• HISTORY – STILL LEARNING

• OVERLAP … PROCESS … INTERRELATED … NO STAND

ALONE … ITERATIVE, ….

• THE INSTRUCTIONS IN RBM ARE ACTUALLY THE “HOW” –

WHAT IS INCLUDED - CONCEPT NOTE

Michael Powell, PhD (Geochemistry)Prometeo – SDIC

Jaime Medina SotomayorSubsecretario de Investigación Cientίfica

PROPOSAL

CONCEPT NOTE

RESULTS CHAIN

(LM, LFA)

SUCCESSFUL MODEL FOR FUNDING*STAND ALONE:

NATURAL OR SOCIAL SCIENCE OR ENGINEERING

*From: P. Sadsawad, 2007; CIHR, 2004; U. Toronto, 2004, CIDA, 1997 – references from Dr. L. Hallstram, U. of Alberta.

• 100% INTERACTIVE AND INTERDISCIPLINARY: INVESTIGATORS TRANSMIT NEW KNOWLEDGE TO END USERS DURING ALL PHASES OF

THE WORK• POLICY MAKERS, PLANNERS AND IMPLEMENTERS FROM ALL

PARTNERS, STAKEHOLDERS AND BENEFICIARIES ON BOARD THROUGHOUT PROCESS

• RISKS & ASSUMPTIONS AND UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THOROUGHLY IDENTIFIED AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES IN PLACE

• VERIFIABLE & QUANTIFIABLE INDICATORS DESIGNED FOR EARLY DETECTION OF POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

• DISSEMINATION & KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER & TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER STRATEGIES WELL DEFINED

BUEN VIVIRTHE SUM OF ALL

RESEARCH EFFORTS

NETWORKS/TEAMS ≡ KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER (LARGER ROOTS)RESEARCHERS ≡ IDEAS

(ROOT HAIRS)

GROWTH ≡ CAPACITY(CANOPY)

1

INPUTS (NUTRIENTS)

EVIDENCE(NEED)

WHY

DO W

E DO

RESE

ARCH

???

LIVELIHOOD, HEALTH

SOCIETAL

ANCESTRAL KNOWLEDGE,

CULTURE, FAMILY

GOVERNENCE

HUMAN

ECOSYSTEM

SOIL,WATER,AGRI., IND.

PLANTS,ANIMALS

STAKEHOLDER, BENEFICIARIES,

PARTNERS

RELATIONAL DYNAMICS

GOVT. , POLICY

MANAGEMENT - IMPLEMENTATION

OMNI-DIRECTIONAL

COMMUNICATION FROM BEGINNING

DISSEMINATION

CROSS SECTOR,MULTIDISCIPLINARY

ITERATIVE, PARTICIPATORY

WHYDA

TA

USERS

PLANNING

FACETS vs BUEN VIVIR

CONTEXT

NEED

ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE

SUSTAINABLE

ADAPTATION

ENVIRONMENTAL

SOCIETAL

GOVT. POLICY

TIMELY

E V I D E N

C E

STAKEHOLDERS;FROM BEGINNINGINCLUSIVE

SPATIAL

REALISTIC

DOABLETIME

$$$$

LOCAL

GLOBALNATIONALREGIONAL

ETHNICITYDEMOGRAPHICSECONOMICSGENDER

NEWEXISTING

W H Y

RESEARCH

BUEN VIVIR

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE - QUESTION

NEED FOR CHANGE

ASSEMBLE RESEARCH TEAM

ENGAGE STAKEHOLDERS

SCIENTIFIC METHOD

STRATEGIC PLAN

TEST HYPOTHESIS

MONITOR & EVALUATE SUCCESS

COLLECT AND ANALYSE DATA

ADJUST AND CONTINUE

DRAW CONCLUSIONS AND PUBLISH

DISSEMINATE RESUTLS &

INFORM POLICY

EXPERIMENTATION IMPLEMENT

R E S E A R C H S P H E R E

C O U N T R Y S T R A T E G I C P O L I C Y

MERGING RESEARCH WITH COUNTRY

FRAMEWORK

P R O C E S S

INFORM

WHY RESULTS BASED MANAGEMENT (RBM) …….. WHAT DOES IT HAVE TO DO THE

PREPARATION OF A CONCEPT NOTE ????

