Final report 20141118

This project is funded by
The European Commission
A project implemented by
HTSPE Limited
Projectfunded by the European Union
Formulation of Annual Action programme
2015
11th European Development Fund
Interventions for Tanzania in the
Agriculture sector
Final Report
Project No. 2014/343611 - Version 1

2
HTSPE Limited
Thamesfield House
Boundary Way
Hemel Hempstead
Herts HP2 7SR
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1442 202400
Fax: +44 (0) 1442 266438
Email: htspe@htspe.com
Web: www.htspe.com
GEOtest a.s.
Smahova 1244/112
627 00 Brno
CZECH REPUBIC
Tel: 548 125 111
Fax: 545 217 979
Email: trade@geotest.cz
Website: www.geotest.cz
S.A. Sopex N.V.
Generaal Lemanstraat, 74
2600 Antwerpen
Belgium
Tel : 03 285 39 88
Fax : 03 285 39 96
Email : sopex@sopex.be
Web: www.sopex.be
This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication
are the sole responsibility of HTSPE Limited and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European
Union.
(5014069)

3
Table of Content
Acronyms...................................................................................................................................5
1 Summary of the assignment................................................................................................6
1.1 Introduction to the Assignment...................................................................................6
1.2 Work programme ........................................................................................................7
2 Key findings and conclusions.............................................................................................8
2.1 General ........................................................................................................................8
2.2 Sustainable agriculture ................................................................................................8
3 Annexe 1 – Enhancing access to market and value additions ..........................................10
3.1 Action Fiche ..............................................................................................................10
1. Identification.....................................................................................................................10
2. Rationale and Context.......................................................................................................10
2.1. Summary of the action and its objective ...................................................................10
2.2. Context, policies and challenges ...............................................................................11
2.3. Lessons learnt............................................................................................................13
2.4. Complementary actions.............................................................................................14
2.5. Donor coordination ...................................................................................................14
3. Detailed Description.........................................................................................................15
3.1. Objectives..................................................................................................................15
3.2. Expected results and main activities .........................................................................15
3.3. Risks and assumptions ..............................................................................................19
3.4. Cross-cutting Issues...................................................................................................20
3.5. Stakeholders ..............................................................................................................20
4. Implementation issues ......................................................................................................21
4.1. Financing agreement .................................................................................................21
4.2. Indicative operational implementation period...........................................................21
4.3. Implementation components and module .................................................................21
4.4. Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement and grants ..................................21
4.5. Indicative budget.......................................................................................................22
4.6. Performance monitoring............................................................................................22
4.7. Evaluation and audit..................................................................................................22
4.8. Communication and visibility...................................................................................22
3.2 Gender Screening Checklist......................................................................................29
3.3 TC/CD Checklist.......................................................................................................31
4 Annexe 2 - Support to food security and nutrition ...........................................................35

4
4.1 Action Fiche ..............................................................................................................35
5. Identification .................................................................................................................35
6. Rationale and Context..................................................................................................35
6.1. Summary of the action and its objective...........................................................35
6.2. Context, policies and challenges.........................................................................36
6.3. Lessons learnt ........................................................................................................39
6.4. Complementary actions.......................................................................................39
6.5. Donor coordination ..............................................................................................40
7. Detailed Description ....................................................................................................41
7.2. Expected results and main activities.................................................................41
7.3. Risks and assumptions.........................................................................................43
7.4. Cross-cutting Issues..............................................................................................44
8. Implementation issues ................................................................................................44
8.1. Financing agreement ............................................................................................44
Indicative operational implementation period.........................................................45
8.2. Implementation components and module.......................................................45
8.3. Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement and grants ....................45
8.4. Indicative budget...................................................................................................45
8.5. Performance monitoring.....................................................................................46
8.6. Evaluation and audit.............................................................................................46
8.7. Communication and visibility.............................................................................46
4.2 Gender Screening Checklist......................................................................................52
4.3 TC/CD Checklist.......................................................................................................54
4.4 Social cash transfer Checklist ...................................................................................58
5 Annexe 3 – Minutes of consultation meetings .................................................................68

5
Acronyms
AAP Annual Action Programme
AF Action Fiche
ASDS Agriculture Sector Development Strategy
ASR Agriculture Sector Review
DFID Department for International Development
DHS Demographic Health Survey
EU European Union
EUD European Union Delegation
GAIN Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition
GIZ German International Cooperation
HDDS Household Dietary Diversity Score
HFIAS Household Food Insecurity Access Scale
HLSCN High Level Steering Committee on Nutrition
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
JAST Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania
JIR Joint Implementation Review
MDG Millennium Development Goals
NAO National Authorising Officer
PANITA Partnership for Nutrition in Tanzania
PCU Programme Coordinating Unit
PMO Prime Minister’s Office
REACH UN Nutrition Coordination Mechanism
SUN Scaling Up Nutrition

