Milestone 2 Progress Report | Mahlathini Development Foundation

RESILIM-O:

Resilience intheLimpopo Basin

Program–Olifants

MILESTONE 2: PROGRESSREPORT#1:

October-November2016

under the

Lower Olifants catchment

Agricultural Support Initiative (AgriSI)

Implemented by

2
Table of Contents
1. PROGRESS ..................................................................................................................5
October-November 2016: Progress according to deliverables...........................................5
Success stories (positives)................................................................................................7
What is Community level climate change adaptation.....................................................7
Some issues……...........................................................................................................8
Miriam Marepe (Mabins B)–local innovations................................................................8
Tsietsi Nkwana (Lepelle) –Local Innovations................................................................9
Plans for the coming month.............................................................................................10
2. AGRISI TEAM MEETING MINUTES; November 2016.................................................11
Agenda -2016/11/28-29 ...............................................................................................11
Progress and planning.....................................................................................................11
Individual interviews.....................................................................................................11
Baseline and learning workshops.................................................................................12
Local facilitators...........................................................................................................12
Baselines, Visioning and learning....................................................................................12
3. TEAM ASSESSMENT..................................................................................................13
Implementation suggestions re homesteads to demonstrate improved infrastructure......13
Individual baseline assessments planning.......................................................................13
Field process review........................................................................................................13
Miscellaneous action points.............................................................................................14
Indicators: Assessment November 2016.........................................................................14
Project Life Change Questions:.......................................................................................15
Attachment 1:  Detailed upcoming milestone detailed activity plans (Nov-Dec 2016)..........17

Outline

In the inception meeting an implementation strategy that would bring all 6 communities on

board at the same time and include some baseline and visioning discussions at community

level as well as some theoretical inputs and practical training, was agreed to. This was done

to accommodate for the fact that people are anxious to start agricultural activities now in the

Spring and Summer season and for us as the facilitators to provide a commitment to the

communities to action.

Thus, the first baseline and learning workshops of 2 days/ community for Mabins A, B,

Sedawe, Willows, Oaks, Finale and Lepelle were held. Reports have been writtenfor each

community. Once this process has been finalised in February 2017 a consolidated baseline

report for all 6 communities will be produced.

The intended process of individual/household interviews and baseline assessments has not

yet started as planned, but will be initiated early in the new year; as will the visioning,

planning and development of indicators for each group.

To date learning for each of the groups has consisted of water flow and in field rainwater

harvesting, making and using line levels to measure contours and slope, construction of

diversion furrows, levelling of planting furrows, greywater bucket filters, constructing trench

beds, soil properties and planting of seeds and seedlings in seedling beds.

A combined demonstrationworkshop is being planned for 3 of the 6 groups in construction

of a 4mx6m shade cloth structure/tunnel as well as a learning session in construction of a

bucket drip kit and also management of greywater.

Participants

SEEDS OF LIGHT: Nick Vorono, Trygive Nxumalo

MAHLATHINI: Erna Kruger, Sylvester Selala

AWARD: Richard Hatfield, BigboyMkhabela, Kevin Pollard

Contents

This report contains the following sections:

1. Progress

2. AgriSi team meeting minutes –2016/11/28-29

3. Monthly team review summary and assessment of indicators

This report contains the following attachments:

1. Work calendar; November 2016-February 2017

And annexures:

Baseline reports; Mabins+Sedawe, Willows, Finale and Oaks.

1. PROGRESS

October-November 2016: Progress according to deliverables

1. Setting the scene

Activities

planned

Activities

actual

Outputs

% completion

Verification

Setting the

scene

4 villages x

3 days ea

6 villages x

2 day ea

Baseline data

50%

Baseline

reports (per

community)

Community

climate

mapping

100% (CC time lines,

current practices, local

innovations)

Learning groups

established

65% -decision re

formalisation still

outstanding

Attendance

registers

Local facilitators

process

25% -discussed with

groups, criteria to be

finalised

Attendance

registers

Visioning and

scenario

development

25% -group process

outstanding –practices

discussed and

suggestions for

innovations made by

groups

Baseline

reports

•Round 1 (2 days) of group baselines conducted in Mabins, A, B, Sedawe,

Willows, Oaks, Finale and Lepelle (2 days/village).-Five baseline reports

attached (Mabins, Willows, Finale)

•Attendance: Mabins,a,B sedawe (24), Willows (26), Oaks (10), Finale (24),

Lepelle (24) -Attendance registers in a file with BB

•Understanding of CC in communities explored as well as community

responses and issues in the face of this. We considered past, present and

future land use practices and changes in resources and availability. We

prioritized issues in the community. Generally the community level

understanding of Climate change is a lot deeper than we may have expected.

