MACO-RWANDA - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

maco rwanda n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
MACO-RWANDA PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation

play fullscreen
1 / 35
Download Presentation
Download Presentation


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. MACO-RWANDA Assessment training needs in Goat Keeping Report Conducted in 5CBGs from Nyamasheke and Karongi March,2012

  2. Executive summery • This assessment has been conducted in 2 days on field , meting and discussed with 5 CBGS ;36 Respondents taken as sample of this assessment. • This assessment report highlights the need for training in the quality of modern goat rearing, modern feeding, sanitation and hygiene; how to increase generating incomes from the modern goat rearing, and cooperative management.

  3. It indicates that there is a lack of suitable know- how or professionalism in what their call” Profession” both of 36 participants are full engaged in agriculture ,it clearly shows how they still far away from an optimized profit income, disputing their primitive minimum knowledge . we here recall The expected CBGs distribution changed , a bite our team worked within 3 CBGS from Ruganda Sector- KARONGI District ; and only 2CBGs from Kilimbi Sectors. The expected CBGS from Murambi,Twumba[Karongi] and Gihombo –Nyamasheke were not taken as sample.

  4. II. Background • II.1. CBGs in Karongi District -Ruganda Sector.

  5. .II.2. CBGs in NYAMASHEKE District –Kilimbi Sector.

  6. Aims & Objectives The training needs assessment aimed to identify: • Challenges and problems faced by goat keepers and assess the standard of the practice and the understanding level on modern rearing technology . • Outline the factors undermining the success of Goat-keepers and assess their practices on profit maximization. • What training is currently used to obtain these skills? • What are the gaps between what is required and what exists?

  7. In which areas are there opportunities in regards to goat keeping training? • What are potential or possible barriers to success? Eg. cultural, language, financial, access, time, resource barriers.  Objectives were then to: • Analyze the collected data. • Prepare a detailing report with recommendations and conclusions. • Submit and Present the Assessment report to ADRA.

  8. Methodology • IV.1 Questionnaire The following steps were used in the process of administering the training needs questionnaire: Here responses were provided personally by the CBG respondents members met on the field, The results of the responses received form part of this report. Expressions of interest in participating in the focus group sessions were also sought via this questionnaire.

  9. Respondents samplering were as shown in the table below:

  10. IV.2 Focus Groups discussion • As a follow up to the survey, a focus group sessions was organized, with a total of 36 attendees from both of CBGS . These were conducted as follows:  • Invitations were sent to each of the questionnaire respondents who had indicated a willingness to participate. • A MACO-RWANDA ,field assessor consultant was engaged to facilitate discussion ,1 facilitator for each group/5 Group in total

  11. • The aim of these groups was to use the survey results as a basis and to gather further detail regarding the goat keeping issues facing dairy. • The structure of each session was designed to maximize the potential to achieve this aim and the hear what they really desire particularly. .The MACO-RWANDA facilitator wrote question 11 and 12 on the flip-chart and Respondents wrote there discussed answers on a papers. • (See Appendix 2 for the focus group session-Questions discussed .)

  12. Target Audience and Responses • The quantity of information received has varied. In some cases, the responses have provided little detail, due to the nature of the CBG. • The graph below shows that there has been wide consultation within the 5 groups and the Group size From past experience, we know that there are differences in the requirements and training needs of each of these categories.

  13. Sample from -Karongi Abaterananankunga participated in 43% ,Abanyamurava participated in 36%,Abishyizehamwe participated in 21%

  14. Sample from nyamasheke • Members of CODERCAM participated in this assessment were 16% of the respondents in Nyamasheke Sample. and CODEBAG participation was 84% of the sample.

  15. V.I Data analysis and interpretations. • Question 1: Structure of the Association/Cooperative [ 5CBG]

  16. Comment1:All of these 5 CB Gs are well communicating ,as we see on the chart ,the member participation in decision making is fully made, in all CBGs by group members, but only the Cooperative from KILIMBI has the lagel Status, others ignore the importance of working in a legally recognized Association or group or these 3 CBGs from Karongi are yet legally Registered, and don’t hold • A sensiblisation and Training in accounts books and report, importance of working in Registered cooperative .

