 I'm Pat Rainey and I'm the Program Support Coordinator for the Livestock and Fish CRP. I have been involved in the gender budgeting exercise that was started off in 2014 as a requirement of a consortium and, by implication, the donor community to make much more explicit our gender budgets and our gender expenditures as well as the outputs associated with the use of that money. An analysis of the 2014 gender budget was undertaken by KIT and it showed that of the roughly $3.5 million associated with any kind of gender work, about two million of that was mainstreamed gender work and the balance, the 1.5, was our strategic gender research. So just about half of our budget is really going towards gender-integrated or mainstreamed work. Implementing or getting the gender budget made explicit and then tracking the expenditures has not been easy without the sort of, I think we could not have done it without the input of the KIT consultancy agreement that we have. Some flagships did better than others. It is a more natural fit for the social science flagship, SASE and the value chain transformation and scaling flagship. Definitely less gender budget and expenditure showed up for the technical flagships. I think going forward, though, we have now, through the KIT consultancy, developed some champions in all of the flagships and hopefully that they will be able to drive that forward and keep the impetus going into phase two. Okay, so going forward into phase two of what will be the livestock CRP, I still think we need to use a bit of a carrot and stick mechanism. Some of that will involve much better and more explicit planning of gender outputs and insisting that they are better articulated. And then for speaking for ILRI, our new program and project management system has a requirement that gender is ticked off or the gender component of any new proposal or concept note must be there or have some kind of good reason not to be there. That needs to be signed off by various program leaders and levels within the ILRI management structure and I think that would help us make sure that gender is included where it can be included. I just want to say that I think that gender budgeting is really where the rubber hits the road. It's very easy to talk about planning for gender and saying that you're going to do gender pieces of research and it will all be gender sensitive but until the money is actually put aside and some accountability is put around explaining that expenditure and coming up with the outputs then it can just remain a sort of a wish or an unfulfilled sort of promise. So thinking about more positive ways to encourage people to integrate or mainstream gender into their research, I think that the livestock and fish CRP put aside some certain proportion of funding specifically for the kit consultancy and the related work with the gender proposals to do that and that seems to have worked very well. I do think though that research institutes need to find specific ways to reward people for producing gender research and then the journals in which gender research gets to be published need to possibly be recognized as better journals.