6
TASAF Tanzanian Social Action Fund
TC/CD Technical Cooperation/Capacity Development
UNDP United Nations development Fund
VAM Vulnerability Analysis Mapping unit of WFP
WASH Water and Sanitation and Hygiene
WFP World Food Programme
1 Summary of the assignment
1.1 Introduction to the Assignment
The aim of this assignment is to formulate a comprehensive Annual Action programme
(Action Fiche and Annexes) in the areas of agriculture, rural infrastructure and nutrition in
specific locations of Tanzania to be funded under the 11th EDF – AAP 2015.
Based on the 2 Project Identification Fiches (Enhancing access to market and value chain,
Support to food security and nutrition), the assignment is to support the EU Delegation and
the Government of Tanzania/ National Authorizing Officer in assessing and formulating
different options based on the needs and challenges of targeted areas and populations and
preparing the necessary documents for launching the 2 Actions. The requested documents for
each identified Action are:
 Action Fiches
 Gender screening checklist
 TC/CD Checklist
 For the Nutrition Action Fiche the Social transfer Checklist
The Mission has provided also:
 AF Infrastructure – The EU Contribution Agreement with IFAD: Annex 1
Description of the Action
 AF Nutrition – The EU Contribution Agreement with WFP: Annex 1 Description of
the Action
The results should be in line with the Government policies and strategies and more
particularly with the Tanzania Agriculture and Food Security Investment Plan (TAFSIP-
2011)1
, and the 11th EDF NIP relevant focal sector and the Agenda for Change2
.
The Assignment started the 30/06 with a kick off meeting at the EU delegation and an
Inception meeting (02/07) during which the Inception report has been discussed and the
programme has been settled. The duration of the assignment has been 3 weeks (19 working
1
http://agrilinks.org/sites/default/files/resource/files/Tanzania%20Second%20Draft%20Summary%20TAFSIP.P
DF
2 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/documents/agenda_for_change_en.pdf

7
days). The Sundays have been used for internal travels and internal meetings for the
preparation of draft Action Fiches and Annexes 1.
Throughout the assignment, the Consultant has used quantitative and qualitative methods to
conduct analysis and reach recommendations. The experts deployed a participatory approach,
involving beneficiaries and all stakeholders concerned more specifically the WFP staff (HQ
and Dodoma) and the IFAD staff (HQ and Arusha). The work of the experts and the outputs
produced are in line with the principles that are governing EU's international aid policies and
the government strategy.
1.2 Work programme
ML JFB AvdH
Phase 1 – Assignment preparation (Home Based). 4 4 4
Desk study. Preparation of the Inception Report
(Sunday 29/07) - Travel to Tanzania
Phase 2: Desk study and Field work (in country) (30/06-18/07) 19 19 19
Monday 30/06 - Briefing with EU Delegation and proposal to organise a Steering Group
Setting up work plan and interview schedule in consultation with the EUD
Wednesday 02/07 - Presentation and discussion on the Inception report. It has been
decided that for each EU Intervention, the Mission will prepare a draft “Action Fiche” and
the “Annexe 1 to the contribution agreement between the EU and Partner Organisation –
Description of the Action”.
Interviews with WFP, IFAD, DfID, REACH, GAIN, VAM
Definition of geographical coverage and organisation of field visits in selected areas
Field visit in selected areas. A one week (06-13/07) field visit took place in Dodoma
(WFP sub office) to investigate the food security and nutrition status. Meetings and field
visits took place in Dodoma and Singida regions followed by a consolidation meeting and
an extensive debriefing session with the WFP Sub office team followed by a debriefing at
the WFP HQ Monday 14/07. During the field visit the Mission was accompanied by a
WFP programme officer. Three days dedicated with the IFAD PCU (Arusha) for
discussions and field visits followed by two days in Dodoma for field visits and
consolidation/debriefing with the IFAD/PCU.
Week 3 - Thorough desk study and consultation with Government officials (PMO
Secretariat), NGOs (Concerns, IrishAid, World Vision, Africare, GAIN, REACH) farmers
and agro processors association, Development Partners (UNIDO, AfDB, DfID) and other
relevant stakeholders.
Synthesis of options: Internal team meetings have taken place to discuss and consolidate
options. A first draft of Action Fiches has been proposed to the EU delegation (14/07) for
Comment (15/07). This has been followed by the drafting of the Annexe 1 to the

