Plant with Purpose: Restoring Ecosystems and Livelihoods

Well, welcome to the All Access Podcast. Uh, I'm excited to have another guest with us today. A couple guests with Plan with Purpose, uh, one of our, our newest additions to our portfolio. Uh, I was telling the guys before this call when we went through our evaluation process this last year, there was a group that. Stood, uh, highly above the rest as far as impact, especially with the, the metric we use and that was Plant with Purpose.

Thank you. No, thank you, Elaine, for letting us be here with you.

Yeah. Well, uh, we'll start with you, millware. Tell us, uh, a little bit about yourself and your role at Plant with Purpose.

Hmm. Yeah, it's a little bit of both in the same, uh, um, I was born in Colombia. I came here to do my grad school in, um, in, uh, molecular genetics with marine mammals. And I, uh, um, I, while I was going to my church, I, there was a group. There was a table about plan with purpose, and I did about flues at that time, flues of plan with purpose.

Awesome.

just like a small version.

Yeah, that's awesome. Miler. I didn't know that about the, the marine biology background. Uh, my, I'm in my background's in the marine space as well in the engineering side, ocean

Oh, I see.

I, when people ask me, what is ocean engineering? I say, well, we design oceans of course. And obviously not true. I, but that's, uh, that's awesome. Milner. Uh, that's really, really cool. Now, Corey. Uh, tell us a little bit about yourself. We've had some fun conversations the last few months, so, uh, yeah, Corey.

Yeah, thanks Lane. Uh, my name's Corey Chin and my formal education was in environmental studies, uh, specifically natural resource management and conservation. And I also studied geography. Uh, but I've been at Plymouth purpose for just over 11 years. I started as an intern, uh, hosting booths and everything, like the one miler visited. And my current role is within the international programs division. I lead our M and EF. Thanks.

Yep. And, uh, so ME monitoring evaluation, I want to dive deeper into that 'cause you guys do it really, really well. And honestly, you're an example to a lot of groups out there and to us as well about how to do that. Well, you've done some really interesting studies, uh, miler. Can you, as far as the, the plan with purpose model and what you guys do, it's really unique. Can you give us a, like an overview of the model?

Yes. Um, yeah, I would say that we are, we're a faith driven, agree, ecological, community centered development organization, right, in which we are. We aim to restore livelihoods and ecosystems by, by working with, uh, small holder farmers in conditions of poverty around the world. So that would be kind of like the. Yeah,

Got it. And.

I can, I can go into what it is, but

Yeah. Well, tell us what it looks like on the ground specific, like, I guess start at the watershed level, which, you know, as I was learning about, you guys had to learn about the watershed model.

Mm-hmm.

what is a watershed? Why a watershed? What that, share more about what that looks like.

Correct. So, so if we, if we're attempting what I said before, we are attempting to facilitate a process of restoration. And we have to take into account that a family or a community is nested within, within a bigger space, within a bigger community. So if you're really aiming to, to be a part of the process of, of restoration, you really need to be, we need to be thinking systemically. So the watershed model attempts to delineate an area, um, big enough.

Got it, got it. Now Corey, at the, uh, with the program itself, you know, so you've got. A reforestation component, a saving screw component, spiritual renewal component. Ag, uh, I'm trying to remember the terms you guys used for it, but like ag component, uh, improved agricultural methods. Uh, tell us I guess more the programmatic level, what that looks like all together with plant with purpose.

Yeah, so, uh, you described it well and I, I think how it works is we use the VSLA. Savings group methodology as a platform, and we provide regenerative agricultural training to those groups as, as well as partnering with, uh, local institutions like the local church, church leaders and schools. And with them we promote, uh, care of creation, peace, and reconciliation. And we have trainings on identity and vocation. And so we have an agricultural curriculum that's called Seeds of Change.

Awesome. Awesome. And I guess we should say a little bit of context of where you guys are working. I know we specifically are, are partnering with you guys and, uh, Burundi, Tanzania, uh, Ethiopia, and the DRC, but you guys are in a few more countries than that, right?

Correct. Yeah. We're currently working in Mexico, Dominican Republic, Haiti, um, at the ones that you mentioned, Ethiopia, Malawi, and Thailand. So a total of nine countries around the world.