There are already indications of adaptations and local innovations responding

to the changes people are facing. Community members are somewhat bleak

about the future if current trends of drought, heat and resource depletion

continue. They do not feel they will be able to survive in the villages where

they live now and know that there is not much in the line of work opportunities

in towns.

•Current practices and local innovations were explored. Interesting practices

and innovations included for example, planting and irrigation furrows, planting

basins for bananas, which include a rain water harvesting system, irrigated

fodder production for goats.

•AgriSI programme introduced; household experimentation demonstration of

CC technologies (small dams/ tanks, shade cloth tunnels and micro drip kits)

and collaborative activities for the learning groups (which could include

erosion control layout and planning of yards for RWH, ….)

2. Learning and mentoring

Activities

planned

Activities

actual

Outputs

% completion

Verification

Learning

and

mentoring

4 villages x

3 days ea

6 villages x

2days ea

New practice

training

25% -still to do

greywater, garden layout

and design, organic

gardening, nutrition, fruit

production and

conservation agriculture

Training

manuals,

attendance

registers,

photos, farmer

work plans,

garden

monitoring

Local facilitators

training and

mentoring

No yet chosen

•Input and discussionson water flow and in field rainwater harvesting,

principles of water management (start at the top, slow it down, spread it out,

sink it in,…)

•Practicals –1. Measuring contours and slope using line levels. Household

assessment of water flow and options of using RWH, constructing a diversion

ditch to lead rainwater to the garden, doing a cut off drain at the top of the

garden,

•Practicals-2. constructing a trench bed. Planting seed and seedlings and

mulching.

•Demonstration: bucket greywater filtration system for cleaning water for

irrigation. This same bucket filtration system is used for the propose drip

irrigation kits to be used with greywater.

3. Experimentation and introduction to innovations

•Initial discussion held around potential innovations that people would like to

have introduced in their areas; included grey water management and use,

cleaning of water, water storage options, small dams, shade cloth structures,

drip irrigation, introduction of new crops, planting trees to reduceheat,

different methods of watering, mechanical pumps (hand and foot pumps) to et

borehole water to the garden, beekeeping, agroforestry etc -that can deal

with issues

•Initial assessments for potential for underground RWH storage structures at

householdlevel (team workshop with Kevin Pollard and Chris Stimie); 2 x

household assessments in Sedawe and Willows respectively. One

householder Salphina Moongaale from Mabins B has volunteered to have a

tank at her homestead. She has offered to source inputs andbuild the tank as

long as the team assists with the technical design aspects.

4. Collaborative activities

•Started initial assessments and “walkabouts” with community members in

Sedawe and Willows to check on erosion issues impacting on households ( 2

days)

5. Networking

•K2C coordinator contacted for join activities (individual household interviews,

collaborative activities around erosion control)

Success stories (positives)

Climate Change Adaptation debate:the team has come across many interesting

examples ofcommunity members adapting to their changing environment in a more or less

conscious way. This has led us to want to consider in more detail aspects of innovation and

adaptation and whether there is a difference.

To start we have defined the processes as follows with some examples:

What is Community level climate change adaptation

Discussed terms used in the field:

➢Current practice: this is a practice or activity that most people in a locality are doing.