8
Contribution Agreement – Description of the Action for each proposed EU intervention.
Friday 18/07 – Debriefing at the EU Delegation. Presentation of the two Actions (AF and
Annexes 1). Revision of the drafts based on comment from the EU Delegation.
(21/07) - Official documents sent to the EU Delegation by HTSPE
(Saturday 19/07) - Travel from Tanzania
Phase 3: Synthesis and report writing (Home based 8 7 7
(04/08) - Comment from the EU Del on the AFs and Annexes 1
(14/08) - Final Report (Summary of the Assignment, Key findings and recommendations,
AFs and Annexes 1, Minutes of the Meetings)
TOTAL 31 30 30
2 Key findings and conclusions
2.1 General
The Phase 1 work gave an overview of:
 The agriculture sector in Tanzania and the main challenges existing in the field of
agriculture development in relation to the proposed fields of intervention.
 The existing policies, programmes and important projects as well as the on-going
donor activities in the fields concerned.
 The other focal sectors (Rural infrastructure, Food security and nutrition) as they
relate to agriculture and the potential synergies.
 The main potential private sector and civil society players in the region and their field
of intervention.
 The ways the EU can support the proposed identified interventions in the framework
of the AAP2015/11th EDF (2014-2020).
The Phase 2 proposed a ready to use Action Fiches (Infrastructure and Nutrition) including
relevant annexes and the Annexe 1 to the Contribution Agreement with the relevant
organisation – Description of the Action for both identified EU intervention. The two sets of
document have been drafted in close coordination with the relevant organisations which
should be in charge, and based on extensive programme of meetings and field visits in the
targeted areas.
The Phase 3 provided this Final report and final proposed Action Fiche and Annexes for both
identified EU interventions.
2.2 Sustainable agriculture
The identified EU interventions within the AAP2015/11th EDF “Enhancing access to market
and value chain” and “Support to food security and nutrition” are part of the Focal Sector 3 –
Sustainable Agriculture. Focus on development of productive infrastructure and food

9
security in the agriculture sector within selected Regions and targeted areas should be
developed in synergies with the concept of green economy. Processing of agricultural
products (including job creation, professional training, and innovation) as well as promotion
and facilitation of trade in processed products should be given considerable attention.
Application of climate change adaptation measures should be part of any Action related to
sustainable agriculture.
Employment and Social Protection: Focus on interventions that can contribute to
employment generation and bringing the informal sector within a more real economy. The
sector will target also the most disadvantaged population groups (women, youths) for social
protection.
In line with the Government of Tanzania ongoing policies and reforms, consolidating the
nexus between sustainable agriculture, rural infrastructure, food security and nutrition
will be expected to boost production, storage, handling, transformation, distribution and
marketing of agricultural products and increase the income generation of smallholder farmers
from subsistence to commercial oriented farming.
Actions to be developed within the Sustainable Agriculture development sector should
support climate change mitigating measures to ensure an environmentally sustainable
growth of the sector. Farming practices should be improved in order to increase nutritional
resilience and also to introduce new crops and technologies that reverse potential negative
impacts on the environment and the climate. Adapted capacity building, extension work and
transfer of technology in favour of agricultural producers, service providers, and relevant
local authorities and farmers associations will contribute to the implementation of the
National Climate Change Policy.
The Mission has also identified the following key issues which have been taken into account
in the drafting of the document
 Market Infrastructure
o Integrated approach for construction and rehabilitation of rural infrastructure:
o The role of the Community Based Organisations:
o Sourcing the road fund and its management issue
 Food security and Nutrition
o The lack of accurate and updated food security and nutrition data necessary for
planning and monitoring
o The necessity for WFP to invest in agriculture expertise and staff at regional
and central levels

10
3 Annexe 1 – Enhancing access to market and value additions
3.1 Action Fiche
ANNEX 2
of the Commission Decision on the Enhancing Access to Market and Value Chain
Programme
1. Identification
Title/Number Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
CRIS number 2014 /037-446
Total cost Total estimated cost: EUR 15,0000,000 (2.4% of IP)
Total amount of EDF contribution: EUR 15,0000,000
11th European Development Fund (EDF)
Aid method / Method of
implementation
Project approach –Joint management with International Fund for
Agricultural Development (IFAD)
DAC-code 43040 Sector Trade Development
2. Rationale and Context
2.1. Summary of the action and its objective
The overall objective of the Programme to contribute to improving livelihoods of people
living in rural areas through generation of agricultural wealth and increase of smallholder
farmers’ income. The purpose is to support the development of an enabling agriculture
market environment in Tanzania (Mainland and Zanzibar). The Programme will support the
delivery of two interconnected Components (rural infrastructures, capacity building),
ensuring maximum impact on poverty reduction. It will foster the key principles of ownership
and partnership development at the Local Government Administration and Non State Actors
levels. The Programme is designed to support social inclusion and human development

