The national Lifetimewool project: a journey in evaluation
J. J. Dart A G , M. Curnow B , R. Behrendt C , C. Kabore A , C. M. Oldham D , I. J. Rose D and A. N. Thompson C E FA Clear Horizon Consulting Pty Ltd, 129 Chestnut Street, Cremorne, Vic. 3121, Australia.
B Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, 444 Albany Highway, Albany, WA 6330, Australia.
C Department of Primary Industries Victoria, Private Bag 105, Hamilton, Vic. 3300, Australia.
D Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, 3 Baron Hay Court, South Perth, WA 6151, Australia.
E Present address: Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, 3 Baron-Hay Court, South Perth, WA 6151, Australia.
F Present address: School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia.
G Corresponding author. Email: jess@clearhorizon.com.au
Animal Production Science 51(9) 842-850 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN09099
Submitted: 3 July 2009 Accepted: 21 May 2010 Published: 14 September 2011
Journal Compilation © CSIRO Publishing 2011 Open Access CC BY-NC-ND
Abstract
The national Lifetimewool project commenced in 2001 and was funded until 2008. The objective of this project was to develop practical grazing management guidelines that would enable wool growers throughout Australia to increase lifetime production of wool per hectare from ewes. The project achieved its ambitious target of influencing 3000 producers to change their management of ewe flocks by adoption (or part thereof) of Lifetimewool messages and guidelines by 2008. The present paper focuses specifically on the evaluation work that was conducted on the project between 2003 and 2008. It is a noteworthy journey because it provides a case study of the effective implementation of an evaluation plan. The Lifetimewool project used ‘people-centred evaluation’ to help guide the creation of an internal evaluation plan. The six core principles followed were: participation; program logic, a people-centred focus; multiple lines of evidence; reflection and learning and a clearly documented and resourced evaluation plan. These principles were applied from the onset of the project. The Lifetimewool team used the evaluation findings to refine the initial design. Based on learnings from their evaluation journey, they created and modified the extension and communications components of the project. The present paper contends that the evaluation process itself enabled the project team to plan and adjust the course of the project through evidence-based reflection and that this helped ensure that the targets were achieved and demonstrated.
References
Behrendt R, van Burgel AJ, Bailey A, Barber P, Curnow M, Gordon DJ, Hocking Edwards JE, Oldham CM, Thompson AN (2011) On-farm paddock-scale comparisons across southern Australia confirm that increasing the nutrition of Merino ewes improves their production and the lifetime performance of their progeny. Animal Production Science 51, 805–812.| On-farm paddock-scale comparisons across southern Australia confirm that increasing the nutrition of Merino ewes improves their production and the lifetime performance of their progeny.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Curnow M, Oldham CM, Behrendt R, Gordon DJ, Hyder MW, Rose IJ, Whale JW, Young JM, Thompson AN (2011) Successful adoption of new guidelines for the nutritional management of ewes is dependent on the development of appropriate tools and information. Animal Production Science 51, 851–856.
| Successful adoption of new guidelines for the nutritional management of ewes is dependent on the development of appropriate tools and information.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dart JJ (2005) Evaluation for farming systems improvement: looking backwards, thinking forwards. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 45, 627–633.
| Evaluation for farming systems improvement: looking backwards, thinking forwards.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dart J, McGarry P (2006) People-centered evaluation, In ‘Proceedings of the AES 2006 international conference’, Darwin. (Australasian Evaluation Society: Canberra)
Farrington J, Nelson J (1997) ‘Using logframes to monitor and review farmer participatory research.’ Overseas Development Institute, Network Paper No. 73, London.
Ferguson MB, Thompson AN, Gordon DJ, Hyder MW, Kearney GA, Oldham CM, Paganoni BL (2011) The wool production and reproduction of Merino ewes can be predicted from changes in liveweight during pregnancy and lactation. Animal Production Science 51, 763–775.
| The wool production and reproduction of Merino ewes can be predicted from changes in liveweight during pregnancy and lactation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jones A, van Burgel AJ, Behrendt R, Curnow M, Gordon DJ, Oldham CM, Rose IJ, Thompson AN (2011) Evaluation of the impact of Lifetimewool on sheep producers. Animal Production Science 51, 857–865.
| Evaluation of the impact of Lifetimewool on sheep producers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kirkpatrick D (1975) Evaluating training programs. (American Society for Training and Development) Available at http://www.businessballs.com/kirkpatricklearningevaluationmodel.htm [Verified July 2006]
Mayne J (1999) Addressing attribution through contribution analysis: using performance measures sensibly. Available at http://pmn.net/library/Library.htm [Verified July 2006]
Montague S (1998) ‘Build reach into your logic chart.’ Available at http://pmn.net/library/build_reach_into_your_logic_model.htm [Verified July 2006]
Oldham CM, Thompson AN, Ferguson MB, Gordon DJ, Kearney GA, Paganoni BL (2011) The birthweight and survival of Merino lambs can be predicted from the profile of liveweight change of their mothers during pregnancy. Animal Production Science 51, 776–783.
| The birthweight and survival of Merino lambs can be predicted from the profile of liveweight change of their mothers during pregnancy.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Owen JM (1993) ‘Program evaluation, forms and approaches.’ (Allen and Unwin: St Leonards, NSW)
Patton MQ (1997) ‘Utilization focused evaluation.’ (Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA)
Thompson AN, Ferguson MB, Campbell AJD, Gordon DJ, Kearney GA, Oldham CM, Paganoni BL (2011a) Improving the nutrition of Merino ewes during pregnancy and lactation increases weaning weight and survival of progeny but does not affect their mature size. Animal Production Science 51, 784–793.
| Improving the nutrition of Merino ewes during pregnancy and lactation increases weaning weight and survival of progeny but does not affect their mature size.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Thompson AN, Ferguson MB, Gordon DJ, Kearney GA, Oldham CM, Paganoni BL (2011b) Improving the nutrition of Merino ewes during pregnancy increases the fleece weight and reduces the fibre diameter of their progeny’s wool during their lifetime and these effects can be predicted from the ewe’s liveweight profile. Animal Production Science 51, 794–804.
| Improving the nutrition of Merino ewes during pregnancy increases the fleece weight and reduces the fibre diameter of their progeny’s wool during their lifetime and these effects can be predicted from the ewe’s liveweight profile.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Young JM, Thompson AN, Curnow M, Oldham CM (2011) Whole-farm profit and the optimum maternal liveweight profile of Merino ewe flocks lambing in winter and spring are influenced by the effects of ewe nutrition on the progeny’s survival and lifetime wool production. Animal Production Science 51, 821–833.
| Whole-farm profit and the optimum maternal liveweight profile of Merino ewe flocks lambing in winter and spring are influenced by the effects of ewe nutrition on the progeny’s survival and lifetime wool production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