Examples in ORB:

oPlanting furrows for furrow irrigation

oIrrigation basins for fruit trees such as mangoes and bananas

➢Good practice:this is a practice from a locality or elsewhere that is considered to be

positive in that context in terms of criteria that include sustainability and improvement

in environmental, agro-ecological, social and economic criteria

Examples inORB

oEnsuring that planting furrows are on contour and level. Planting into the

sides of the bunds and in the bottom of the furrow instead of only on top of

bunds as is the local practice

oWell designed planting basins -with planting holes that are deep and contain

a lot of organic matter and are designed to create a stepped water flow route

for excess runoff water during rainfall events.

oContour lines in garden that include rock lines, planting of perennial erosion

control species on these contours such as vetiver, lemongrass, sugarcane…

➢Local innovation:An adaptation to a normal or current practice in a community or

locality that can be considered a good practice

Examples inORB

oWater harvesting in banana basins

oAsh for treating grey water prior to use

oPlanting and irrigating rye grass for fodder for goats –

oPipes for gravity feeding of irrigation water from sources quite far away

(usually springs in dried river beds)

oPlanting of garlic to repel snakes and for medicinal purposes (this is an

adaptation from working with indigenous and wild garlic species)

➢Climate change adaptation:Community members have a conception of what

climate change is and some people will follow specific practices to deal with this.If

the person is consciously doing something and changing their practice to deal with

the issues of climate change then it is considered an adaptation.

It is possible for a local practice to follow some aspects of CCA and some good

practices and local innovations could have elements embedded that are a good

climate change response. This can be explored to become a conscious change

process.

CCA is not really just responding to the environment in making decisions nod taking

action –it needs to include some form of recognition of the process and conscious

change. Not all responses to CC have

Examples inORB

oChanging field cropping patterns –no longer planting dryland sorghum and

millet (too dry and too much bird damage), but planting ofirrigated maize in

stead

oPlanting at different times; traditionally for example jugo beans have to be

planted in December and it is considered that not following the traditions in

these cases have exacerbated climate change. Some community members

believethe CC is punishment for not respecting the traditional ways. Jugo

beans are planted by some community members either earlier or later in the

season when it is too dry in December

oIrrigation practices such as gravity fed pipe-lines for irrigation and drip

irrigation.

➢‘Non local’ innovations: these are introduced for demonstration and exploration

purposes to localities and communities form elsewhere where they would be

considered good practice in climate change adaptation

Examples inORB

oSoil and water conservation techniques

oAppropriate tech pumps; hand pumps, foot pumps, solar pumps

oSmall dams and underground RWH structures

oShade netting structures –tunnels

oHousehold level bucket drip irrigation kits

oWorking with commercially produced fruit trees and increased knowledge on

implications of local practice of planting from seed-especially in Lepelle

where fruit is grown specifically for sale…..

Some issues……

Potentially almost everything can be considered climate change adaptation as people

respond to situations when they make decisions.

Are we making any kind of judgement on what is good CCA practiceand what is not and

what are we basing this on… and issues of sustainability.

•Below are two small case studies of local innovations we found.

Miriam Marepe (Mabins B)–local innovations

Water harvesting: In field zig zag ditches/ furrows to carry excess water in rain storms and

distribute evenly and safely in the garden.

•Water sits in them and sinks in

•It stops erosion in the garden

Banana basins:Basins are dug in a series for filling up and overflowing and bananas

planted in these. Basins are filled with grass, and are mulched after planting the bananas

•Basins are dug knee deep and grass placed with manure to anchor bananas

•She observed how water runs and then saw that the water fills up the first one and

then overflows into the next. This gave her the idea to make the ‘series’ of basins

•She also designed the size of the basin by filling up a basin with water the day before

and then coming the next day to see if all the water has sunk in. This means that her

basins are much larger than the ‘normal’ banana basins seen in the area.

•Basins are square, rather than circular.

•To design the over flow she has an initial idea-then when it rains she goes out and

looks to see what the water is doing and corrects the basin walls and overflow routes

to suite.

•This leads to increased water holding capacity for that area of her garden. Bananas

grow a lot better and produce much bigger bananas.

•Mulch is important-as it is moist and cool underneath.

Above left: The banana basins in June 2016 when there was still water and Above right: the

basins in November 2016 –water no longer available. Garden empty except for bananas

and other fruit trees.

Tsietsi Nkwana (Lepelle) –Local Innovations

One young man in the group has a very interesting garden, with a number of interesting

innovations.

He has built stone bundsand check dams to regulate the flow of the running water in his

garden. He grows paw-paws from seed and has recently propagated avocadosso that he

can add these to his orchard.

