 My name is Ben Lukuyu. I'm an animal nutritionist working for Aurea and I'm based in Aurea Kampala. I'm part of the team that has been developing the FEES tool for the last seven years at Aurea and I've become so passionate about the FEES tool. My role has mainly been to support the training and make sure that the tool is used widely by our partners. FEES tool has increasingly gained importance in its use. It's been used in East Africa, many parts of Africa, Asia and it's a tool that has gained importance due to the fact that it's easy to use, quick and not expensive and rapid. We began to then train us who then put the tool into use and we began to get feedback from all over the areas where we have promoted the FEES tool. One of the main things that we got from FEEST is that it's usefulness. The fact that FEEST can easily, you can easily apply FEEST over one day and you get your results and within a very short time you are able to come up with the reports and you have an idea of the problems, opportunities and potential feed interventions in a particular site where you are working. But also we got feedback about the fact that FEEST is gender blind and it doesn't take into consideration gender issues. The feeds and forages team took this criticism on board and we began to look at options and think of ways on how to engender the FEEST tool and make it better. With the help of the kit team and the gender experts within IRI and also the feed experts we initiated a process to begin to revise the FEEST tool so that it captures or it becomes gender sensitive. I was involved in this team that protested the gender FEEST tool in Tanzania and there are several things that really struck me. One was that we were missing a lot of data out compared to the old version of the tool. For example there were opportunities, there were many opportunities to collect data on disaggregated data on men and women which we missed out on that. There were many other issues around looking at issues around roles who was doing what. There were issues of who is benefiting from the feeds and forages technologies, issues around preferences, issues around problems and opportunities and ranking them and actually looking at the differences of what men prefer and what women prefer, what they consider important and so on and so forth. The striking differences I would see is that women tended to begin to give solutions that would reduce their drudgery because men, women do most of the cause around feeding the cow and even sourcing for that feed and they were much more thinking about technologies that would make those processes easy. Men were thinking about technologies that would increase feed availability for example and hence productivity. So you could see that there was distinct preferences between men and women. That was about the tools themselves but also the other aspect we were looking at was the process of conducting the fees tool and the gender experts also reviewed that process and recommended section areas where we could improve to ensure that we collect data accurately and one of the recommendations was separating groups having separate men and women groups and there I also noticed that there were a lot more discussions particularly among the women themselves who otherwise they would not normally do that from my experiences in the past but even among the men there were good discussions and exchange of ideas among them and coming to consensus over issues within those separate groups and I found that pretty much interesting on the process. So the other aspects we discovered that you've got to be careful about who you are talking to in those groups particularly what roles do respondents play in households and that really determines the kind of feedback or answers that we would get from groups but having said that there is also a challenge the whole process first of all almost double the time that the current fees tool would take and this is because it goes into details of collecting detailed gender information and as a team we are now looking at what options are there or what trade-offs we can take and decide on what needs to be included in the new gender tool and what needs not to be included for the simple reason that we want to make sure that fees retains its usefulness of being able to be used quickly and easily.