11
through better access to market and promoting sustainable agriculture and natural resources
management.
2.2. Context, policies and challenges
Country context: The United Republic of Tanzania, comprising the Mainland and Zanzibar,
is an influential member of the East African Community (EAC), which also includes Kenya,
Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi. In 2012 and into 2013, the Tanzanian economy expanded at
an annualized rate of approximately 7%. The main drivers of Tanzania’s rapid economic
growth continue to be a small number of fast growing capital intensive sectors, particularly
communications, financial services, construction, manufacturing, mining and retail trade. The
service sector recorded the highest rate of annual growth in 2012, at 8.0%. By contrast,
labour intensive sectors, particularly the agricultural sector, in which approximately 80% of
households are primarily engaged, recorded an average annual growth rate of only 4.2%.
Poverty - Tanzania’s ranking in UNDP’s Human Development Index3 improved marginally
from 0.370 in 2005 to 0.398 in 2010. Still, poverty remains high suggesting that, despite
impressive macroeconomic achievements and sustained economic growth over the past
decade, there has been very little impact on the incomes and well-being of the rural poor.
Available evidence points to the weak redistributive aspect of growth, especially the weak
linkages with rural areas where the majority of the population lives. Poverty remains
predominantly rural (37.4% of the population) due largely to low agricultural growth caused
by drought, low marketing power and poor agriculture infrastructure and equipment. These
developments suggest that the MDG target of halving abject poverty by 2015 may not be
achieved4.
National development policy: The 2001 Agricultural Sector Development Strategy
(ASDS) objective was to achieve a sustained agricultural growth rate of 5% per year
primarily through the transformation from subsistence to commercial agriculture. The
transformation was to be private sector led through an improved enabling environment for
enhancing the productivity and profitability of agriculture. The implication is for policy and
public expenditure to be a means of inducing private sector investment in the agricultural
sector. The ASDS contributes to both the growth and poverty reduction objectives of the
National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty and to the Tanzania
Development Vision (TDV) 2025 which envisages raising the standard of living of
Tanzanians to a typical medium-income country through ensuring food security, improving
incomes and increasing export earnings. The medium term development goals are outlined in
the National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty - MKUKUTA II/MKUZA II
(2011-2015)5, which focus on broad clusters: i) growth and reduction of income poverty; ii)
improvement of quality of life and social wellbeing; and iii) governance and accountability
(MKUKUTA II) and i) growth and reduction of income poverty; ii) improvement of social
services and wellbeing; and iii) good governance and national unity (MKUZA II). The
strategies are fully linked with the Millennium Development Goals, results-based
management, and count on the contributions of all sectors to growth and poverty reduction.
The target is a real growth rate of 8% for 2015, setting the foundation for a higher growth of
10% from 2016 to 2025. To achieve these objectives the Government focuses on five key
priority areas: infrastructure, agriculture, industry, human capital and tourism.
3 http://countryeconomy.com/hdi/tanzania
4 http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/country/home/tags/tanzania
5 http://www.tzdpg.or.tz/external/national -development-framework/national-development-framework.html

12
In the context of the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program (CAADP),
Tanzania adopted in 2011 an Agriculture and Food Security Investment Plan (TAFSIP)
(2011-2021)6 to achieve the CAADP target of 6% annual growth in agricultural GDP.
TAFSIP aims to be the financing mechanism and framework for implementing the
Agricultural Sector Development Strategy through the Agricultural Sector Development
Programme. In fact it is well anchored to, and aligned with, other agricultural strategies. In
the context of the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition7, G8 members committed
agricultural financial and technical support within the priorities of the CAADP/TAFSIP. This
support has been designed to increase responsible private sector investment in agriculture in
line with Tanzania’s overarching ‘Kilimo Kwanza’ (“Agriculture First”) vision8. Within
the CAADP/TAFSIP, the Southern Agriculture Growth Corridor initiative (SAGCOT)
was launched in 20119 as a "public-private partnership" (PPP). The partnership brings
together commercial and public sector actors, as well as local and international organisations
working with agricultural value chains to develop “clusters” of profitable farming and
processing businesses, allowing small, medium and large farmers to share the benefits of
scales and access to infrastructure. In line with SAGCOT, the Big Results Now (BRN)10 is
Tanzania’s latest initiative to transform the country into a middle-income economy focusing
on six priority sectors including agriculture. Growth in agriculture GDP is to be driven by a
combination of small scale farming models and large scale commercial farming. Increased
smallholder income is to be achieved through smallholder aggregation with a strong emphasis
on infrastructure development, notably warehouses and small scale irrigation schemes.
According to the Agricultural Sector Review 2006 by the Tanzanian Ministry of
Agriculture, Food Security and Co-operatives, existing taxation (e.g. high corporate tax,
import duties on agro-processing equipment) discourages the production of food crops in
general and for the market in particular. The National Agricultural Policy 2013 (NAP 2013)
aims at addressing challenges that continue to hinder the development of the agricultural
sector. A more conducive policy environment is required for effective participation of all
actors in the sector in order to tap existing capabilities and potentialities so as to revitalise the
development of the sector. There is a policy shift towards increased investment in agriculture
and greater involvement of the private sector in the production and provision of support
services to the farming community. The existing legal and regulatory framework does not
provide the necessary provisions to ensure the development of a modern, efficient and
competitive sector and under NAP 2013 agricultural related laws, legislations and regulations
will be review, harmonization and formulated. Tanzania is party to various regional
integration and trade affiliations such as the East African Common Market which became
operational in July 2010 and will position Tanzania to participate in a market with a
population of 126 million, providing opportunities for tariff free market access and less
stringent sanitary and phytosanitary requirements.
Agri Infrastructure Sector context - policies and challenges: All agriculture related
national policies emphasize the importance of rural infrastructure development, particularly
the need for passable feeder roads, adequate rural energy, efficient communication and
post-harvest and marketing infrastructure, all of which are essential for agriculture
growth. More particularly the MKUKUTA II is targeting (i) increased rehabilitation of rural
feeder roads connecting agricultural areas to trunk roads by 50% by 2015; and (ii) scaled up
6 http://www.gafspfund.org/sites/gafspfund.org/files/Documents/TAFSIP_FINAL_FOR_PRINTING_AND_CIRCULATION.pdf
7 http://feedthefuture.gov/lp/new-alliance-food-security-and-nutrition
8 http://www.policyforum-tz.org/files/ReducingpovertythroughKilimoKwanza.pdf
9 http://www.sagcot.com/
10 http://www.africa-platform.org/resources/tanzanias -big-results-now-initiative