CONCEPT NOTE COMPONENTS …REQUIRE RBM THINKING:• ABSTRACT• OBJECTIVES• JUSTIFICATION• WORK PLAN• METHODOLOGIES• ANTICIPATED

RESULTS• ENGAGEMENT• GENDER -

ABORIGINAL• M&E• TOC (UC)• DISSEMINATION• VALUE

RBM WILL BE THE NEW “STANDARD”1ST2nd

WHY … BENEFITS OF RBM: PROVIDES CONSISTENCY IN MANAGEMENT AND

LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE SECTRETARÍA PROMOTE A RESULTS ORIENTED PHYLOSOPHY

FOR/WITHIN ALL ACTORS ACHIEVE GOALS vs EXECUTION DEFINE ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES ACCOUNTABILITY AT ALL LEVELS ENCOURAGE FLEXIBILITY – PLANNING AND

IMPLEMENTATION ASSIGN OWNERSHIP

INSURE RESULTS THAT SATISFY EC AND BV MANDATES EVIDENCE FOR FUTURE POLICY/STRATEGY IDENTIFY NEED FOR FUTURE CHANGE APPLY LESSONS LEARNEDINTNL., N

ATIONAL,

REGIONAL, LOCAL,

GO-CSO-NGO, INDIVIDUAL

PROCESS FOR CONSTRUCTING A LOGIC MODEL (RESULTS CHAIN)

THE RESULTS CHAIN (LOGIC MODEL)

PLATFORM

• TOOLS• BLUEPRINT

PROCESS• DOCUMENT

OUTLINE

PROPOSAL

LOGIC MODEL

CONC.NOTE

STEPS FOR CONSTRUCTING THE LOGIC MODEL (1)BRIEF – IN DEPTH DURING RBM WORKSHOPS IN JULY/2014

GROUP 1: IDEA STAGE … “WHAT”

1. IDENTIFY THE ULTIMATE OUTCOME = THE WHY = NEED = PROBLEMa. IN CONSULTATION WITH RESEARCH TEAM AND FUNDING AGENCYb. CONTEXT (RELIGION-ETHNIC-SOCIO-ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENT,

POLITICS, ANCESTRAL KNOWLEDGE, BUEN VIVIR)c. MAKE SENSE (FEASIBLE, TIMELY, REALISTIC, “WHO”)

2. IDENTIFY AND ENGAGE ACTORS = THE WHO = PARTNERS, BENEFICIARIES, STAKEHOLDERSa. CREDENTIALS – ACCOUNTABILITY – CAPACITIES

i. ARE THEY APPROPRIATE (IDEOLOGIES - $$$ vs PROPONENT)

STEPS FOR CONSTRUCTING THE LOGIC MODEL (2)

3. DETERMINE ACTIVITIES = HOWa. CREDENTIALS – ACCOUNTABILITY – CAPACITIES

i. ARE THEY APPROPRIATE (IDEOLOGIES - $$$ vs PROPONENT)ii. CONTEXT – SETTING - SPHERE

GROUP 2: PLANNING MODEL STAGE … “ROUTE”

4. IDENTIFY OUTPUTS = ACTIVITY PACKAGESa. OCCUR AT OUTPUT & OUTCOME LEVELS

5. IDENTIFY OUTCOMES = ALL LEVELSa. ASSOCIATION WITH OUTPUT(S)

SCALE

TOCPIP

STEPS FOR CONSTRUCTING THE LOGIC MODEL (3)

6. LOGICAL CONNECTIONSa. IDENTIFY LINKAGES FROM BOTTOM TO TOPb. “IF … THEN”

GROUP 3: VERTICAL INTEGRATION STAGE … “ADHESIVE”

7. CHECK FOR CONSISTENCYa. CONFIRM ACTOR’S EXPECTATIONS

i. TRANSFER KNOWLEDGE

TOCIP

STEPS FOR CONSTRUCTING THE LOGIC MODEL (4)

GROUP 4: BUILD IN APPRAISAL … “SELF-CHECKING”

8. EVALUATION FRAMEWORKa. INDICATORS – S.M.A.R.T.b. PROGRESS

i. MONITORINGii. EVALUATION

9. RISK ASSESSMENTa. ASSUMPTIONSb. MITIGATION STRATEGIES

i. TRANSFER KNOWLEDGE

10. PREPARE NARRATIVE

Outcome 100: Quantity and quality of sludge analyzed to assess potential environmental, agricultural and human health benefits/problems associated with its use.