  17. Question 2: Production 2.1 Physical conditions [1,2,3,4,5,6 ]

  18. Comment 2: Only 40% of the CBGs use Common cowshed, regural vaccination, and ReguralVeterian visit and their goats take only prescribed medication. ,the same percentage is enabled to use modern rearing materials, other 60% of the CBGs. • members raising their goats from home ,don,t vaccinate, they also buy and conserve medications on their own decision and use poor material like plastic bath ,plastic baskets, as rearlingustensils • All these 5 CBS, never used the insemination method, and they all hold local race goats. Alimantion is 100% herbal based food.

  19. 2.2.Financial terms [8,9,10]

  20. Comment 3: • Only CBG4[CODRBAG] has managed to increase both of the Production parameters[ Numbers of goats, and money] their goats has doubled and they are able to save 25,000Frws/year on the cooperative account. • CBG5[CODERCAM] has increased the number of goats but they decided to cell 60% of their goats in order to buy a cooperative plot. but still the individual annual revenue is 30,000frws. • 2 of these 3women yet registered cooperatives, [Abishyizehamwe]and [Abateranankunga] don’t determine their town annual incomes, t hey don't have to save on the common account, members have free hand on money they sell individually. • Only CBG2[Abanyamurava ]decreased in numbers of goats but is the only women cooperative well managed able to save 36,000 s an individual annual revenue.

  21. VII. Focus Group Session • As a follow up to the survey, a focus group sessions was organized,with a total of 36 attendees from both of CBGS . These were conducted as follows: • Each CBG, assisted by one MACO-RWANDA facilitator, responded these 2 question on the Flip –chart.; answers provided will be present in a table bellow.

  22. Question 10,11,12 of the questionnaire were discussed in group

  23. Comment 4: All the CBG are fully wishing to be trained 100%, all CBS have in different sensitivity rates the goat mortality ,but only the ladies CBGs need advocacy to enforce their cooperative .

  24. VIII. Challenges • VIII.1 Commun challenges.

  25. VIII.2 Specific challenges/CBG

  26. Recommendations and conclusion. Having produced a summary of both the questionnaire and focus groups sessions, the next step has been to analyze and data interpretation ,we have summarize the outcome of the research . Some of the conclusions to be drawn from the research and corresponding recommendations are listed below for further discussion, development and action:

  27. modern goat keeping training Recommendation: All the 5 CBGS assessed are willing to have a modern goat keeping training. We here recommend an immediate training in goat keeping to all CBGs members .

  28. Vaccination and regular check up Recommendation: 2 CBGS from Karongi are not even aware about the goat vaccination and the regular check-up, they only buy and conserve anyhow medications and sometime they use nature unmeasured herbal juice. We here recommend a particular training on Gaot-Care ,organize a general vaccination campaign to all these 5 CBGS.

  29. Goat alimentation and hygiene We have seen only clean CBGS cowshed from NYAmasheke, these 3 CBGS from Karongi are not clean and are from poor materials. We also suggest a course introductive course on cowshed construction and specification on essentials useful materials. According the alimentation, all these Groups feed they animals with plants derivates [banana-lambs,telebusakumu( penisetumlaxum ) .A particular lesson on Goat-feeding is highly needed.

  30. Profit maximization-Saving-notions All these 5CBGS have noticed the importance of legal statute, they all hold cooperative account bank, but they struggle with the saving task.2 of them don’t even see the importance of a shared saving account and 3 which have managed to annually save an amount testifying that they don’t know how to calculate the Product profit. Here we recommend a session of training in Profit maximization and saving notions.

  31. Conclusion. Maco –RWANDA, in order to be efficient , while assessing the CBGS needs in training ,used 5 qualified field officers, facilitated by ADRA facilitators from KILIMBI and RUGANDA sectors. This assessment ,has been exhausted from a sample of 36 respondents taken from respectively in 3 CBGS of karongi and 2 CBGS Nyamasheke. The Data collection was been conducted in 2 days as proposed ,our staff was guided by ADRA facilitators on each and every site. After the data collection ,the supervising team redacted an analyzed and detailing assessment rapport ,here presented as proper product of MACO-RWANDA.

  32. ---------Thank you for your attention.!!--------- MACO-RWANDA presentation.