Case Study on Results Measurement & Attribution
•
0 likes•279 views
This document discusses strategies to increase access to tractors for farmers in several African countries. It outlines a current business model where tractors are purchased and leased to farmers with financing from banks. Metrics are proposed to measure the program's outreach, impact on farmers' income, and overall impact. Challenges of impact evaluation are addressed, along with lessons learned from past experiences. Potential outcomes of the program are increased yields and income for farmers as well as improved access to agricultural machinery.
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (14)
Similar to Case Study on Results Measurement & Attribution
Similar to Case Study on Results Measurement & Attribution (12)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Case Study on Results Measurement & Attribution
- 4. context 2.8 2.8 35.0 4.9 13.8 2.7 2.9 34.0 5.5 12.7 Tunisia Cote d'Ivoire Nigeria Kenya South Africa Arable Land (million hectares) 2000 2009 Source: Index Mundi
- 5. context 114.2 30 6.5 24.9 52.3 142.6 32.1 6.6 25.2 47.5 Tunisia Cote d'Ivoire Nigeria Kenya South Africa Tractors per 10,000 Hectares 2000 2009 Source: World Bank
- 6. context • •
- 13. Current business model Fits Tracker on Tractors PaymentforTracker Loan Approval Equity Contribution Payments Screening of loan applicants Delivers Tractors Tractor service(s) Payment for service(s) Tractor Association (TOHFAN/ TOOAN) Tractor Vendor(s) Tracker Vendor(s) Individual Members Farmers (Tractor Users) Commer- cial Banks Tractor Operators Salary/wages Remittance of Payments Send Operators for training Corporate + Individual Members Credit Risk Guarantor After sales services Monthly repayments Reduceriskof lending Negotiation with stakeholders
- 20. impact assessment - planning
- 21. impact assessment - planning
- 22. impact assessment - planning
- 25. Are there other influencing factors? 1 Before-After Comparison Can they be isolated? 2 Is everybody affected by the intervention? 3 Treatment and Comparison Groups Identifiable? 4 Yes No Yes No No No Comparison Group (User vs non-user) Yes Quasi Experimental Design (D-in-D) Yes Are historical data available? 5 Before-After Comparison No Yes Comparing Trends Are there other influencing factors? 1 Yes Can they be isolated? 2 No Yes Ploughing costs Yield - Ploughing costs - Yield Is everybody affected by the intervention? 3 No Treatment and Comparison Groups Identifiable? 4 No Comparison Group (User vs non-user)
- 26. Are there other influencing factors? 1 Can they be isolated? 2 Is everybody affected by the intervention? 3 Treatment and Comparison Groups Identifiable? 4 Yes Yes No No No Comparison Group (User vs non-user) Are there other influencing factors? 1 Yes Can they be isolated? 2 No Yes Ploughing costs Yield - Ploughing costs - Yield Is everybody affected by the intervention? 3 No Treatment and Comparison Groups Identifiable? 4 No Comparison Group (User vs non-user)
- 28. challenges
- 29. challenges
- 30. challenges
- 32. lessons learnt
- 33. lessons learnt
- 35. outcomes
- 36. outcomes
- 37. outcomes
- 38. outcomes