He has planted fodder grass(rye) for his goats as they are being harassed by the baboons

in the area and will expand his garden for more fodder species.

Above: Goat fodder, the orchard (with an avocado tree in the foreground) and paw-paw

seedlings

Above left: Bunds and cross ties of stones are used to manage water flow in the orchard and

to irrigate the trees.Above right:A large stone bund is used to anchor bananas and provide

good seepage of water for continued moisture

Plans for the coming month.

(See the attached calendar December 2016-January 2017)

1. Run the demonstration workshops for building of a shade cloth tunnel and drip

kits for Mabins A, B, Sedawe and Willows at a pre-selectedsite in Sedawe -

Christina’s “group” chose the presently unused plot of her mother for the site as a

good demonstration within the community, that is easily accessible, where people

could work together and where the ‘ownership’ of the tunnel would not be in

question.

The 2nd workshop of this nature will be held for Finale, Oaks and Lepelle together

in Feb-March 2017.

2. Run the 3rddday for the baseline workshops in all five sites: Now chosen as

Mabins A+B, Sedawe, Oaks +Finale, Willows and Lepelle.Content will be

Visioning and ‘Five finger’ discussions and choice of indicators for each group

3. Learning will include the bucket drip irrigation system linked to the bucket filter

already introduced and working with greywater; including building tower gardens

and keyhole beds.

4. Introduction of conservation agriculture trials in three of the communities where

field cropping was prioritized; namely Mabins B, Willows and Finale. Set out

intercropped plots using planting basins and rows for planting maize, (sorghum-

bird resistant variety), cowpeas and beans.

2. AGRISI TEAM MEETING MINUTES; NOVEMBER 2016

Agenda -2016/11/28-29

➢Finalise compilation of baseline info to date; attendance registers, photos, B2O’s,

written notes, newsprints

➢Individual interviews; progress, issues…

➢PLANNING

oLocal facilitators; criteria, process

oLearning group members; formal/ informal…

oExperimentation: Sites for tunnels, drip kits… arrangements

oAssessments for RWH potential in homesteads

oAssessments for needs forcollaborative work; K2C monitoring involvement?

oGroup baseline continuation…Five fingers

oIndividual interviews continuation

➢Discussions

oGood practise vs climate change adaptation practices

oUnderground tank designs, options, potential implementation…

➢Training:

oReview of progress for each village

oNext steps

oFarmer experimentation, tower gardens, keyhole beds

➢Fields- CA

oWhere with whom and when….

Progress and planning

Individual interviews

Planned process of individual interviewing for completion of the baseline not yet started. This

has complicated this present exercise of household level assessments for RWH storage

implementation, collaborative erosion control work and siting of community level

demonstrations such as the tunnels and household level drip irrigation systems.

Availability of interns to assist with the household interviews was not a guaranteed as

assumed and needs to be more carefully negotiated and planned. BB has spoken to the

K2C coordinator and it would be possible to work with the mentors at village level to be the

enumerators. It is however important for the field work team to be involved as this process is

crucial to getting to understand and know the participants and pick out nuances in

understanding and implementation at household level that have relevance to this

programme. We do not want to send out the enumerators by themselves.

DECISION: Leave the individual household interviews over for January-February and adapt

to also be a process of checking progress as wellas a baseline interview. Negotiate a proper

schedule for working with interns and or the K2C mentors

Baseline and learning workshops

Doing all five workshops consecutively in one week places too much pressure on the team in

terms of logistical arrangements and reporting –as there then in reality is no time for either.

DECISION: Richard to motivate for 2 interns to assist in the next two weeks (1st 2 weeks of

December). Their role would be logistical support, recording of workshops and writing up,

collecting of data and hopefully practising a few of the individual homestead questionnaires.

Local facilitators

A decision was made not to push the identification and election process as yet, but to

continue working with the groups to identify individuals emerging from the group who

demonstrate the attitudes and skills that would be required. There are already primary

contact persons in each area who are assisting the facilitation team in setting up meetings

and informing community members regarding processes andworkshops.

