Lessons learned. Describe the positive aspects of project implementation, the problems encountered and how (if) were they addressed. Describe how other parties could use the solution. Describe best practices that can be adopted or adapted.
Lessons learned. The Farm-to-Table program begins 2011 in a much stronger position than it began 2010. This is partly due to better financial planning and more diversified funding sources, including an increase in program-generated revenue. It is also due to the organizational partnership (soon to be merger) between Food Works and CVCAC, which will in the long run increase both the financial stability, as well as the outreach and educational opportunities, of all of Food Works’ many intersecting programs. However, the strength of Farm-to-Table is also due to the commitment of the primary growers to working collaboratively on production planning and marketing strategies Reflecting on the experience of this past year, however, brings several critical issues to the fore: First and foremost, the rapid expansion of sales (and the volume of product) strained the capacity of program staff, especially in the fall months. The planned increase in work processing parties, and consequent expanded availability of “lightly processed” products, did not occur, due to limitations in capacity. Likewise, the proposed increase in statewide outreach and modeling of the program did not occur. It is becoming increasingly evident that a new staff position will soon be necessary, although the current budget does not provide for this. In concert with our new partners at CVCAC, we are actively exploring new funding sources. An unexpected outcome also occurred as a result of achieving one of the more specific proposed goals; namely, the increase in the number of community buying clubs. The creation of five new buying clubs in the summer and fall months put an enormous burden on staff and volunteers filling the orders on delivery days. An evaluation of the cost effectiveness of the current buying club pricing structure needs to be made. Between the growth of the buying clubs and the vastly increased sales to the rest of the commercial customer base (workplace and college cafeterias, etc.), it may soon be necessary to revamp the packing, delivery, and billing procedures that have been in place since the inception of the program. In short, an “upgrade” to the entire system will soon be necessary. Farm-to-Table is now at a point where its success may lead it to re-invent its processes. However, its commitment to its dual mission – to benefit the nutritionally at-risk members of the Central Vermont community by providing access to healthy local foods, while at the same time increasing the viability of loc...
Lessons learned. CRAFT programs were originally created by a community of growers with like minded commitments to the education of new farmers; experienced farmers both educated and mentored new farmers. The modified CRAFT model we developed and used for this program supports the education of new farmers by providing the organizational structure to allow expert farmers to be teachers. It was successful in part because of our regional collaborative partner whose farmer board provided a direct connection to the community of farmers in that region. These farmers were willing to commit to the project, lend their expertise to educate specialty crop producers, and promote the series. We recommend and plan to continue the approach of working with a regional partner in other areas of the state. Evaluations were lower in quantity than desired. We developed both paper and electronic evaluation formats. Paper evaluations could be either written in the field or taken home to be completed and later mailed to the NOFA-VT office. Electronic evaluations were available in Survey Monkey. The paper evaluations handed out in the workshop contained a link to the electronic evaluation. We received 12 paper evaluations and 12 electronic evaluations from participants. However, our collaborative partner conducted their own evaluation which had 16 responses, so we gleaned additional information from their survey. Next year we will use a simpler evaluation format to increase participation with check box options. We also plan to ask farmers how many new practices they learned so we can start to quantify the learning experience. CONTACT INFORMATION Xxxxx Xxx Xxxxxx, Ph.D., Vegetable and Fruit Technical Assistance Advisor for NOFA-VT Phone: 000-000-0000 x00 and email: xxxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xxx ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The beginner farmer workshops were marketed through a catalogue of summer workshop offerings; the whole catalogue can be viewed at xxxx://xxxxxx.xxx/sites/default/files/SWS2010.pdf. Below is one section describing the beginner farmer workshops. Note that only some of the workshops (those targeted to specialty crop farmers) were part of this project. Beginning Farmers & Apprentices Workshops 1, 2, 5, 7, 8 & 9 are produced in partnership with the Rutland Food and Farm Link (RAFFL) and funded by a USDA Specialty Crop Block Grant; they are offered at no charge. 1Wednesday, July 14 • 6:30 - 8:30pm Marketing Strategies for the Small Farm Xxxxxxxxxx Family Farm • Granville, NY Learn the basics of market...