13
storage and agro-processing facilities to enhance value chains. Similarly, Kilimo Kwanza
identifies improved infrastructure as one of its pillars, including market centres, storage and
agri-processing facilities and increased access to input and produce markets. The AfDB11
report 2010 and the WB12 Tanzania Country Economic Memorandum 2012 – Concept
Note identify the most critical constraints for inclusive economic rural growth as: 1) land
tenure, access rights and management, 2) poor infrastructure, 3) financing the agriculture
sector and access to credit. The report notably highlights that agriculture remains the
dominant sector in the country's economy. It is also recognised that agricultural programmes
have failed to have any notable effect on smallholders due to the fact that Development
Partners’ initiatives remained project based, highly geographically focussed and relatively
disconnected. Increased institutional support for agriculture, particularly through
strengthening the Local Government Administration, is necessary and the institutional
framework of agricultural development must be strengthened alongside rural infrastructure,
market access, and rural credit. Improving income generation opportunities through the
agricultural sector mainly lies in addressing the sector needs and constraints such as the
competitiveness, production and marketing costs. The problems to be tackled can be
summarised under the following issues: i) restricted market access for local producers and
businesses; ii) scarce availability of financial services; iii) limited service delivery
capacity at district, and local government levels; iv) and lack of entrepreneurial and
business skills for local producers and businesses. These main issues are being considered
as the basis for the Action and are in line with the NIP 2014-2020 which identifies linking
farmers to processing and markets as part of the Focal Sector Sustainable Agriculture.
Furthermore they are in line with the EU Agenda for Change13 and particularly the focus on
inclusive and sustainable growth, as the Action will impact on sustainable agriculture and
enhance the business environment through promoting small and medium enterprises and
cooperatives.
2.3. Lessons learnt
Reducing aid fragmentation: To contribute to the ongoing effort to reduce fragmentation of
the sector, EU funded interventions need to foster synergies and collaboration with other
agencies and, where possible, build on existing successful programmes. EU support to the
ongoing Marketing Infrastructure Value Addition and Rural Finance Programme (MIVARF)
is considered as an opportunity to contribute to an integrated country-wide programme that
combines hard and soft investments. Rural infrastructure sector development is
recognised as having a clear impact on food security and economic growth; this has been
highlighted in the evaluation of the EU Food Facility initiative. However rural infrastructure
management and maintenance through public funding is a recurrent issue that needs to be
addressed through technical and institutional capacity building support for Local Government
Administration and Village communities. Focus on Local Government Administration
and Community Based Organisations: The Agriculture Sector Development Programme
(ASDP) Impact Assessment Report for the infrastructure component highlights that, because
of the wide geographical coverage, investments have been thinly spread, and the approach
has not been conducive to expanding agricultural production and value added in the sector.
The report recommends that in future support should be more strategically targeted towards
Local Government Authorities (LGAs) with high agricultural potential, including at least one
crop with good marketing potential, and aligned with other development opportunities
11 http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Publications/WORKING%20105%20%20PDF%20d.pdf
12http://www.worldbank.org/en/region/afr/
13 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/documents/agenda_for_change_en.pdf