Got it. Got it. Yeah, I, um, first I have to say the. I really gained appreciation for reforestation and care of creation in Haiti where I lived, uh, on the border of the DRC. Actually, we had to evacuate through the DRC, uh, when we couldn't make it to the airport. And when you cross the border at the DRC, uh, I'm sorry, Dr. Uh, immediate change in the topography, uh, and it's pretty wild. And obviously there's a. You see the, the poverty level changes as well.

Um, I think it's, I, I think it's worth clarifying if we step back for a little bit, it's worth one of the values. I'm usually kind of careful about. How much time can I take to explain all this kib? So, uh, Elaine, so, so. Mm.

You're good. Take your

Yeah, so I'm being a little, uh, I'm being a little, uh, syn Synaptical. But anyway, all that to say that I want, I, I, one thing that I, that I wanna make sure that we, that we consider a value of plan of purpose is that, uh, we see monitoring, evaluation, and research very much part of programming. We don't see it as an additional component. We don't see it as a, as a, as a luxury. We see it as an integral component of programming.

Yeah.

is, is there's no, there's no this or that. There's the program that is completely merged with, with the concept of, of regulating itself so that we can improve what we do, and so that we will make sure that we are doing what we say that we do without what we hypothesize that we do.

Exactly. Yeah, that's one of the, I mean, it was very obvious in, in, in getting to know Plant with purpose, that connection of, Hey, we're measuring this to see how we can improve. And, uh, I love that. I really encourage other groups to like, Hey, uh, take that on. See monitoring through that lens. Uh, Corey, when we think about, okay, what do we measure to figure out what do we improve?

Yeah, I, I think when you talk about metrics, uh, I think it's important to remember that the metric is no more or less important than the process and method to get that metric. And we like to say that, um. Hm. Bad data is worse than no data at all. So the quality of what you're collecting really is the essence of its utility. But as you know, we really like using MPI.

Mm-hmm.

Um, but we don't just measure and look at MPI. We're interested in socioeconomic conditions changing, and so we're looking at things like income assets, savings amount, uh, we're looking for environmental conditions to change. And so we measure things like agricultural practices, uh, things like conservation, agriculture and agri forestry. And we're also looking for spiritual or social changes. And so we're looking for internal transformation and community cohesion.

Mm-hmm.

And so we're looking at. Not just the number of trees, but the species planted. And all of these are planted voluntarily by farmers. Uh, we look at savings group metrics like amount saved, uh, equity loan utilization, et cetera. And I think these are good examples of things that we don't do ourselves, but we facilitate and they're indicators of the growth that's enacted by the participants themselves.

Lane. Something else that I'd like to add. Kinda like bringing it back to the concept of the watershed model is that, um, we carry out the impact evaluations of the, or the monitoring of what we do, uh, let's say that the hypothetical scenarios that if we work with enough people in a wa in as a watershed, that usually goes anything between 150 to 350 square kilometers and we want to see changes sustained and reflected in, in the whole.

Yeah. Yeah. That's uh. Really fascinating. I'm curious to know what are some of the most interesting things you have learned as far as that the community as a whole, knowing, not everyone went through the program, but that ripple effect, uh, we're the most interesting findings. You guys have learned that, okay, because we did this with this group of people. Now the community as a whole is, is is X, Y, and z. Are there any interesting things that.

I can tell you one thing, and Corey can tell you 10 things, but one thing, one thing that, that I, that it might be obvious, the obvious things are the most difficult to explain, but. Is that when things work, people wanna do them.

Yeah, I think one that comes to mind is, so as Miler stated, our assumption is that if we've achieved a critical mass in a watershed and we've been working there long enough to facilitate change, we expect to see change amongst participants and non participants. And so that's how we, of course, approach our impact measurement.

Nice. Awesome. Well, I'm eager to hear what you guys find out. Uh, I'd love to touch on, uh, you know, when I talk about MPI, so that's a multi-dimensional poverty index. Uh, a lot of people aren't super familiar with that. Um, you guys are very familiar with that. So that was a, a really great connection with us. Uh, what was it about? The NPI, I know you guys have kind of like a modified version of that, but yeah.

