DM 2005 Project Completion Report Instructions

DM 2005 Project Completion Report Instructions

The Project Completion Report is designed to ensure accountability and share lessons learned from the implementation of DM-funded projects with the public.Your Project Liaison will review this Report with you and it will be posted on the Development Marketplace website at

If you would like to provide confidential information, you may do so in section VI.Information provided in this section will not be sharedoutside the DM Team without your agreement.

In addition, in accordance with Paragraph 3.1.1 of the Project Agreement, please attach a statement of account showing the use of the entire amount of the funds awarded.Please also provide a one-pagesummary of your project, which includes 1) brief background of the issues addressed by your project, 2) major achievements during the implementation, and 3) envisaged next activities and involvement of new partners.We will use this summary to continue to disseminate your project idea to interested organizations.

DM 2005 Project Completion Report

Project Number: 3765

Date: June 30, 2007

I. Background Information

DM Project Number and Title

/ Benefiting from the Dreaded Janitor Fish (#3765)

Report Author’s Name

/ Jose K. Carino III

Funding Period

/ 2005-2007

Total Award Amount in US$

/ $ 143,746.51 (100%)

II. Project Achievement and Impact

1) Please rate and describe your project’s overall success with respect to the milestone objectives determined with your Project Liaison at the beginninsdasdfdsfg of implementation.

Overall Achievement:

Limited Success (less than half of original objectives achieved)

Partially Successful (roughly two-thirds of objectives achieved)

Mostly Successful (nearly all objectives achieved, most or all major goals accomplished)

Met Expectations (all original objectives achieved)

Above Expectations (all original objectives achieved, plus significant additional ones)

Description of Achievements:

The objectives of the project were the following: a) To address the invasiveness of the janitor fish thereby reducing its impacts on the local ecosystem. b) To establish the viability of processing the janitor fish into fish meal and using it as basic raw material or ingredient for fish, poultry and swine feed and promote its utilization as such among the fish farmers, hog raisers or feed millers in the region. c) To help create the conditions whereby marginalized fishermen and backyard scale hog raisers are capacitated to undertake their livelihood activities in a sustainable manner. The mobilization of various fisher folk organizations to continuously harvest the janitor fishhelped addressed the uncontrolled proliferation of janitor fish in the lake, at least in the Siniloan River which is one of the most heavily infested with the janitor fish. All in all, a total of13,444 kilos or 13.4 tons of janitor fish was harvested from the lake for the duration of the project. The harvested fish was processed into 2151 kgs. of fish meal which was consequently used as ingredient for animal feed. It has also been conclusively proven by the project that the janitor fish is an excellent substrate for fish meal and a viable alternative source of protein and other micro-nutrients when used as an ingredient for animal feeds.The addition of fishmeal to animal diets even in small amounts confers a health benefit and a growth promotional response on the part of animals raised on diets containing janitor fish meal. And this benefit is achieved at a lower cost compared to the use of the more expensive imported fish meal.Through the project, fourteen 14 fishers and five 5 backyard hog raisers were provided with alternative livelihood support. Most of thesefish and pig farmers were able to earn subtantial income from such livelihood activities. The Siniloan River Rehabilitation and Management Foundation Inc. (SRRMFI), the primary partner under the project, is ready to sustain these livelihood activitieswith project generated revenue.
The project also incidentally led to the conduct of a series of Laboratory Analyses to determine the level of heavy metals content not only in the Janitor fish but also intwo other species of fish found in Laguna Lake, namely Tilapia (Oreochromis nilotica) and Dalag(Ophicephalus striatus). Results reveal thatintake estimates of methylmercury for Filipino consumers may already be close to or even exceed internationally established safe intake limits. Because of this, the project has strongly recommended the conduct of more detailed studies on this matter by concerned government agencies and the issuance of appropriate advisories for a population whose subsistence is almost entirely dependent on the consumption of fish harvested from the lake.

2) Were there any activities in the Project Agreement that were not accomplished?

YesNo

If yes, how did these unrealized activities affect the overall impact of the project?

