PROJECT MANAGERS:BRITT BEAULIEU, ANEE BRAR, KARINA MILLER, NIC HAGENS

JUNE 1, 2008

Community Greenspace Project

Project Summary

Stakeholders:

Stakeholders (another look):

Stakeholder Analysis:Stakeholder and basic characteristics

Interests and how affected by the problem

Capacity and motivation to bring about change

Possible actions to address stakeholder interests

Community Liaisons (local leaders)

•Personally concerned about the rates of Diabetes, Obesity and other diet-related illnesses in their communities •Knows people from their community personally suffering from these ailments or suffer from them themselves•Will be partially responsible for the maintenance and sustainability of the greenspaces after completion

•Capacity to mobilize volunteer labor from some of the work packages in the project•Knowledge necessary to give input on fitting the needs of the community

•Project Managers will meet with liaisons bi-weekly to insure their consistent empowerment in the decision making process•Identify develop alternative income sources For some activities, liaisons will be given approval authority

QFC department of Corporate Social Responsibility

•Complete a project that will improve the image of QFC in the region•Complete a project that will impress the overall administration of QFC•Will be partially responsible for the maintenance and sustainability of the greenspaces after completion

•Have $250,000 in funds allocated to the Community Greenspace Project•Limited knowledge of needs specific to target communities

•Project Managers will meet with the head of QFC CSR on a bi-weekly basis to give detailed reports on where the project is in terms of budget and schedule as well as to seek consultation when appropriate.

Community Groups • Some individuals will decide to become gardeners and grow food on the plots• Some individuals are at risk for obesity or diabetes or need to maintain a diet because they suffer from these diseases•Will be partially responsible for the maintenance and sustainability of the greenspaces after completion

•Limited access to capital•Ability to contribute to the project in the form of volunteer labor.•High knowledge of community needs

•Project Managers will receive feedback from and give information to individuals in community groups via liaisons•For some tasks individuals from community groups will give consultation directly to liaisons

LogFrame Matrixes:

Project Description (1.0)

Indicators Source of Verification

Assumptions

To contribute to improved health, particularly of under 5s and the general health of the river ecosystem.

Incidence of water-borne diseases reduced by 30% by 2012, specifically among low income families who live by the river.

Municipal hospital and clinic records collected by mobile health teams.

Improved quality of river water.

Concentration of e. coli reduced by 20% (compared to levels in 2003) and meets national health and sanitation standards by 2012.

Monthly water quality surveys conducted by the EPA and the River Authority.

-The Clean River legislation is introduced by the EPA and enforced--Up river water quality remains unchanged

1.1 Reduced volume of fecal waste discharged into river1.2 Reduced volume of household refuse directly dumped into the river system

1.1 60% of household fecal waste is disposed of via latrines or sewage connections.1.2 …

1.1 Annual sample survey conducted by municipality between 2009 and 2012.1.2

-Waste water treatment meets national standards-fishing cooperatives meet obligations to establish waste collection systems

1.1.1 Conduct baseline survey of households1.1.2 Prepare and deliver public awareness campaign1.1.3 Prepare engineering specifications for latrines and expanded sewage network.1.1.4 Etc.1.2.1 Etc.

1.1.1 Baseline data (Knowledge Practice Coverage) for household waste management exists1.1.2 Schedule of visits of mobile teams completed1.1.3 Engineering plans approved by Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

1.1.1 6 month progress report1.1.2 Extension team progress reports1.1.3 Approved project charter from the Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

-Municipal budgets for improvements to sewage systems remain unchanged.

Go

alO

bje

ctiv

es/

Ou

tco

mes

Del

ive

rab

les/

Ou

tpu

tsA

ctiv

itie

s

Project Description (2.0)

Indicators Source of Verification

Assumptions

To contribute to improved health, particularly of under 5s and the general health of the river ecosystem.

Incidence of water-borne diseases reduced by 30% by 2012, specifically among low income families who live by the river.

Municipal hospital and clinic records collected by mobile health teams.

Improved quality of river water.

Concentration of e. coli reduced by 20% (compared to levels in 2003) and meets national health and sanitation standards by 2012.

Monthly water quality surveys conducted by the EPA and the River Authority.

-The Clean River legislation is introduced by the EPA and enforced--Up river water quality remains unchanged

1.1 Reduced volume of fecal waste discharged into river1.2 Reduced volume of household refuse directly dumped into the river system

1.1 60% of household fecal waste is disposed of via latrines or sewage connections.1.2 …

1.1 Annual sample survey conducted by municipality between 2009 and 2012.1.2

-Waste water treatment meets national standards-fishing cooperatives meet obligations to establish waste collection systems

1.1.1 Conduct baseline survey of households1.1.2 Prepare and deliver public awareness campaign1.1.3 Prepare engineering specifications for latrines and expanded sewage network.1.1.4 Etc.1.2.1 Etc.

1.1.1 Baseline data (Knowledge Practice Coverage) for household waste management exists1.1.2 Schedule of visits of mobile teams completed1.1.3 Engineering plans approved by Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

1.1.1 6 month progress report1.1.2 Extension team progress reports1.1.3 Approved project charter from the Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

-Municipal budgets for improvements to sewage systems remain unchanged.

