EXIT STRATEGY PLANNING TOOL for the School Garden Project (SGP) an

Andean Alliance for Sustainable Development (AASD) Effort

NOTE: Exit Strategy Planning Tool would also apply for 2 other projects, the
School Greenhouse Project (SGH, concurrent project to the SGP) and the Family
Greenhouse Project (FGH) because they are planned implemented in a similar manner
which addresses sustainability and exit strategy issues.

Sustainability Issue:
A.
B.

What must be sustained after Exit?

What special challenges exist to meet question #1?

Funding (benefit stream), institutional relationships and project model must be

sustained. As with most AASD projects, most funding for the actual building of the
greenhouses is supplied either by the individuals or the local government. For the SGP
the local governments supplied the funds for building. Schools (and individuals in other
projects) are aware of the funding request project and have been requesting funding for
their own greenhouses. Local governments have also stated interest in scaling the AASD
model where trainings are supplied in sustainable agriculture and funding comes from the
local government. Usually individuals build the walls from local resources and the
government supplies either funds or materials for the roofs of the greenhouses.

1A. Can benefit streams be maintained without continued activities?

Yes for community. Once the funding process is well known and because
proposals for greenhouses have been accepted by local governments in the area, it is very
likely the benefit stream may be maintained.
The SGP is based on volunteers and interns having a learning experience that has
a positive impact on the target communities. When the program is discontinued this
benefit will no longer be available for new participants, but the experiential learning
experience will have had its effect on past participants.

2. Which of the following exit strategy options are most appropriate for this project?
Definitions of Exit Strategies:
Phasing down (preliminary to phasing over or phasing out):
Sponsor or implementer reduces activity levels (and possibly target audience coverage)
but continues to provide some support for project activities
Special challenges include: pacing; redefining the target population; maintenance of the
benefit stream
Phasing over:
A successor institution is identified to continue the activity or service; the initial sponsor
helps the successor organization, network, or partnership secure needed resources and
develop critical capacities
Special challenges include: pacing; capacity development; and decision-making about
scope and scale of activities
Phasing out:
Sponsor discontinues support and involvement; no new organization, network or
partnership is identified to continue the activity
Special challenges include: safety net considerations (when critical services related to
health, education or emergency assistance will be discontinued); maintaining the benefit
stream without maintaining the activity that initially produced the stream

Recommended Strategy: Phasing down, over and out

Phasing out: is part of implementation. After the original building of the greenhouses
and the original trainings the AASD brings technicians to sites and has weekly trainings
over a month that teach how to maintain them. After that, projects become independent
and AASD efforts are restricted to monitoring and evaluation. Projects that have been
carried out have great potential for continuing to have an effect on malnutrition in the
area. For people/schools wanting to start new projects, trainings would have to be carried
out by local governments, something they mean to do with their scaling initiatives.
Teaching efforts carried out by program participants at local schools should also be
sustainable as the teachers receive the same trainings and sustainable agriculture has been
integrated into individual schools curriculum as schools agree that this topic is key to
combating malnutrition in the area and the vegetables grown at schools are used to
supplement schools meals. As the students tell their parents about the project, many
parents have become interested in starting their own greenhouses both for consumption
and for the selling of produce. While the AASD was planning sustainable efforts to start

FGH projects, a parent went ahead and built his own greenhouse and came to the
organization to show them what he had done. The organization, given the expressed
interest, initiated community assemblies in the communities of Maucau and Pampacorral.
This was the start of the Family Greenhouse Project (FGH).

Phasing over: is also part of implementation. As most construction funding comes from
individuals, schools and local governments, phasing over is part of project design. The
scaling efforts of local governments and the establishment of greenhouse funding
requests as accepted by the local intuitions helps assure smooth phasing over.

Phasing out: As projects have trainings that transfer operation and maintenance to
individuals and schools projects are phased out as part of project design and
implementation. For new projects to start without AASD involvement the phasing over
component is key. The program is ran during the summer. While organization members
monitor schools at least on a monthly basis, teachers and care takers continue to take care
of produce grown, teach sustainable agricultural practices to students and the
maintenance of the greenhouses.

2B. Meeting special challenges that are associated with the exit strategy approaches
Knowledge and availability of funding: While knowledge of AASD and
greenhouse initiatives in general has spread. Knowledge of such funding would no longer
be spread by the AASD, this is a limitation. Availability of for funding will be dependent
on local governments, as these change on a regular basis their continuity will dependent
on individuals in office and in the continued visibility of the benefits of such projects and
on continued requests from individuals and schools.
Availability of a variety of trainings: While local governments have expressed
interest in continuing such effects this is dependent on the political cycle and continued
funding.

Monitoring Exit Strategy:

After the implementation of projects the AASD provides training and support
while enable their continuation. They also continue to monitor projects to make sure they
are still running. Upon the ending of the program or organizational efforts in the area,
these efforts would be necessary for a few months and yearly basis dependent on funding
and organizational availability.

Status Indicators:
-Number of greenhouses in continued operations
-% of individual greenhouses being utilized

Organizational and partnership capacity indicators:

-Continued community-government relationships
-Continued community, school and individual interest/organizational efforts in
such projects

Time indicators:
-1 month after building of greenhouses all training are completed
-Continued funding and institutional support from local governments for new
projects years after
organizational efforts have seized.