Uttarakhand - Department of Land Resources

CHAPTER -9
OUTPUT AND OUTCOME INDICATORS
Watershed Management works entail considerable amount of budget and hence a
proper monitoring and impact evaluation is desired to assess the benefits accrued
out of the expenditure incurred. Thus, to monitor the achievement of our defined
project objectives certain output indicators have been designed which will help in
quantifying the objectives any change in achievement of objectives will help in
flagging our procedural shortcomings like ineffective community mobilization, poor
PRA process improper prioritization of natural resource management objectives etc.
RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING OF IWMP
Results Frameworks (Table 9.a)
Objective Outcome Indicators Use of outcome
Information
To improve the
productive potential of
natural resources and
increase incomes of
rural inhabitants in
selected watersheds
10% increase in household
Income (over baseline) in
targeted villages
(disaggregated) by Gender and
socio- economic class.
10% increase in Vegetative
Lack of achievement may
flag:
Tariff and subsidy
structure inhibits viability
of farming systems
improvements
through socially
and biomass index of treated Poor participatory
inclusive, institutionally watersheds
process
and environmentally 15% increase availability of Inadequate prioritization
sustainable approaches. water over baseline for of NRM investments
domestic and/or agriculture Inadequate capacity
use.
building of GPs and other
20% improvement in local institutions.
administrative capacity of GPs
as measured by performance
indicators
Intermediate Results Results Indicators for each Use of Results monitoring
(One per component)
Component One
(a)Communities are
mobilized and prioritize
their own mix of
watershed development
technologies by actively
involving all households.
component
Component One
80% of households are
included in preparation of the
plan.
60% of activities in IWMP
address soil conservation
measures, water resource
management, forest fuelwood
and/or fodder management
identified during PRA exercise
Component One
Low level may flag either
poor mobilisation of
community or poor
inclusion of all socioeconomic
households in
decision taking in village.
Low level may flag poor
understanding of project
objectives or weak PRA
processes.
181