Go

alO

bje

ctiv

es/

Ou

tco

mes

Del

ive

rab

les/

Ou

tpu

tsA

ctiv

itie

s

Project Description (3.0)

Indicators Source of Verification

Assumptions

To contribute to improved health and economic success of inner-city communities lacking access to fresh and organic produce.

Incidence of water-borne diseases reduced by 30% by 2012, specifically among low income families who live by the river. (What are our indicators?)

Municipal hospital and clinic records collected by mobile health teams.

Improved quality of diets in these communities.

Concentration of e. coli reduced by 20% (compared to levels in 2003) and meets national health and sanitation standards by 2012.

Monthly water quality surveys conducted by the EPA and the River Authority.

-Communities will change their diets to incorporate fresh produce--Up river water quality remains unchanged

1.1 Build 3 sustainable community gardens in communities lacking access to fresh and organic produce

1.1 40% of all community households tend a garden and consume their produce1.2 …

1.1 Annual sample survey conducted by municipality between 2009 and 2012.1.2

-Waste water treatment meets national standards-fishing cooperatives meet obligations to establish waste collection systems

1.0 Lease Land2.0 Build and Sow Garden3.0 Develop and deliver communications plan5.0 Transfer Gardens to Community

1.1.1 Baseline data (Knowledge Practice Coverage) for household waste management exists1.1.2 Schedule of visits of mobile teams completed1.1.3 Engineering plans approved by Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

1.1.1 6 month progress report1.1.2 Extension team progress reports1.1.3 Approved project charter from the Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

-Municipal budgets for improvements to sewage systems remain unchanged.

Go

alO

bje

ctiv

es/

Ou

tco

mes

Del

ive

rab

les/

Ou

tpu

tsA

ctiv

itie

s

Project Description (4.0)

Indicators Source of Verification

Assumptions

To contribute to improved health, particularly of under 5s and the general health of the river ecosystem.

Incidence of water-borne diseases reduced by 30% by 2012, specifically among low income families who live by the river.

Municipal hospital and clinic records collected by mobile health teams.

Improved quality of river water.

Concentration of e. coli reduced by 20% (compared to levels in 2003) and meets national health and sanitation standards by 2012.

Monthly water quality surveys conducted by the EPA and the River Authority.

-The Clean River legislation is introduced by the EPA and enforced--Up river water quality remains unchanged

1.1 Reduced volume of fecal waste discharged into river1.2 Reduced volume of household refuse directly dumped into the river system

1.1 60% of household fecal waste is disposed of via latrines or sewage connections.1.2 …

1.1 Annual sample survey conducted by municipality between 2009 and 2012.1.2

-Waste water treatment meets national standards-fishing cooperatives meet obligations to establish waste collection systems

1.1.1 Conduct baseline survey of households1.1.2 Prepare and deliver public awareness campaign1.1.3 Prepare engineering specifications for latrines and expanded sewage network.1.1.4 Etc.1.2.1 Etc.

1.1.1 Baseline data (Knowledge Practice Coverage) for household waste management exists1.1.2 Schedule of visits of mobile teams completed1.1.3 Engineering plans approved by Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

1.1.1 6 month progress report1.1.2 Extension team progress reports1.1.3 Approved project charter from the Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

-Municipal budgets for improvements to sewage systems remain unchanged.

Go

alO

bje

ctiv

es/

Ou

tco

mes

Del

ive

rab

les/

Ou

tpu

tsA

ctiv

itie

s

Project Description (5.0)

Indicators Source of Verification

Assumptions

To contribute to improved health, particularly of under 5s and the general health of the river ecosystem.

Incidence of water-borne diseases reduced by 30% by 2012, specifically among low income families who live by the river.

Municipal hospital and clinic records collected by mobile health teams.

Improved quality of river water.

Concentration of e. coli reduced by 20% (compared to levels in 2003) and meets national health and sanitation standards by 2012.

Monthly water quality surveys conducted by the EPA and the River Authority.

-The Clean River legislation is introduced by the EPA and enforced--Up river water quality remains unchanged

1.1 Reduced volume of fecal waste discharged into river1.2 Reduced volume of household refuse directly dumped into the river system

1.1 60% of household fecal waste is disposed of via latrines or sewage connections.1.2 …

1.1 Annual sample survey conducted by municipality between 2009 and 2012.1.2

-Waste water treatment meets national standards-fishing cooperatives meet obligations to establish waste collection systems

1.1.1 Conduct baseline survey of households1.1.2 Prepare and deliver public awareness campaign1.1.3 Prepare engineering specifications for latrines and expanded sewage network.1.1.4 Etc.1.2.1 Etc.

1.1.1 Baseline data (Knowledge Practice Coverage) for household waste management exists1.1.2 Schedule of visits of mobile teams completed1.1.3 Engineering plans approved by Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

1.1.1 6 month progress report1.1.2 Extension team progress reports1.1.3 Approved project charter from the Ministry of Public WorksEtc.

-Municipal budgets for improvements to sewage systems remain unchanged.

Go

alO

bje

ctiv

es/

Ou

tco

mes

Del

ive

rab

les/

Ou

tpu

tsA

ctiv

itie

s

Risk Assessment:

Work Breakdown Structure (in the form of a list):

Questions & Comments?