14
identified for these areas. Limited capacity of stakeholders/Focus at Local Government
Administration and community level: The DFID funded African Community Access
Programme14 (2008-2014) and other rural infrastructure projects have found that in Tanzania
Local Government Administrations face significant capacity constraints in the planning,
implementation and maintenance of public works. Shortages of staff, frequent staff turnover
and limited availability of transport are particular issues. Capacity building for engineering
and procurement staff and contributing to transport costs will go some way towards
alleviating this problem. Infrastructure maintenance budgets, particularly for feeder roads, are
inadequate and projects such as the African Community Access Programme have found that
well trained and equipped Community Based Organizations can be effective for rural access
maintenance. Strengthening community ownership and responsibility: Most rural
infrastructure development projects (USAID, DANIDA, AfDB) have found that community
consultation and mobilization prior to any infrastructure development is essential to
strengthening community ownership and long term sustainability of works.
2.4. Complementary actions
The EU is supporting in partnership with other institutions the rehabilitation of road
infrastructure and the development of energy infrastructure in key SAGCOT "clusters. The
10th EDF Rural Roads Programme implemented in Iringa, Rovuma, and Morogoro region is
creating opportunities to build synergies towards increased connectivity of feeder roads, rural
roads and main trunk roads enhancing access to inputs/outputs markets. The Action
complements efforts achieved under the EU Accompanying Measures for Sugar, which has
contributed to the development of small scale infrastructure (feeder roads) for out-growers
schemes. The EU Food Facility initiative has clearly demonstrated the positive impact of
rural infrastructure development on food security. Related to the 11th EDF, the Action has the
potential to complement the planned EU Support on Food Security and Nutrition programme
(AAP 2015). Member States such as UK (DFID) and Ireland (IrishAid) are participating
actively in the rural infrastructure sector development through the SAGCOT, BRN and
ASDP funding. DFID is providing £25M for the programme ‘Improving Rural Access in
Tanzania’ (2013-2017) delivered through the Tanzania Roads Fund Board and Local
Government Authorities. The use of labour based road construction methods is encouraged.
IFAD through the Marketing Infrastructure Value Addition and Rural Finance
(MIVARF) support is a key player in promoting warehouse receipt schemes, market linkages
and processing through support to capacity building and development of appropriate
infrastructures, as well as improving rural financial inclusion through capacity building of
existing financial institutions that provide services in the rural area. This programme is co-
funded with AfDB. USAID is providing support for planning, feasibility assessment, detailed
design, procurement support and construction supervision activities for two irrigation
schemes, Dakawa and Mgongola, including improved market access through rehabilitation
and maintenance of rural feeder roads. In addition, through Feed the Future, USAID is
supporting rice, maize and horticulture value chains in a number of regions. JICA is
providing support to ASDP particularly through technical and financial cooperation for some
120 small scale irrigation schemes and capacity building for rice industry development.
2.5. Donor coordination
The agriculture sector is coordinated through the Stakeholders Agriculture Consultative
Group Meetings which are held on a quarterly basis. The group is composed by Development
Partners (DPs), line ministries, NSA and academia's representatives. Development Partners
14 http://afcap.org/SitePages/Home.aspx

15
meet on a monthly basis within the Agriculture Working Group15 to share information and
agree on common positions for policy dialogue with the government on implementation of
the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS), priorities and plans. The annual
Agriculture Sector Review (ASR/PER) is expected to be carried out during last quarter 2014
and first quarter 2015; in parallel the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS) is
being reviewed and updated for the next coming years 2014-2020. Coordination mechanisms
in place are also being reviewed and streamlined to strengthen a sector approach role and the
leader ship of Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives, including recently
launched initiative such as BRN.
3. Detailed Description
3.1. Objectives
The overall objective of the Action is to generate wealth and to increase income and
livelihood of the rural population. The purpose of the Action is to increase access for
smallholder farmers to the input/output market through the development of rural
infrastructures (feeder roads, storage and agri-processing facilities, collection centres, market
facilities) and increased capacities of Local Government Administration and Community
Based Organisations.
3.2. Expected results and main activities
The Action is expected to contribute to smallholder farmers' food security and income
increase through better access to markets, storage facilities and value addition for their
commodities. Infrastructure investments are expected to have a direct positive impact on
quality, postharvest losses, transport cost, and access to better prices.
Strategy - The Action will build on activities developed through the MIVARF Programme
(2011/2018 - 125M Euro). MIVARF’s target group is low-income women and men in all the
rural districts/LGAs of the Mainland and Zanzibar who have a potential to improve their
productivity and incomes, as well as the food security of their households. It covers 72
districts in 29 regions of Tanzania Mainland and Zanzibar with three components: (1)
Marketing infrastructure; (2) Rural finance; and (3) Programme coordination. Criteria used to
prioritizing districts and wards include: (a) high incidence of poverty, food insecurity and
degree of vulnerability; (b) existence of smallholder farmers, small entrepreneurs and
artisans; (c) effective involvement of women and female headed households and other
vulnerable groups; (d) active participation of the private sector/NGOs/CBOs to enhance
public private partnership (PPP), commitment to community-driven development and
livelihood-based and gender-sensitive poverty reduction; and (e) entrepreneurship and market
potential. Districts compete for inclusion in the Programme. All districts submit proposals
(based on District Development Plans, which draw on village and ward plans), to the regional
offices where they are evaluated on the basis of the eligibility criteria and prioritised.
Successful proposals are forwarded to MIVARF, where they are reviewed by the PCT to
ensure that they meet eligibility criteria. MIVARF interventions take market demand as a
starting point, focusing on existing agribusiness and products with a high national or regional
demand, and helping smallholder groups match supply to the buyers’ requirements through
facilitating market information and improved policy environment. Participants in MIVARF
are also assisted to link up with existing larger enterprises under contract farming and out-
grower arrangements.
15 http://www.tzdpg.or.tz/index.php?id=952