Maybe, maybe, uh, if I can start, Corey, I think that, um, we are an organization that we understand the complexity of, of what poverty is. We embrace that complexity. We don't, we don't shy away from it. We don't want to simplify it. When we think about poverty, we don't think about poverty just from a socioeconomic perspective. We're thinking about it from a perspective of relationships and, and dysfunctional relationships.

Got it. Got it.

Maybe, maybe Corey can talk about a little bit about the mechanics or of some specific indicators, but, but as I said, in the essence, it's very much aligned to how we think, how we think the problem is, and how we want to approach.

Right, right. Yeah. I mean, it's what I mean the UN when they define, I have this conversation all the time, especially in the impact investing space about poverty. Uh. And we have to define what that term means. So when I was starting all access and doing this research, you know, that's what the UN is using. When they say 1.1 billion people live in poverty, you know, there's the World Bank number out there as well. But, um, the data behind the NPI is really fascinating.

Yeah, we took the original U-N-D-P-M-P-I methodology and adapted it to try and better suit the rural context specifically. And throughout that process, which was many years ago now. We found a lot of value in, there's some MPI training materials from UNDP that provide best practices for actually modifying and adapting it. They have best practices for indicators, for thresholds and for waiting. And so that was really helpful. And what we came up with is comprised of 12 indicators.

Right.

And we're using the same calculation method where you have not to go too deep, but you have the deprivation threshold for each indicator. You score each household. You come up with households that are quote unquote mult, multi-dimensional, deprived, and then multiply that with the quote unquote multi-dimensional headcount ratio.

Right. Which do you guys, uh, uh. Which is a interesting conversation we've had this past month about the threshold that, one third, you know, if, if they're deprived in, you know, more than a third of these, that counts as multiculturally poor. Uh, those who are less than that are not. We've had to wrestle with the censored versus uncensored headcount. Now we're getting really in the weeds. But how, love to hear Corey, your, uh.

I can't say we have compared sensored versus not sensored we, we do use the sensored deprivation score with one third being the cutoff. Um. Yeah, we haven't, we haven't played around with, with both options. I think you may have gone deeper than we have actually.

Well, I don't know about that, but we, we wrestled with, okay, if, if there's a group, a population out that out there that is. of clean water, uh, in a certain area, but because of certain other things, they may not be deprived in a few of the other ones that are weighted higher, you know, because all 10 of these on the NPI are not weighted the same.

Uh, so we actually, we don't usually use the term RCT even though it, it pretty much is. Um, we, I mean, a DID is part of an RCT. We do a DID everywhere, not just in the DRC. That's our standard methodology now, and the way that we approach that is by randomly selecting treatment watersheds and then randomly selecting control watersheds from a pool of selected eligible watersheds based on community readiness assessments. And so there is a randomization element there.

Yeah, but I think you, you, uh, you clarified it, but. I know you guys did a pretty extensive study there that, uh, I know I think like 37% crop yield improvements and, and so forth. And, um, yeah, I, the, one of the last things I'd love to hear more about, and guys feel free to share more about what you're doing, is the regenerative farming techniques, because that's newish to us, uh, and trying to get a better picture of what that means.

So, so before I, before I can talk a little bit about it, uh, lane, I, I wouldn't, I wanted to say about the whole, the whole, uh, thought process that you're going with your team about. The MPI. Um, though we care about the metric by itself, we care, we, we, we pay more attention to the trends over time. Meaning that, that we, we, and again, this, anytime that you're doing statistics, anytime that you're doing. We, we want to, we want to, we wanna see we're measuring a process over time.

Nice.

What would you, what else would you say, Cory?

No, I have nothing to add to that. That was great.

yeah, miler, you, you, uh, nailed it there. That was really helpful. Thanks for, uh, explaining it's here to, uh, good to hear the word jock mail as well. Um, so yeah, it's, um, I'm just really encouraged by you guys. Thank you for. Uh, going, the lengths that you guys do to, uh, help, you know, my friends in Haiti, uh, look at their, their farming that way.

Thank you

you so much, lane.

All right guys, I'll talk to you soon.