accessible to all without any
social discrimination).
Does small and marginal farmers and low caste / women farmers able
to benefit from KVKs

20. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Optimal Indicators
• Relevant, focus on strategic values
• Realistic and representative
• Specific, measureable, comparable
• Timely
• Understood, agreed upon by everyone
• Governance and sustained use

21. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Conclusions
Broad set of performance indicators
How to make them specific needs of Extension
systems
How to make them specific to extension agencies
Such as KVKs
Staring with the what is currently being used? How
the indicators can be made more practical in
applications?
Discussions?