Baselines, Visioning and learning

Some changes have been made to the implementation plan put forward in the proposal –

through team discussions in the inception planning process to accommodate both for the

seasonal need for action (we started abit later than anticipated and November-January is

the planting season). If we miss this, many of the activities cannot happen at all given that

the programme is only 13 months long.

Thus a mixed process of combining some of the elements of the baseline and visioning with

learning and practical implementation has been adopted. This has implications for the

deliverable timelines and milestone reports as well as invoicing and payment.

In addition AWARD has stipulated a need for combined implementation in 6 villages, as

opposed to the staggered approach of starting in 2-3 villages and bringing another 2-3

villages on board 6 months into the process as was initially proposed.

This has meant an incredibly tight schedule.

Practice and vision; over time you need to revisit and evaluate the practices related to the

vision (financially, socially and environmentally). Scoring it in terms of the Vision.

For this process we are starting with the doing and will need to get to the overall Visioning

process a little later as part of the discussion of trying out new ideas and things… linked into

a process of validation of the experimentation.

3. TEAM ASSESSMENT

It has been planned to conduct monthly team planning meetings as well as monthly team

reviews summarised in the assessment template developed. The first of these was

conducted in November 2016.

Two document templates (from the M&E annex of the inception report) were completed: (1)

the ‘monthly assessment’ table and (2) ‘project change questions’.

We referred mainly to BB/Trygive’s written notes and experiences, with additional input from

Penelope and Nick from the sessions they attended.

Implementation suggestions re homesteads to demonstrate improved

infrastructure

The improvements include small dams, underground tanks, drip-kits and tunnels. Two

points emerged: first, there was high level of interest expressed amongst participants of

Round 1 (early November) to experiment with new techniques; second, the actual individuals

are not known yet, or even if known, they need to be vetted for suitability.

Meanwhile there is a technical discussion happening involving MDF, consultant Chris Stimie,

and AWARD re appropriate tank design; and Nick Vorono and recent contacts re solar

pumps.

Re: local facilitators, there are potential candidates but they also need to be vetted in greater

detail before making any decisions. It was recommended by BB and Try that criteria should

be gathered from boththe project and the community, but that the project should lead with

its criteria.

Individual baseline assessmentsplanning

The group agreed that these should be conducted after Round 2 (ends December 9).

It was discussed and agreed that the project approach K2C (Kruger to Canyon project) to

see if their EMs (Environmental Monitors) can be used to carry out the baselines, since they

are local and locally based. They would require some training in order to conduct the

assessments. If K2C is agreeable, it wold be good to begin the individual assessments in

the first week of December whilst the team is still present to assist. Otherwise Try is

available to supervise the EMs and provide quality control under that option.

Field process review

A. A team of 4 is ideal for smooth field operations: 1 person facilitating; 1 taking notes; 1

doing logistics (tea, fetching people, registers, photos etc); and 1 setting up experiments.

Plus this number is useful / needed when dealing with several sub-groups for group work

(3 sites have up to 40 people participating).

B. Combining Mabins A & B is sub-optimal but is adequate for now, in terms of assisting

wider spread in the start-up phase. The suitability of the arrangement can be reviewed

in January Round 3 as implementationtakes hold.

C. Vehicle needs were discussed in light of demand on AWARD vehicles. The

arrangement for upcoming Round 2, where two AWARD vehicles will be used on certain

days, was explained; whilst the arrangement will be reviewed afterwards.

D. Otherwise the process was felt to be continuing well, overall.

Miscellaneous action points

•BB and Try will spend this week typing up their notes from 2 weeks of work, for better

reference. Otherwise their general guideline is: ½ day to type 2-day sessions.

•BB will take charge of labelling photos, dividing into site folders, and loading to Drop Box.

•Try will confirm his availability dates for Round 2, whilst trying for maximum number in

view of its focus on innovations.

•RH to ask Erna about the plan for first 2 fielddays of upcoming Round 2, so that basic

planning can be done (next week following the planning is too late).

•BB to explore whether K2C EMs are available with Mina, their supervisor.

