DM 2003 Project Implementation PROGRESS REPORT [10/10/2004]

DM 2003 Project Implementation PROGRESS REPORT [10/10/2004] I. Background Information DM Project Number and Title 00729 Getting ready for the market Report Author s Name (if different from Team Leader) Total Award US$ 126,200 Amount Disbursed to Date US$ 75,720 ( 60 % of the Total Award) II. Progress Against Milestones i) List the milestone objectives in the first column as expressed in the Project Agreement. The second column should indicate the current status of each milestone objective. In the third column, please provide quantitative data and qualitative information describing the status of the project against that particular milestone. Milestone Objectives (Copy from the Agreement) Selecting members of the committee and rural groups of producers Status (/ In Progress) Descriptive Information on the Status The Gestalt School of Design (EGD) started courses this year on January 6 th. Two days later a committee of seven members was set up: Joel Olivares, Margarita Acosta, Mariana Acosta, from EGD; Mario Aparicio, Angeles Morales, Angeles Álvarez from University Center of Services to Enterprises (CUSEM) and Arturo Pacheco, the project leader. The Committee held a meeting on January 9 th with local government officials from Office for Economic Development (SDE) and Veracruz Institute for Rural Development (INVEDER) who, during the previous five years, have contacted a great number of rural farmers in need of developing their products. These two groups supplied an initial list of 54 farmers, and advised the Committee to start with more than 30 farmers, instead of 15 for the first period, because the process of getting legal documents and registering trademarks was very slow. So the Committee chose 37 of them, based on product quality, organization level and the amount of design students available. (See enclosed producers data in detail). During the month of January producers were notified by government officials that they had been selected to participate in the project. Only 14 of them went to EGD asking for information. We introduced them to the students of design so they 1

could start doing their job. The rest waited until receiving a confirmation letter. Identifying students and professors to work in the project The EGD Board of Directors decided that undergraduate students of Graphic Design were going to participate in the project, and chose 3 professors as technical advisers: Antonio Pérez, Zenen Montes and Peter rth. Assigning students to producers was mainly done at random. The matching only took into account the students and producers places of origin. Courses at Universidad Veracruzana (UV) started on February 16 th. The UV Board of Directors chose students from Administrative and Social Sciences Faculty (FCAS) to work on the project. Students with the highest grades from varying levels of study were selected. Meetings between students and producers and visiting the rural factories The first general work meeting took place on March 6 th. The session was divided into three parts; 37 teams were formed in the first one, then, all teams got together for an hour and a half. Students asked questions, producers showed their products and they exchanged personal data; then we got together again to ask for their points of view. Most of producers were shy and did not want to talk. One of the program s characteristics was developing regional routes for visiting producers, thanks to the UV who supplied us with a station wagon and a driver. For this part of the program we chose to give priority to those students who initiated their work with us after March 6 th, for the reason that a sense of uneasiness arose when these students compared themselves to the other students who began earlier; the newer students felt they were lagging behind. When we planned out our budget, we thought we wouldn t need to consider expenses for training courses. But we were far from reality. At this stage, it was necessary to hire Mr. Juan José Hinojosa from Mexico City, a professional in rural development business, who gave training sessions for five days to UV students. That was very profitable because students came out with a stronger self-assurance of their knowledge and they took notice of what they could do for rural producers. Work continued to be done during February, March and April. Teams experienced diverse situations, from those who worked nicely since the 2

beginning, to those who couldn t get along well. Some students contacted the team leader to show their progress or to ask for advice and others just to complain mainly about communication problems. Designing packages and getting licences and permits, presentation and correction of designs before peers and tutors As the team leader was talking with producers, he realized that some of them were not happy with the corporate identity that was being designed for them. Others wanted to modify the product name even if they had agreed with it well in advance. Others didn t want to modify the product name even if it was not possible to register it, because it was already being used. One of them had a Disney trademark image and wanted to keep it. Few of them could not afford the expenses of registering trademarks. Others were having internal social problems interfering with the project development. A second general working meeting was held on April 30 th. All the students and 32 producers showed up. The meeting was divided in three parts. The team leader talked about the project activities and the producers about their experiences. It wasn t easy to get them to talk because they are not used to talking in public, so we had to pass on the microphone to each one of them in order to know their feelings about the project. During the second part of the meeting, teams split up to work by themselves; advisors and tutors were closely working with them. So agreements were taken. After that, we all got together again to give final dates over having products names available, trademarks registration, lab tests and bar code acquisition. At this time teams that didn t have products names available were lagging behind, because design students couldn t really continue their tasks. It was something that had to be solved swiftly. Determination of unit price cost and sales price proposal, planning of the manufacture of initial stocks of packages and transportation. Interactive activities between UV and EGD students were a key to success. EGD students came with a list of possible names, the whole team got together to choose the best ones. The UV student had to check names availability and the producer had to choose the final one. By this time, EGD students had the corporate identity image done and approved by tutors and producers; the students just needed to do the final modifications if the name had changed. Then UV students registered both name and image to come out with a registered trademark. 3