16
At present MIVARF limits funding of feeder roads to 30-35km per district for full
rehabilitation of roads to gravel standard, including all necessary structures. There is no
ceiling on costs, but MIVARF works on the basis of an average cost of USD 30,000-35000
per km, depending on site conditions. For other types of infrastructure, each district is limited
to construction of one warehouse and one market, and rehabilitation of up to two warehouses.
Most proposals request only roads and warehouses. The budget limit is USD 200,000 for a
1,000 ton capacity warehouse and up to USD 400,000 for market facilities. There is also
provision for renovation and reequipping post-harvest training centres in some regions at a
cost of USD 40,000-50,000. For capacity building of producers and processors and market
linkages in each district by a Service Provider, the budget is USD 80,000/year for 3 years.
The rural finance components are more challenging as financing is based on Institutional
Business Development Plans prepared by various micro finance institutions participating in
Programme implementation. Infrastructure related investments are directly paid from donors
to contractors or by the coordination unit depending on contract amount. Districts receive
limited funds, disbursed on a quarterly basis, for supervision of marketing infrastructure and
other Programme components. The entry point for Programme intervention is the Region,
which has a MoU with the Programme. A MoU between the Region and the district
provides a basis for all activities being implemented at district level. Districts are monitored
on their adherence to what has been agreed in the MoU and evaluated in terms of what
support they provide to Programme activities. As no funds are provided directly to districts
for implementation of activities, evaluation is straightforward. For cost effectiveness,
MIVARF promotes a wide choice of service providers from both the public and private
sectors to work with the Programme. It is building the capacity of the private sector to
compete for service provision contracts in order to reduce dependence on public funding.
Under the programme MIVARF, private sector participation and commercial incentives are
seen as keys to sustainability of interventions. Activities are implemented mainly by farmer
groups (CBOs), warehouse managers, collaborating commercial banks and SACCOS, and
private sector partner agencies recruited through a competitive bidding process by the
Districts with support from the Programme Coordination Team
The proposed EU intervention will focus on MIVARF’s Component 1 which has the specific
objective to enhance rural incomes and food security through improved market access, and
increased skills of small-scale producers and processors. The EU Contribution will scale up
the MIVARF Programme impacts though investment in rural infrastructure (feeder
roads, post-harvest facilities, collection centres) and capacity building for Local
Government Administrations and Community Based Organisations. As added value, the
EU intervention will be integrated into the ongoing MIVARF implementation procedures,
focusing on areas where value chain and access to finance activities re being implemented but
short of financial resources for infrastructure. Following existing MIVARF procedures, the
EU intervention will use government institutional arrangements and planning systems in
order to enhance sustainability and strengthen alignment with government priorities. Drawing
on District Development Plans, which incorporate District Agricultural Development Plans,
LGAs in selected regions will propose packages of interventions for areas that: (i) have a
high incidence of poverty and food insecurity, but which have at least one major crop that
produces (or has the potential to produce) a surplus for marketing; and (ii) have smallholder
farmers and small entrepreneurs willing to be facilitated to increase their livelihood incomes.
LGA staff, with support from MIVARF, will procure contractors for construction, and will
ensure that Community Based Organisation, including women’s groups, are actively involved
in the design, implementation, operation and maintenance of the assets, ensuring their long
term sustainability. Service Providers will provide support in each participating district,