Output 110: Producers and users of sludge identified and linkages with all partners established.Activity 111: Headquarters established by Canadian Proj. teamActivity 112: Office equipment purchased and operationalActivity 113: Reconnaissance field work to identify sludge facilitiesActivity 114: Identify and establish relations with farmers using sludgeActivity 115: Determine demographics of villages using sludgeActivity 116: Contact with local NGOs and finalize MOU'sActivity 117: Identify and enlist support of all potential partners and strike committees

Output 120: 20 Treatment facilities selected and volume of available sludge determined. Activity 121: treatment facilities selected for studyActivity 122: Collection of sludge from all sites

Output 130: Chemistry, microbiology and toxicology of sewage sludge for agricultural usage evaluated.

Activity 131: Lab protocols establishedActivity 132: Samples prepared and split for various analytical methodsActivity 133: Representative samples sent to appropriate labsActivity 134: Data compiled, reduced, evaluatedActivity 135: Indian staff trained in appropriate lab techniquesActivity 136: Application rates determined

WBS: BASIS OF A GOOD CONCEPT NOTE

CAUSAL

RELATINSHIP

RESULTS

LEVEL

PROPERLY

DEFINED

INTERMEDIATEOUTCOME

INCREASED VOLUME OF NTFP PRODUCTS FOR SALE IN THE MARKET

IMPROVED MARKET AVAILABILITY AND ACCEPTANCE

IMMEDIATEOUTCOME

INCREASED ACCESS TO TIMBER AND NTFP

INCREASED YIELDS DUE TO HEALTHIER SOILS

INCREASED CAPACITY TO PRODUCE HIGH QUALITY NTFP BASED PRODUCTS FOR THE MARKET

IMPROVED MAKETING ABILITY

OUTPUT(S)• (AS

INDICATORS – USING MIXED LANGUAGE)

1.# TREES PLANTED

2.% OF WOODLOT COMPLETED

1.ANALYTICAL RESULTS OBTAINED

2.FERT. RATE CALC. MADE

1.# OF PEOPLE PARTICIPATING

2.# OF VILLAGES PARTICIPATING

1.# OF UNITS PURCHASED

2.# OF PP WHO CAN OPP. UNITS

1.# OF COOPS FORMED

2.# VILL.3.# OF

PEOPLE WHO UNDERSTAND FIN.

GROUP OF ACTIVITIES (STRATEGY)

• PLANT 10 WOODLOTS

• PLANT 100 TREES PER WOODLOT

• TRAIN PP RE PROTECTION & MAINT.

• COLLECT 20 SOIL SAMP. PER WOODLOT

• ANALYZE 200 SOIL SAMP.

• DIFF. SOIL = DIFF. FERT. RATE

• TRAIN 10 PP EA. VILLAGE RE QUALITY

• TRAIN 5 VILLAGES

• PURCHASE 5 UNITS FOR MAKING NTFP

• TRAIN 10 PP EA. IN 5 VILLAGES TO USE EQUIP.

• FORM 1 COOP EA. FOR 5 VILLAGES

• TRAIN 10 PP EA. VILLAGE

INPUTS FUNDING/DONOR, LOCAL H.R., CSO & NGO, $ AGENCY PARTICIPATION, GOVERNENT BODY, INST. IN-KIND, INST. RES. $

IF …THEN

“NEED”

ASSUMPTIONS (UC)

ASSUMPTIONS (UC)

ASSUMPTIONS (UC)

ASSUMPTIONS (UC)

ULTIMATE OUTCOME:IMPROVE THE ECOMIC CONDITION OF VILLAGERS IN RURAL INDIA VIA NTFP

SALES

RESEARCH POLICY OBJECTIVE

(O-J-M-WP-AR-SE-RA)