Indicators: Assessment November 2016

Indicator

Overall target

Actual_November

2016

No of participants in learning groups

100

108

No of learning groups

No of local facilitators

Percentage of participants engaged in CC

adaptation responses

1-2 (45%)

2-3 (25%)

>3 (10-15%)

1-2 (10%)

No of participants experimenting with new

innovations

-local

-co-designed

No of participants showing increased

knowledge

Percentage of participants engaged in

collaborative activities

45%

Percentage of participants with improved

livelihoods

-increased availability of food

-increased income

-increased diversity of activities and

livelihoods options

40%

Qualitative assessments;

-stakeholder engagement

-Increased understanding and agency to

act towards increased resilience

-Adaptation and innovations into local

context

-Potential for increased resilience

-Social engagement

Stories, case

studies, photo

diaries, collaborative

work catalogue

2 small case

studiesIncluded

above in section 1.

Also;

-The Willows;

banana circle

-Lepelle; Mr Tsietsi

Shai uses rocks and

banana trees to slow

erosion, planted

grass for his goats

watered by a pipe

that leads from the

tunnel waterfall.

(previous foraging

no longer available)

-Most villages use

ash to purify grey

water for watering

gardens.

-The Oaks; Using

government

supplied drip

irrigation

-Mabins A; Onions

being planted

between other crops

to support other

plants and fully

utilise space

-Mabins A:

Christine Thobejane

pumps from a small

stream to her

garden (100m)

Understanding:

Examples of people

showing an increased

understanding of CCA

adaptation

Future dated question; explicit vs implicit? What qualifies as

CCA vs good practises?

(i)The communities already have knowledge of Climate

Change although causal reasonsare diverse (log per

learning group).

Rain patterns have shifted.

Traditional farming methods no longer followed. Rains comes

later, are heavier and lasts longer into the year.

Now the weather is hotter than it used to be 10 years ago;

extreme weather–temperature (heat not cold) and rainfall.

Actions:

Examples of people

showing an increased

agency towards increasing

their resilience

Planting of grass for animals for fodder –drought response

(Mr Shai).

Shifting planting to match rains.

[also see above for practice examples].

Examples of increased

potential towards

resilience

Willingness to learn / experiment: The general majority of

people who attended Round 1 have stated that they want to

try the modalities shared. The availability of water is seen as

a potential barrier.

Note: because of extreme conditions of the past 2 years,

most peoples’ progress has been going backwards, hence

difficult to talk / think in terms of improvement.

Project Life Change Questions:

1. Do we have examples or storiesof how we or others are in the process of adaptive

management related to CC? (adapt, reflect and respond to….) and examples of

what this adaptive management is?

Examples above.

2. Do we have stories that show innovation or lack of innovation towards positive

change? What insights have we gained into how innovation can lead to positive

change?(INCREASED RESILIENCE)

Future date? Otherwise existing stories:

•Botshabelo –piping to mountainsource (6 kms) for community water to 120

users. Users paid R 600 upfront + R20/mth for usage. Reason: lack of

existing / unreliable sources. Cost-sharing effort.

•Willows –priced water from private boreholes (drinking + other). R30 per 210

ltrs.

•Oaks –payment for river water (drinking + other) –mainly collection

transport/effort.

•Lepelle –Mr Shai bought pipe (approx. R3000) foraccess from stream

behind tunnel.

3. Do we have stories that show evidence of, or an interest in self organisation towards

collective action? What insights have we gained into how self organisation can lead

to collective action?

•Past story: Mabins A cost-sharing water development. Driven by Mr.

Leshike’s (more self taught professional farmer) son –enthusiastic about

working with the community (rather than self-centric).

•Willows: Mr. Motseo is a champion in organising people to attend meetings,

and making sure they attend.

•Willows: requested TA be exempted from participating due to fear of

undermining process / organisation / action.

4. Do we have stories to show that learning together is happening or that there is an

interest in learning together? What insights have we gained about how to learn

together?

Mabins A: Have a potential site where they want collective garden/field (4 ladies),

based on developing a collective water supply from the river (800m).

[Future date stories]

5. Do we have stories of how we and or others are able to think systemically? What

insights have we gained?

Baseline: little evidence-Participants are focussed on their day to day needs and

survival.

6. Do we have stories of how we and or others are able to be inclusive and democratic?

What insights have we gained about how this can be achieved? (STAKEHOLDER

ENGAGEMENT).