Lessons learned. Over the past six years in Mozambique, TechnoServe has also learned some important lessons regarding both what works and what does not work in rural enterprise development. ▪ Scale of operations and size of transactions matter. In cashew and oilseed processing, we have learned that the minimum plant capacity to capture economies of scale (and justify the cost of experienced management) is approximately 1,000 tons per annum. For this reason, smaller plants such as Oleos Cuti, Oleos Ribaue and QualiCaju have shut down or struggled. TechnoServe has thus shifted its focus to assisting those plants – such as Optima - willing and able to reach this minimum capacity and replicating their success elsewhere. ▪ Private enterprises can play a key role in extension. The success of our rural processing clients depends, to a certain extent, on the availability of high quality raw material. And TechnoServe has focused on empowering its clients to play an important role in ensuring the highest quality material. For example, cashew processors have a significant incentive to help families understand how to grow high quality cashew trees, and our clients are playing a critical role in helping them intercrop with groundnuts in order to improve the soil quality. We believe that private sector-led extension is a real, sustainable option for those sub sectors which have reached a certain level of development, such as cashew processing. ▪ Focusing on a single sub-sector without understanding its links to broader value chains can limit enterprise growth. For the past three years, TNS has been assisting oilseed processors to start up and expand in the Beira and Nacala Corridors. While 2,500 families benefited, the impact would have been greater if the companies had diversified into feed production or if assistance had also been given to start-ups in the animal feed business. These experiences have helped us understand that opportunities for rural oilseed processors must be evaluated in the context of the entire value chain. ▪ Pilots are the first step to building a competitive sub sector. One reason for TechnoServe’s success in cashew processing has been its approach: focusing first on a single pilot (Xxxxxxx Xxxx), digesting and applying learnings from this experience, and replicating the model for new entrants. As a result, we focus significant resources on a small number of enterprises (as opposed to working with 10-15 companies in each sub sector and hoping that a few of them s...
Lessons learned. Please describe the strengths and weaknesses of your study and provide details of lessons for future projects.
Lessons learned. Lessons learned by the project staff are numerous. The best way to be able to help producers is to “do it ourselves” so we can really know the production challenges that are being faced by growers. The experimental hopyard is helping us collect valuable data but also allowing us to “experience” hops just like a grower. Through this process we are able to alert growers when pests arrive and/or share our mistakes with new growers. Hops are a complex crop. There are significant startup costs, both economically and in time and labor. Constituents have commented how invaluable they have found the Building a Hopyard YouTube videos and construction costs fact sheets, and how much they have appreciated the opportunity to be able to visit a hopyard prior to constructing one themselves. Variety selection is a major decision, and we are proud to be able to offer some baseline data on variety suitability through our research. Hops are very disease susceptible, particularly to downy mildew, which is a consideration that every grower should be undertaking, but other pest factors seem to be worth consideration as well. There are numerous hop pests and beneficial insects specific to the Northeast that are not found in the main hops production areas of the world. Further work is certainly needed in this domain. Planting varieties that don’t thrive or yield well in this climate is economically unsound. Our first year harvest data is an indicator of the potential of each of the 20 varieties trialed, but as hops take three years to reach peak production, further research is needed. Small-scale infrastructure is a continued stumbling block in hops production in the Northeast. The mobile hop harvester designed courtesy of a SCBGP grant has taken steps to alleviate this issue, as has UVM Extension’s work with small-scale hops balers and oasts. The future bears great promise once these works have been completed and made publicly available. CONTACT PERSON Xx. Xxxxxxx Xxxxx, UVM Extension Agronomist, (000) 000-0000, xxxxxxx.xxxxx@xxx.xxx
Lessons learned. Describe the key lessons learned (a) during this grant period, and
Lessons learned. Describe the key lessons learned (a) during this grant period, and (b) during the project as a whole. Identify the critical factors that promoted and/or inhibited the successful implementation of the grant. Add any other activities or successes achieved, in addition to those outlined in the proposal. Indicate what changes you would make if you were to do this work again.
Lessons learned. Issue How did you overcome the issue? Lesson learned
Lessons learned. We here summarise the two most important lessons which need to be taken into account when deriving a key agreement protocol, offering resistance in the CK model and being less vulnerable for DoS attacks. • Resistance in CK model: Any possible definition of the SK should consist of a combination of both the local state variable and the private key of at least one entity. For instance, in [10,11], the SK can be written in a form only consisting of local state variables of the two entities and in [12], the SK is derivable to a form only consisting of the private keys of the two entities. • Resistance to DoS attacks: In [10–12], the SP only retrieves the identity of the SMs after receiving a second message and is not able to detect malicious behaviour. Therefore, to avoid the SP keeping open a huge amount of (potential malicious) sessions, it is better to let the request initiated by the SP. The SM is less vulnerable since it can react when too many requests are sent as they are coming from only one entity, i.e., the SP.