Originally, 4 fish cages, each a hectare in size, were to be constructed in areas of the lake frontingfour (4)pre-identified lakeshore municipalities and stocked with the appropriate number of fingerlings. These fingerlings were to be raised with feeds using janitor fishmeal as an ingredient. It was also originally intended that several demonstration facilities for fish meal and feed production would be set up at appropriate sites in the region. These facilities would double as buying stations for the janitor fish that will be collected by the community of fisher folk.
However, as the project moved forward, serious logistical and administrative problems dictated that the implementation arrangements originally thought to be feasible be revisited. Instead, the project proceeded with an implementation plan that entailed a scaling down of the livelihood activities originally planned.Despite the scaling down,the project was able to achieve and even surpass the milestone objectives. All the original cooperators were trained and given the opportunity to proceed with the livelihood component of the project, albeit no longer large scale fish farming. For one municipality, the fishermen were engaged to raise broiler chickens and this even led to a second cropping due to the success of the first one.

3) What were the major challenges your team faced during implementation?What, if any, adjustments or changes did you make to your original plans in order to overcome these challenges?

Challenges: Adjustments Required:

Original plans did not push through due to serious logistical and administrative problems.
Heavy metals found in meat of hogs affected the schedule of the fish production. / Original implementation arrangements were revisited and adjusted to make the project more feasible. What is significant is that the adjustments paved the way for a more effective and localized approach to addressing the janitor fish problem.
Due to the alarming level of heavy metals, particularly of mercury, found in flesh of hogs raised under the project, the production of fish was affected since we needed to wait for the final laboratory results. Only after confirming that the heavy metals found were not from the feeds that were formulated did we continue with the fish production. This was the main reason for the delay in the fish production activity. The actual seeding of fingerlings took place on the first week of February thus making the crop harvestable only by late June. This is also the reason why the Public Disclosure Program which was tentativley scheduled for June 15, was moved to later date, July 13, 2007 to be exact. Also, a Final Report is currently being prepared for publication and we are hoping that the laboratory analysis of fish samples that were gathered on the second week of June, shall be ready before the final printing of said report.

4) How did these obstacles affect the overall success of the project?

These obstacles served as a challenge for the team to improve uponthe approaches and methodologies used.To our mind, the adjustments that were made led not only to the attainment of the project objectives but to other significant accomplishments as well. The project incidentally has generated the data that indicates that the levels of mercuryinthe janitor fish and in two other fish species that are found in Laguna Lakeare excessively high paving the way for more conclusive studies that need to be undertaken and the issuance of appropriate advisories informing the public about the risks involved in consuming fish that is harvested from the lake.

5) What were the key activities of your project (column 1)?What is the most significant impact of these activities and how has it been measured (column 2)?How do these outcomes address the original problem and what are the effects of the project on the larger community (column 3)?

Key Activities:

e.g., 200 girls between 15 and 25 years old were trained in crafting and gardening through four skill-building courses.

Significant Outcomes:

e.g., Half of the trained girls began earning steady income within 6 months by participating in village markets.

Social Impact:

e.g., Economic activity in Iagan village has grown and the girls are more independent and respected.

A two day training on project management, fish meal processing and animal feed formulation was conducted.Participants included two (2) representatives of the SRRMFI, five (5) hog raisers from Siniloan and 34 MFARMC members from four towns located in Laguna de Bay Region. Project Memoranda of Agreement weresigned by each of the project partners.
A total of 13,444 kgs. of Janitor fish was collected for the duration of the project.
A total of 2,151 kilos or 2.151 tons of fish meal was produced.
126 hogs and 2000 chicks were successfully raised under the project
Laboratory analysis and testing forheavy metals content of not only the janitor fish but other fish species as well was undertaken. / Nineteen (19) cooperators benefited from livelihood activities provided by the project. All cooperators except two (2) earned additional income from the livelihood activities. Continuing support to livelihood activities will be provided by the Siniloan River Rehabilitation and Management Foundation Inc. using project generated revenue.
While the exact extent of proliferation of the janitor fish has not yet been firmly established, the volume of janitor fish which was actually collected under the project constitutes a substantial reduction in the janitor fish population in the lake and this has contributed to control of the proliferation of the same.
The processing of janitor fish into janitor fish meal (JFM) and consequently using it as ingredient in animal feed and feeding these to various animal species has proven that janitor fish is an excellent substrate for fish meal and that janitor fish meal could very well be a substitute for imported fish meal. The effects of using janitor fish meal are comparable to the benefits derived from using commercial fish meal only at a lower cost.
Hog and broiler production provided additional income for different individuals/ cooperators. Opportunities for continuing livelihood support using project generated funds have arisen especially for those cooperators that have exhibited a good track record in raising livestock and poultry animals.
The results of the laboratory analyses could serve as baseline data for further and more comprehensive studies on the matter. / Hog Raisers and the fishers (who raised chickens) have improved their self esteem by proving that they could be accountable and responsible albeit small proprietors.
Complaints about the proliferation of the janitor fish have reduced noticeably. Fishers have become aware that continuous harvesting of the janitor fish is the mechanism that wouldeventually lead to its eradication. The project has also contributed, in no uncertain terms, toward establishing an economic value for the janitor fish leading eventually to its active harvesting by the community of fishers in the lake.
Fish, poultry and pig farmers as well as the feed manufacturers now have the option of including janitor fish meal as the main source of protein for livestock, fishand poultry animals. The opportunities for earning more from such livelihood activities has been greatly enhanced by the project considering the substantial lower costs needed to produce janitor fish meal compared to importing fish meal from abroad.Also, the production of fish meal and feed manufacturing has provided jobs for certain individuals for the duration of the project.
Cooperatorshave become more confident, independent and reliable.
The data generated by the project has paved the way for the issuance of advisories by the concerned government agencies about the proper disposal of hazardous waste and permissible intakes of mercury or allowable weeklyconsumption of fish harvested from the lake.