Mabins water dev: eg of inclusiveness & democratic vs eg Mr Shai in Lepelle who is

individualistic.

All villages: participation in Round 1 inclusive, open two-way exchange.

Attachment 1: Detailed upcoming milestone detailed activity plans (Nov-Dec 2016)

2016 November AWARD

MONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAY THURSDAYFRIDAYSATURDAYSUNDAY

310102030405 06

AWARD Baselineand

training grp1

AWARD Baselineand

training grp1

AWARD Baselineand

training grp2

AWARD Baselineand

training grp2

AWARD Baselineand

training grp3

070809101112 13

AWARD Baselineand

training grp3

AWARD Baselineand

training grp4

AWARD Baselineand

training grp4

AWARD Baselineand

training grp5

AWARD OFFICE:TEAM

MEETING: Richard, BB,

Sylvester, SOL

141516171819 20

AWARD TEAMPLANNING:

Forin interviews:

Richard, interns,BB,

Trygive

AWARD: Ind interviews:Try,

BB, interns

AWARD: Ind interviews:

Try,BB, interns

AWARD: Ind

interviews:SOL, BB,

interns

AWARD: Ind

interviews:SOL, BB,

interns

NOTE: SOL to decide on

4 days in one week, 3

days and oneday or 2

days ea week

212223242526 27

AWARD: Ind

interviews:SOL, BB,

interns

AWARD: Ind interviews:SOL,

BB, interns

AWARD: Ind

interviews:SOL, BB,

interns

AWARD OFFICE:TEAM

MEETING: Richard, BB,

Trygive, SOL

282930010203 04

AWARD TEAMPLANNING

MEETING: Erna, Richard,

Chris, Sylvester, BB, Nick

AWARD Collaborativework

assessment grp 1,2,

baselineday2, grp 5..

AWARD Collaborative

work assessmentgrp3,4

DEMONSTRATION DAY: All

groups - MABINS A and B-

tunnels

DEMONSTRATION DAY: All

groups -FINALE;drip kits

NOTE: Assuming that

Nick could provide

value in the

'construction sub-team"

-ifthat is an interest

AWARD vehicle; 1x double

cab:

AWARD vehicle; 1x double

cab:

AWARD vehicle; 1x

double cab:

AWARD vehicle; 2x

double cabs or 1 double

cab and one kombi

AWARD vehicle; 2x

double cabs or 1 double

cab and one kombi

2016 December

MONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAY THURSDAYFRIDAYSATURDAYSUNDAY

282930010203 04

050607080910 11

AWARD Baseline and

training grp1

AWARD Baseline and

training grp2

AWARD Baseline and

training grp3

AWARD Baseline and

training grp4

AWARD Baseline and

training grp5 .AWARD

OFFICE:TEAMMEETING:

Richard,BB,Trygive,SOL

AWRD vehicles: 2x double

cabs - Combining of

groups fortraining in grey

water-

AWRD vehicles: 2x double

cabs - Combining of groups

fortraining in grey water-

AWRD vehicles: 2x

doublecabs - Combining

ofgroups fortraining in

grey water-

AWRD vehicles: 2x double

cabs - Combining of

groups fortraining in grey

water-

AWRD vehicles: 1x

doublecab

121314151617 18

AWARD;follow up

mentoring; CA Finale,

Mabins, Willows

AWARD;follow up

mentoring; CA

AWARD;follow up

mentoring; CA

192021222324 25

262728293031 01

2017 January

MONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAY THURSDAYFRIDAYSATURDAYSUNDAY

262728293031 01

020304050607 08

091011121314 15

161718192021 22

232425262728 29

30 31

AWARD TEAMPLANNING

MEETING:Erna,Richard,

Chris, Sylvester, BB, Nick

AWARD Baseline and

training day 2 grp1

Notes:

2017

February

MONDAY

TUESDAY

WEDNESDAY

THURSDAY

FRIDAY

SATURDAY

SUNDAY

AWARD OFFICE:

TEAM MEETING:

Richard, BB,

Sylvester, SOL

AWARD training day

2 grp2

AWARD training day

2 grp3

AWARD training day

2 grp4

AWARD training day 2 grp5

AWARD training day

2 grp6

CA follow up

Ca follow up