Teams had to work in the process of selecting the kind of package and label best suited to the product. They had to take into account the type of package the producer was working with, and the kinds of packages manufactured by enterprises already in the market, so they all had to agree with it. Then UV students had to search package and printed label costs so they could add these data to the per-unit cost of the product and to come up with a total per-unit production cost. Some of them had to switch from glass to plastic, or from bottles to bags in order to reduce costs. Some others worked in the opposite way: some producers decided to go from plastic bags to plastic bottles in order to improve the quality of the product presentation. In these cases tutors worked really close to the team to avoid cost-calculation mistakes. This process was part of the marketing analysis whereupon EGD students based their research on designing aspects and UV students based their own research on prices and sales amounts. EGD students built the first package and label prototypes with technical specifications by mid July, so UV students could continue their production cost analysis per unit. Packing items was seen from a different point of view; EGD students had to build a strong box for transportation, and UV students had to analyze the cost of the box. Most of the teams realized that it was cheaper to increase the cardboard thickness in order to pack for example 36 bottles, instead of 24. We invited two packing technicians from Puebla and Veracruz enterprises to talk to the students about technical characteristics and marketing requirements. Their visits were free of any charge; they even paid their own travel expenses. We also wanted to bring a Costco packing technician from Mexico City, but for some reason it was not possible. We will try this again. The Committee held a meeting on May 3 rd.; it decided to hire Mr. Juan Luis Cordero, a graphic design professional trained in Europe, to give an intensive training course from May 17 to 29. Students worked hard with their projects, then producers came to Xalapa to see the results. Image improvements were done and in some cases students had to redo their work. It wasn t easy, it is a well known fact that artists ego over their work. Twenty five producers were really happy with the images presented so they signed an letter of agreement stating their satisfaction. Those ones who had not already registered their trademarks, made a commitment to do it. 4

Two weeks later, 22 of them were ready for the market, meaning by this that they had all produced their legal and tax documents, registered their trademarks, done laboratory tests, done the bar codes or in process of doing it so, calculated the per-unit product cost analysis, done the marketing research, the corporative image, and getting finally a product with good quality, an attractive label and strong packages. Three more didn t have the bar code yet, but they were about to get it. Organization of a meeting with the participants to deliver the results Having the trademarks was a must for all producers; this process as well as getting bar codes takes about three to four months. For purposes of the project, producers were allowed to show the bank s payment sheet and the applying documents in order to be considered in process. Therefore some design students let the bar code space in blank. Products that needed lab analysis didn t have that choice, High Technology Laboratories (LATEX), a UV enterprise, gave results in three days. So it was necessary to show product ingredients in the labels and the quality standards required by the market. By mid August, twenty teams had finished their work and five more were almost done. We organized a Results Delivery Meeting on August 26 th. By then, 22 teams had already finished their work. Our budget for this period required the payment of 30 scholarships, but we had to pay 44 instead. So we agreed with the students to pay the full scholarship to the first 10 teams to present their products, and the first half of the scholarships to the rest. So they have to wait until October, when we will receive the next payment from DM, to get the other half of the scholarship. Up to date, we have 25 producers ready for the market. We are also working with 8 more in the second period of the project. The Committee decided to organize teams with the available UV students that did the best administrative work during the first part of the project. The advantages of this decision was that students were already trained and had the experience to do the job again. The Committee also decided that 16 of the most advanced design students would work with 8 producers, two to one, they will have to compete to have the right to get into the project. The Committee has to choose the best images. ii) If you did not achieve some of your stated milestone objectives, please explain the reasons. 5

iii) Has your project s overall accomplishments to date exceeded the original plan? If, describe your achievements: We already have 25 producers ready for the market instead of 15 from the original plan. A design student was already hire by a producer to design other products: Legaria Rugerio Triana. An enterprice called JVentura (Abigail Marin, Sales Manager, 2288179716) saw the work done in the project by Iliana Tronco and Juan Carlos Carvajal and hire them to help producers exporting their products. Seven producers already printed packages and labels with the new image: Café Selecto Garrido, Botanas y Garapiñados Bercking, El Barreal, Estropajos Lorett, Joyas el Cofre, Padelma and Faja de Oro. They are already in the market. III. Overall Project Progress i) What have been the main challenges of your project to date? What, if any, adjustments have you made to your original business plan in order to overcome the challenges and meet your objectives? Challenges: Solving Communication problems Adjustments: At the beginning students had communication problems among themselves. We developed a list with everybody s names, e-mail addresses and phone numbers; that helped a lot. We also set up a telephone line especially for the project, so students could make their long distance calls; the line was available from 9 to 5 pm, Monday to Friday. We also distributed prepaid telephone cards among the students. Communication was a key factor. All EGD students were in two classrooms at certain times of the day, so getting in touch with them was quite easy. We established a communication process with UV students in which they all had to give us an e-mail address and were advised to check it every day, even during the weekends. Communicating with producers was done mainly by phone. Some producers had expressed financial difficulties to get their first package stock. We are still searching funds from Fundación Produce de Veracruz A C. ii) Have any of your objectives changed or have you added new objectives since you signed your Project Agreement? If, explain the changes. We are still searching funds in other institutions to help some producers getting the first stock of packages and labels. We think our budget will allow us to help 33 producers to become ready for the market instead of 30. It means increasing the objectives by 10%. 6