RELATE THIS RESULTS HEIRARCHY TO A DOCUMNT THAT EXPLICITLY OUTLINES THE ENTIRE “MANAGING FOR RESULTS PHYLOSOPHY” ……

..… LIMITED SPACE, LIMITED TIME, SATISFIES FUNDER/DONOR STANDARD GRANTING CONDITIONS

CONCEPT NOTE ……NOT A MAKE-WORK, BUREAUCRATIC EXERCISE

WHY … REQUIRED• BY MOST/MANY - FUNDERS/DONORS• PRIVATE & PUBLIC & GOVERNMENT

BENEFITS … BOTH SIDES• ALLOWS RESEARCHERS TO FOCUS OBJECTIVES

• IMPROVES COMPETITION• QUICKLY IDENTIFIES IDEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES

• SAVES TIME & EFFORTS

SPECIFIC … RESEARCH TEAM• CHANCE TO PROMOTE IDEAS• PROVIDES A BROADER BASE

MORE FUNDING POSSIBILITIES QUICKER EVALUATION – SUITABILITY MOVE FORWARD – OTHER SOURCES

EVIDENCE

EVIDENCE

EVIDENCE

EVIDENCE

EVIDENCE

EVIDENCE

UNIQUENESS …..KNOWLEDGE GAPS

CONCEPT NOTE … FORMAT

TITLEINTRO/ABSTTHE PROJECT:BACKGROUND,GOALS,OBJECTIVES,PURPOSE,RATIONALE,METHODS,HYPOTHESIS,THEORY,BENEFITS,LOCATION,BIBLIO.,TEAM, BUDGET

WHAT YOU SAY IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN HOW YOU SAY IT – GET THE POINT ACROSS.

DIFFERENT FORMATS FOR DIFFERENT FUNDERS – USE IT!

EGO

NOT WHAT YOU KNOW ... WHAT YOU WANT TO KNOW

QUANTITY QUALITY

PAY ATTENTION TO THE

INSTRUCTIONS

BACKGROUND

RELEVANCE NECESSITY

W H O ???CONEXT

BV-NEW

P O L I C Y I M P L I C A T I O N SSECRETARÍA

STRATEGIC PLANNING …. NEW/CHANGING POLICY

TARGET – THE “WHO”

CLEAR, SHORT SUMMARY/CONNECTION BETWEEN THE PROJECT AND

BUEN VIVIR

NOT ENOUGH TO “WANT”, “HOPE”HOW

ELEMENTS OF THE

CONCEPT NOTE

L I N K A G E SNEW …

CHANGE…BV OBJ. ..

TIMING & LEVEL

WHEN RESULTS LEVEL

WHO IMPACTED STAKEHOLDERS

C A U S A L I T Y SHOW HOW

E N G A G E D

E V I D E N C ERESULTS

STATEMENTS THAT

ARE TIED TO

ACTIVITY LEVELS

SPECIFICS NOT COMMON TO ALL CN … THEORY OF CHANGE

PARTICIPATORYIMPACT PATHWAYS ASSUMPTIONS-RISKS-MITIGATION

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

SEPARATE THE “AVERAGE” FROM THE “BEST”

AVOID FALLICIES WHEN COMPILING ASSUMPTIONS FROM VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS

• UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES• RISKS & ASSUMPTIONS• STRATEGIES FOR MITIGATION

THEORY OF CHANGE

(TOC)

TOC – EXPLAINS THE ACTIVIES/EVENTS ALONG A PATHWAY DESIGNED TO REACH THE ANTICIPATED, ULTIMATE OUTCOME

“HOW” CHANGE WILL TAKE PLACESEQUNCE OF EVENTS THAT WILL LOGICALLY LEAD TO THE FINAL OUTCOME

BASED ON ASSUMPTIONS TAKEN WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A SPHERE

ACTIVITY

OUTCOMECAUSALITY

THERE MUST BE A LOGICAL, DIRECT, MEASURABLE CONNECTION FROM STEP TO STEP

IF…THENUNIQUE & UNAMBIGUOUS

QUAL./QUANT. INDICATORS

PARTICIPATORY IMPACT PATHWAYS (PIPA) …IMPACT PATHWAYS (IP) … MAPING ….