III. Ancillary Achievements

1) Describe how you have disseminated, or plan to disseminate, your project idea and which audiences you have targeted.

The project itself had been disseminated during the various presentations on the project made before different fishermen's groups, government agencies and private individuals who expressed interest to know more about the project.
Brochures depicting the various activities of the project were also distributed during exhibits and forums that were participated in by the project team.These include the Annual Learning Forum of LLDA and training for Pollution Control Officers organized by the Federation of River Basin Councils.
Orientation meetings were conducted for the different sectors/groups including hog raisers and the Municipal FARMCs.
A public disclosure forum is being organized to take place on July 13, 2007. This forum is the culminating activity of the project where the results of the project will be disseminated to the various sectors including the scientific community and academe, media, fisherfolk,government agencies
A Final Reporthas been developed and this will be published for distribution to different Government Agencies and different organizations. If the Final Report is deemed worthy of being posted in the DM Website, this will certainly contribute greatly in disseminating the results of the project.
One of the Undergraduate Theses that were conducted under the project became an awardee as the Best Thesis for 2007 given by the Philippine Society of Animal Science paving the way for it being presented in a number of scholars' fora and organizations all over the Philippines.
Bookmarks and other info-materials (e.g. on the proper disposal of hazardous waste, uses of janitor fish etc.) are also being developed for printing in sufficient number of copies for distribution in schools and to various organizations.

2)How has your relationship with your project partners evolved since the start of the project?In what ways will you be working together in the future?

The Project Partner, the Siniloan River Rehabilitation and Management Foundation, Inc. (SRRMFI) was actually created by the LLDA to functionas advocatesand stewards of their specific micro-watershed, the Siniloan-Famy Sub-Catchment. Because of the project, the SRRMFI is the beneficiary of a modest amount of project revenue, including the recovered capital expenditures (for the livelihood component) and various assets of the project.The organization, together with LLDA, intends to usethese funds and assets for continuingsupport to various cooperators in pursuing the livelihood activities that were initiated under the project as well as undertaking more focused river protection initiatives.

3) Has the project generated any revenue or income? If yes, please indicate the amounts and when they were earned.

The project cooperators and the SRRMFI earned modest revenue from the livelihood activities that were supported by the Project. The income sharing scheme of 70%(for the cooperators) - 30%(for SRRMFI) was used. This is the usual sharing scheme practiced in the area. For the first cropping of broilers, the five (5) cooperators earned a total of P6017.9 (70% of the total incomefor an average of P1,203.58.00/cooperator) and the SRRMFI earned a total of P2, 579.10 (30% of the total income). For the second cropping, this time eleven (11) cooperators were engaged, a total of P6562.78 (70%) was earned by the cooperators and SRRMFI earnedP2812.90 (30%). Of the five cooperators for the Hog Raisers, only four were able to earn income amounting to P57,533.98 (for an average of P14,383.5/cooperator).Poor management problems was the reason why no income was generated bythe 5th cooperator. The SRRMFI earned a total of P24,657.42 from this cropping period. For the fish production (the one fed with commercial feeds), the sole cooperator earned P19,061.00 while the SRRMFI got P8,169.00 (30% of the total income). On top of this, SRRMFI inherits the recovered capital expenditures which is actually the greater amount. All in all, SRRMFI inherits approximately P800,000.00+from the project.

4) Will you be working with other partners or receiving additional funding to continue the project beyond the DM funding period?If yes, please list the new partnerships you have made that are specific to this project in the table below.