iii) Do you have any concerns about meeting your next milestone objectives? If, what are the concerns and how do you plan on addressing those challenges? iii) Although this is an interim report, are there any development outcomes or results of your activities to date that you would like to call attention to? Our producers were invited to the Agro Expo 2004, a regional exposition organized by the State Government. Seven of them presented their products with their new image. iv) Reminder: In accordance with Paragraph 3.1.1 of the Project Agreement, each project team is required to submit a statement of account showing the use of the funds within three months after the last disbursement. As a part of periodical expenditure review exercise, please provide an annex with un-audited summary of expenses during this reporting period. IV. Ancillary Achievements i) Have you or has your organization received any awards/recognitions or media attention as a result of your DM-funded project during this period? If, please specify the sources and identify the names. Local: National: International: Award /Recognition Media e.g. International: BBC News on Dec. 3-4, 2003 Local: Diario de Xalapa on 17/jan/2004 Gráfico de Xalapa on 29/jan/2004 Diario de Xalapa on 29/jan/2004 Universo on 9/feb/2004 Diario de Xalapa on 21/feb/2004 ticable. TV News on 2/may/2004 Diario de Xalapa on 9/may/2004 Universo on 10/may/2004 Diario de Xalapa on 28/august/2004 Universo on 31/august/2004 Gráfico de Xalapa on 28/august/2004 El Dictámen on 28/august/2004 Diario de Xalapa on 11/september/2004 National: International: Explain the Award/Recognition or the Media content: Diffusion of project objectives, development and results. Attach web links/news clips, if available: 7

ii) Has your organization made any new partnerships as a result of this project during this reporting period? If, specify type of the organization from the list below and describe nature of the partnership: Local Government: Institute for Rural Development Office for Economic Development Xico City Hall National Government: NGO: Bilateral Development Agency: Multilateral Development Agency: Private Corporations: Other: e.g. Multilateral Development Agency: Development Marketplace of the World Bank (financial partnership and technical assistance) iii) Sustainability and scalability after completion of the DM fund are top of the DM Team s priorities. Has your organization leveraged new funding or secured future funding during this reporting period? If, provide the following information. Funding Sources: Names of the Organizations: Office for Economic Development (SDE) and Xico City Hall Amounts Funded/Committed: US$ 2,235.00 The Office for Economic Development paid half price of getting bar codes and labs analysis to 7 producers. Xico s City Hall paid half price of mark register to 3 producers. Althougt they paid directly to the offices involved, the amount provided come to around $ US 2,235.00. V. Requests to the DM i) Do you have any comments on the overall process and support provided by the DM Team or Project Liaison? Mr. Jorge Franco, our project liaison was present in all the general meetings we had; he was keeping track of our project, and so after we scheduled our first Results Delivery Meeting, we knew that he was not longer working for the World Bank. The Committee decided that it was necessary to have someone from the World Bank to witness the meeting. We talked to Mr. Bradley Browning in Washington about the video-conferencing possibilities of the meeting. He agreed to be present in the World Bank videoconference room, but a week later he said that it was not possible for him because he was moving to another job within the Bank. For a moment we didn t have any contact with DM but it didn t last long; two days later Bradley introduced me to Amy Lin, his replacement. She agreed to participate in the meeting. Very soon Amy introduced me to Guadalupe Toscano Nicolás our next project liaison in Mexico. It worked well for us, because both of them were present at the meeting. Unfortunately Amy couldn t see the project results exposition because it was held in a different room, but Guadalupe did. She can talk about the producers testimonies of gratitude, and about the great deal of social knowledge and self-assurance that EGD and UV students got with the project. We are proud of that, and we thank DM for giving us the opportunity to be proud of a social work well done and to be 8

able to get services to work for poor people. Annex I. Project Expenses for this Reporting Period Items Sub-Totals (USD) 1 Personnel 37,951.66 2 Materials and Equipment 15,977.96 3 Training 1,877.25 4 Travel 3,645.87 5 Evaluation/Information Dissemination 2,473.61 6 General Administration/Overhead 12,336.19 7 Other 891.63 Total Expenses 75,154.15 9