WHAT IS REQUIRED:• REFLECTIVE,

HONEST FEEDBACK

• COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH $$$/INST.

• TRANSPARENCY• FLEXIBILITY

THOERY OF CHANGE (TOC) …PARTICIPATORY IMPACT PATHWAYS (PIPA) …

IMPACT PATHWAYS (IP) …MAPING ….• TOOLS TO IDENTIFY

“HOW” CHANGE WILL OCCUR

• HOW THE METHODS WILL ACHIEVE THE RESULTS

THIS IS WHERE YOU CONSTRUCT • THE LOGICAL LINKS

BETWEEN DESIRED RESULTS,

• THE CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS,

• THE “IF … THEN” RELATIONSHIPS,

• THE SEQUENCE OF RESULTS THAT WILL ACHIEVE THE ULTIMATE OUTCOME

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION USING RBM IS• A DYNAMIC PROCESS• FLEXIBLE AND

RESPONSIVE TO LESSONS

WHERE HONEST ASSUMPTIONS • MITIGATE RISK• UNINTENDED

CONSEQUENCES

IMPORTANCE OF ASSUMPTIONS

•Inputs: money, $500; staff, 5 people; tools, 4 sets for sampling; literature, 1 manual •activity: buy the equipment; train the field staff to use the equipment; collect 100 soil samples form 10 hectares •output: 100 samples collected and in the lab for analyses, which leads to more activities and other outputs.

WHERE IS

THE RESULT

CHAIN

VULNERABLE

???

that $500 was enough to collect 100 samples from 10 hectares that 5 field staff with 4 sets of sampling equipment were enough to do the job that 3 days was a realistic time to complete the work that the equipment worked as per the manufacturers specifications that the field staff really understood the instructions in the manual that the field staff had the will to complete the work as outlined that all the staff showed up for work that the manual explained in enough detail how to take the soil samples that the 10 hectares were accessible (i.e., not too mountainous, or covered with

water, or to bushy, etc.) that the weather was good enough to go into the field that no landowner issues arose, which might have stopped the sampling ……

EXAMPLE – IMPORTANCE OF ASSUMPTIONS

RATIONALE …DAY 1

RESULTS, DAY 2

ACTUAL:• 75 SAMPLES • 8 HA.• 2.5 DAYS• SPENT $500

PLAN

LIMITING FACTORS:• RISKS –

ASSUMPTIONS• MITIGATION

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCESBAD &

GOOD

CURRENT/EXISTING DATA, REFLECT ACTIVITIES:

NUMBER OF PERSONNEL AMOUNT OF FUNDING SOURCE OF FUNDING

FURNITURE FUNDS SPENT PER TYPE OF RESEARCH

HOW FUNDS SPENT (FIELD) LABORATORY SPACE

…………

HOW HAVE THEY

IMPROVED PRODUCTIVITY

VALUE FOR MONEY

WAS FUNDING LEVERAGED

IN USE NOW, WORKING,

CONTRIBUTION TO RESEARCH

EQUIPMENT VS RES. GOALS,

WORKING, TRAINING, DATA FOR PUBS. ….

CONTRIBUTION TO SCIENCE

PROGRESS TOWARDS COUNTRY

FRAMEWORK

R E S U L T S

HOW DOES YOUR CN MAKE THESE LINKS

A PROJECT ON

BE: SHORT, CONCISE, ON POINT, NOT WORDY

NUTRIENT AVAILABILITY (f) SOIL PHYSICS ...

DISCUSS THE IMPORTANCE

OF NUTRIENTS TO PLANTS

DISCUSS CHEMICAL

SPECIATION FACTORS

SHOULD NOTSHOULD

ROLE OF FEMALE TEACHERS AT THE PRIMARY LEVEL …

SOCIO-ECONOMIC

STATUS

ABLITY OF THE TEACHERS (f) THEIR EDUC.

