Coutts J&R undertook a mid-term review of a very interesting program in Tasmania – Sheep Connect. It was mainly a desktop review, but did include some input from informed persons. Sheep Connect follows on from a very successful 8×5 Project which Coutts J&R has also had the opportunity to evaluate in the past. An interesting feature of the program has been the way it is clear about its different market segments which assisted both the targeting of activities and in undertaking evaluation.
Jeff and his team at Coutts J&R has provided leadership in the development of intervention and evaluation approaches across Australia and beyond in rural and regional development, Research, Development and Extension (RD&E) and education. The projects listed in this section are examples of those undertaken in recent years – ranging from individual project evaluations to working with national funding bodies to developing monitoring and evaluation frameworks to guide investments and reporting.Read More
Program and Project Evaluations (42 projects)
Coutts J&R undertook a review for Condamine Alliance of legislation and guidelines supported by interviews with informed persons and landholders looking at the (potential) impact of clearing trends on biodiversity in a sub-catchment of the Condamine River.
COutts J&R were involved in evaluating the TRaCK program www.track.gov.au. TRaCK (Tropical Rivers and Coastal Knowledge) is described on its website as a research hub under the Commonwealth Environmental Research Facilities scheme, managed by the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, drawing together more than 70 of Australia’s leading social, cultural, environmental and economic researchers. The program’s research focuses on the tropical north of Australia from Cape York to Broome.
Our evaluation completed in April 2010, included secondary data analysis, a survey of researchers and informed persons and workshops with program management.
Coutts J&R is undertook an evaluation of the Best Practice Salinity Management Program in Tasmania (NRM North) to assess its effectiveness in achieving its stated aims – particularly in terms of capacity building and practice change.
The Best Practice Salinity Management Project was funded by the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality. Beginning 2006 and finishing at the end of June 2009 the project has a budget of $2million. The Project includes activities in the Southern NRM region of Tasmania, and a variety of sub-projects and consultants. Activities have included on-farm salinity demonstrations, trials, development of farm salinity plans, glove box guides and fact sheets, trials of plant-based salinity solutions, incentives and field days.
The evaluation process included surveys, workshops and secondary analysis.
The ‘Evaluation of Defeating the Weed Menace R&D program’ was completed by Coutts J&R. It focused on researcher, staff and informed person feedback and the program management and used surveys, interviews and secondary data analysis. The evaluation found a high level of management excellence by the program manager, her team and Steering Committee, good performance by the researchers despite a shortened time frame and early indications of direct impacts on policy and R&D funding.
Jeff Coutts and Amy Samson were involved in the evaluation of an ambitious event run by Dairy Australia with support from the Federal Government called DairyLive. This event used video streaming to connect 8 venues across the country as well as using a website for those who could not attend. The evaluation included the use of participant observers at the venue and on-line, feedback sheets – including a web-survey for the on-line users, and records and statistics.
The evaluation of this project looked at the success and effectiveness of distributing incentives through workshops in the LCMA. Interesting results emerged and were included in the final report.
This evaluation at the end of 2008 followed on from a mid-term review in 2007. It used a Bennett’s Hierarchy framework to look at the impacts of the project funded by AWI and undertaken by the Tasmanian Institute of Agricultural Research (TIAR). This was an extension based project faced with a state wool industry severely affected by drought. It used grower groups, workshops, field days and a newsletter to provide support, information and foster changes in management. The evaluation used a mixture of surveys – growers involved in groups, those that participated in some events, and those who only received the newsletter; interviews with informed persons; participant observation at project events; and analysis of secondary data. The evaluation reported a high level of practice change as a direct result of project activities – in relation to the comparative level of involvement in the project.
The evaluation was undertaken in 2008 to see how well it met its objectives and also ‘how has exposure to the information and activities of the initiative impacted on people’s awareness and (re)thinking about Natural Resource Management issues relevant to the cotton industry and its catchment communities.’ The project aimed to establish collaborative partnerships between Regional NRM bodies and the Australian Cotton industry; facilitate the delivery of NRM outcomes; develop and promote resources for capacity building; and increase the adoption of good NRM practice. The evaluation used: secondary data; and informed persons survey; case studies; and collated participant feedback from project activities. Among other conclusions, the evaluation found that there was good evidence that the project stimulated interest and fuelled the conversation about how NRM management is best incorporated into farm and catchment management.
This project aimed to encourage dairy farmers to take on a business culture – including improving strategic decision-making concerning pasture management. The evaluation was undertaken in 2008 near the completion of the project and used: surveys of participants and non-participants in the program; interviews with informed persons; a ‘structured debrief’ of project insiders; case studies and secondary data. The evaluation indicated a high level of impact on at least 20% of the industry, a benefit cost exceeding 10/1 and suggested that non participation was related more to an issue of perceived immediate relevance to specific activities and difficulty in getting away from their enterprise rather than a reluctance to learn.