|Strongly agree (%)||Agree (%)||Neutral (%)||Disagree (%)||Strongly disagree (%)||Qualitative quotes|
|Understanding||43.8||43.0||13.20||–||–||All agriculture related sections are clearly understood.|
No additional cost can be seen as high for goal achievement.|
Budgetary allocation is usually grossly inadequate.
|Acceptability||51.3||38.6||–||10.3||–||The roadmap stratifies and aligns to the ministry.|
|Demand for a roadmap||26.3||73.7||–||–||–||The roadmap address issues on goals, training, employment, and integration.|
Sections or recommendations are likely not be executed (institutional independence, develop indicators). (Staff) well trained to implement them (roadmap). The roadmap is well-articulated, and the programmes contained therein are capable of addressing the identified problem.|
(Implementable) with commitment and political will.
No budgetary allocation or plan. The problem is how these will be sustained.|
The state has many problems to address therefore, choices will be made on which issues to address. This may take longer as funds are limited.
|Integration||37.5||62.5||–||–||–||The roadmap can help the Ministry of Social Welfare to rise up to its challenges.|
|Political buy-in||100||–||–||–||–||Proposal should be sent to the stakeholders for a joint meeting to discuss the roadmap.|