LEVEL

AT THE CONCEPT NOTE STAGE

NEED FOR NEW POLICY INITIATIVES

FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE …

WHETHER THE POLICY OR THE

IMPLEMENTATION IS FLAWED

FOCUS ON EXTERNAL EXAMPLES

P L A N N I N G - P L A N N I N G - P L A N N I N G

CONCISE

EXAMPLES TO FOLLOW

PROPOSAL:Rice consumption in India has fallen 7% over the past 10 years but still stands at >80kg/yr. per person. As one of the main staples of the India diet, the biochemical composition of rice can have a significant health impact on those who rely on it as their major source of food. In addition, the occurrence of As in products consumed in No. Amer., and which contain rice, have been shown to contain 2-10 times the limit of 10 µg/gr of inorganic As as established by the USEPA. This project will develop rural models for inhibiting As accumulation in rice by establishing physical and chemical barriers to uptake

Attenuation of As Uptake into Rice Using Organic (Aquatic Macrophytes) and Inorganic (Fly Ash) Barriers: A Constructed Wetland Model for India

BACKGROUND:The accumulation of As in various plant types, including foods, is common wherever As exists in the water used for irrigation. The ubiquitous occurrence of biologically significant As concentrations in various foodstuffs is a function of the redox potential of the site and has resulted in many studies of the uptake, translocation, and release of those species most important within the food chain. These are, inorganic arsenate (As(V)) under oxidizing conditions, and arsenite (As(III)) under reducing conditions and organically bound As, typically as monomethylarsonic (MMA) and dimethylarsinic (DMA) acids. As(V) typically enters plants via phosphate transporters while As(III) enters with aguaglyceroporins along with MMA and DMA. Once inside plant cells, As(V) is reduced to As(III) via arsenate reducing enzymes and is then transported via glutathione and/or phytochelatins for storage in vacuoles in the form of S-thiol, thus decreasing it’s phytotoxicity. Translocation of As from the root to the shoot or leaf/grain of a plant is species dependent and variable. This biogenic process results in some plants being hyperaccumulators of As and suited for use as phytoremediators, which have proven more useful and thorough at sequestering As than synthetic filters, etc.

… global environmental change … mobilize thousands of scientists while strengthening partnerships with policy-makers and other stakeholders to provide sustainability options and solutions in the wake of Rio+20.

Future Earth will be a global platform to deliver:• Solution-orientated research for sustainability, linking environmental change and

development challenges to satisfy human needs for food, water, energy, health;• Effective interdisciplinary collaboration across natural and social sciences, humanities, economics, and technology development, to find the best scientific solutions to multi-faceted problems;• Timely information for policy-makers by generating the knowledge that will

support existing and new global and regional integrated assessments;• Participation of policy-makers, funders, academics, business and industry, and

other sectors of civil society in co-designing and co-producing research agendas and knowledge;

• Increased capacity building in science, technology and innovation, especially in developing countries and engagement of a new generation of scientists.Integrating existing endeavours

… build on the success of existing global environmental change programmes

… International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP), International Human Dimensions Programme (IHDP), Diversitas - an international programme of biodiversity science, and World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) and Earth Science System Partnership (ESSP)

Belmont Forum: Future Earth PAY ATTENTION

RESEARCH

The Ganga River Basin, a Large Ecosystem at Risk: Role of Civil Society,

Sciences, humanities and Government.

Sort title and abstract: - 152 wordsBackground information (incl. link to GEC projects or equivalent initiatives) -169 wordsMain knowledge gap that the call should address - 1142 wordsAdded value for the research community (in particular, highlight how the call will promote knowledge advances by tackling the proposed theme at the global level) - 939 wordsAdded value for research funders - 82 wordsContribution to the Belmont challenge and Future Earth - 86 words Appropriate funding instruments (foresight, networking, capacity building, research projects…) and call timeline (“one shot” call versus repeated calls) - 54 wordsPotential funding / co-alignment partners (Joint Programming Initiatives, Development Aid Agencies…) - 140 words Work plan (including Scoping Workshop) if identified yet - 69 wordsRelation to existing Belmont Forum Collaborative Research Actions (if any) - 53 words

Belmont Forum: Future Earth

2886 WORDS, 6.5 PAGES, 10 SECTIONS = $3,000,000.

THEIR RULES

ObjectivesThe ultimate goal is to …Intermediate objectives will include:1) access how decision makers construct policy on basin management, 2) identify factors that control livelihood systems related to water quality/availability at local/regional scales and within different gender, special needs, and socio-economic scenarios, 3) pinpoint how usage (triggers) control processes that affect water quality/availability, 4) evaluate how these processes will be affected by climate change, and 5) integrate knowledge into policy and local/regional training to change usage patterns and buffer climate change impacts (close the gap). Outputs will include: 1) establish a system of participatory engagement for stakeholders at all levels (societal, government, etc.), 2) establish a dissemination, data-sharing, communication group including all stakeholders, 3) organize workshops/information sessions to sensitize people about the goals of the project and how we plan to achieve them, 4) determine vulnerability factor differences with changing demographics, customs, and livelihood systems within the basin, 5) begin training modules that will run from the start of the project through completion, 6) data mining for all variables related to livelihood systems (either agrarian/agricultural, domestic, urban, rural) and how water figures into their importance.

CARIAA, 2902 WORDS, 6 PAGES, 9 SECTIONS = $15,000,000

Stakeholder Engagement Approach

The stakeholder engagement will be designed …1) Identify and invite to participate: a) classify stakeholders … , b) invitation to engage … 2) Stakeholder consultations regarding involvement; importance of engagement: a) delineate differences …, b) identify vulnerability factors, c) potential risks …, d) evaluation of existing policies … 3) Engage: a) determine capacity …, b) establish rules …, c) solution-oriented approach …, d) model framed within the context …, e) data mining … 4) Action: a) second iteration of engagement …, b) insure governance and management …, c) set targets …, d) set performance indicators …5) Dissemination: a) consistent feedback loop …, b) two-way communication …, c) utilize “cloud” and social media …, d) conduct one-on-one …, e) monitor progress …, f) public awareness …, g) training and technology transfer …

CARIAA, CONT.WEAKNESSES ???

Supergen Fuel Cells Challenge - €5M http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Calls/2014/SUPERGENFuelCellsChallengeCall.pdf

Assessment criteria Research Quality

• Research vision, ambition and adventure • Distinctiveness from other projects in the existing portfolio • Appropriateness of proposed methodology

National Importance • Potential impact of the UK research landscape in cross-disciplinary technology research

Pathways to Impact • Appropriate and viable potential user collaborations • Plans for dissemination and knowledge exchange with potential beneficiaries of the research

Applicants’ Track Record • The leadership quality and experience of the PI • The track record of the team • The balance of skills of the project team

Resources and management • Effectiveness of planning and resource management • Appropriateness of resources requested

Fit to the Call • Degree to which the proposal aligns with the intent of the call

RCUK: €3B

NSF GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSIONb. Project Summary - http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/nsf04_23/2.jspThe proposal must contain a summary of the proposed activity suitable for publication, not more than one page in length. It should not be an abstract of the proposal, but rather a self-contained description of the activity that would result if the proposal were funded. The summary should be written in the third person and include a statement of objectives and methods to be employed. It must clearly address in separate statements (within the one-page summary): (1) the intellectual merit of the proposed activity; and (2) the broader impacts resulting from the proposed activity. (See Chapter III for further descriptive information on the NSF merit review criteria.) It should be informative to other persons working in the same or related fields and, insofar as possible, understandable to a scientifically or technically literate lay reader. Proposals that do not separately address both merit review criteria within the one page Project Summary will be returned without review.

THINK 5 PAGES IS TOUGH ???

NSF – GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSALShttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/nsf04_23/3.jsp

Criteria for acceptanceWhat are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?

How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?

IS RBM PHYLOSOPHY BEING USED IN THE SCIENCES …..

ONE DAY DOES NOT PROVIDE IN-DEPTH TRAINING IN RBM OR ITS USE IN CONSTRUCTING PROJECT DOCUMENTS … BUT YOU MUST START SOMEWERE

THOSE SUBMITTING CONCEPT NOTES WILL HAVE TO SPEND SOME TIME ON THE INTERNET …. DO YOUR RESEARCH

ADDITIONAL RBM TRAINING WILL TAKE PLACE IN QUITO, CUENCA AND GUAYAQUIL IN EARLY JULY/2015

WE ARE ONLY A PHONE CALL AWAY ….

G R A C I A SMPOWELL@SENESCYT.GOB.EC