17
empowering small-scale farmers, traders and processors through assisting the formation of
cohesive groups, providing them with organisational, entrepreneurial and technical skills, and
facilitating access to markets and financial services.
The expected results are twofold: i) Results 1 - Smallholder access to input and output
market is improved through rural infrastructure (feeder roads, post-harvest facilities,
collection centres and market facilities); ii) Result 2 – Smallholders, Local Government
Administrations and village communities have the capacity for efficient infrastructure
maintenance and market linkages
Selection of target areas: currently 29 regions are planned to benefit from soft activities
(capacity building and access to finance) while only 23(18 mainland and 5 in Zanzibar) out of
the 2916 will benefit of hard activities (infrastructure investments) due to financial
availability constraints. Based on the selection criteria previously mentioned and availability
of EU resources, EU support will focus on two neighbouring regions: Mtwara and Lindi.
Mtwara and Lindi regions are: a) adjacent to one another; b) they are considerably poorer
than the other regions (20% poor/ 28.5% borderline food consumption in Mtwara and 5.3%
poor/ 28.5% borderline food consumption in Lindi); c) there is potential for developing value
chains for cashew nuts, sesame and rice; d) the Aga Khan Foundation (with DFID funding
and EC funding) is already supporting smallholder cultivation, value chain post-harvest
operations and marketing in a range of crops such as horticulture, sesame and rice; and e)
MIVARF has, or is planning, activities in three districts in each of the region, whereas only
two districts will be covered in Kagera, Kigoma, Mara and Tabora. EU intervention will be
an integrated package of infrastructure combined with community development, supported by
Local Government Administration.
The Action will focus on two integrated Components:
Component 1 - Rural Infrastructure improvement
Act. 1.1. Rehabilitation of feeder roads connecting local communities to markets and
essential social services facilities. It is expected to rehabilitate 350 km of feeder road, if
possible, using Labour Based Technology. Where an adequate local workforce is available
labour based, rather than machine based, rehabilitation is recommended in order to provide
wage earning opportunities for people in poor areas. Added benefits are that local people and
Community Based Organisations (CBOs) will be involved in the rehabilitation, acquiring
skill for routine and periodic maintenance of the road and building ownership on the assets.
Act. 1.2. Rehabilitation or construction of storage and agri-processing facilities, collection
centres and market facilities at village community level and/or district centre level. It is
expected that 20 facilities, identified as priorities in District Development Plans, will be
rehabilitated or constructed. At each site, a Community Based Organisation will be involved
in the design preparation ensuring possible management and ownership of assets.
Component 2 – Capacity building for rural communities and Local Government
Administration
Act. 2.1. Support a management system for the sustainable maintenance of the rehabilitated
feeder roads developed through training and engagement of Community Based Organisations
living along the rehabilitated feeder roads and Local Government Administration. It is
expected that the District council will sign a memorandum of understanding ensuring
16 Kagera,Kigoma, Mara, Tabora, Mtwara , Lindi are not covered by infrastructure component

18
continuing funding through the District Road Fund budget for the Community Based
Organisation contracted for the routine maintenance and minor repairs.
Act. 2.2. Support a management system for the sustainable maintenance and management of
the storage and processing facilities, collection centres and market facilities, developed
through Local Government Administration and Community Based Organisations
mobilisation process. Farmers will be expected to pay membership fees to the CBOs that will
cover the operation and maintenance of the facilities. Linkages between facilities and
microfinance sector (warehouse receipts) will be facilitated. The Warehouse receipt Act
no.10 of 2005 supports the participation of smallholder producers in agricultural commodities
trade, access to bank credit and the reduction of post-harvest losses. The Act provides the
legal foundation for farmers and traders to obtain credit from lenders through the use of
Warehouse Receipts when they deposit their produce in a licensed warehouse. Support will
be provided to facilitate the implementation of warehouse receipts systems to make the
system more accessible and usable by farmers. This will include workshops at regional and
district level to create awareness amongst government staff, farmers, SACCOS, commercial
banks and other actors on the benefits of WRS.
Act. 2.3. Support the ongoing training programme for smallholder farmers and processors to
facilitate access to information and knowledge on market, new technologies and agricultural
best practices. The aim will be to work with groups of rural men, women and youths with a
common interest through existing CBOs. Training topics will include group management
skills, post-harvest technology and value addition, marketing skills and accessing market
information, accessing and using credit, improved agricultural techniques and best practice,
natural resource management and climate change adaptation measures. If, and when
necessary, youth and women will be provided with foundation courses or literacy training in
order to participate effectively in the training programme. The Act 2.3 will organise
awareness campaigns on issues such as HIV/AIDS, climate change adaptation and
environmental management.
Act. 2.4. Local Government Administration training to support governance initiatives, such
as District Development Plan preparation, development, and monitoring with the aim to
reinforce the link between Local Government Administration and local communities in terms
of rural infrastructure management and value chain development funding. The LGA planning
process is intended to be a bottom up procedure with inputs from communities, village
committees and ward committees feeding into the District Agricultural Development Plans
and District Development Plans. At present the procedure is often poorly implemented due to
lack of resources and data, and delays in the system. The EU intervention will work with
LGAs and communities to identify community priorities and ensure that District plans take
them into account. Prime Minister Office staff at central and local levels will be involved in
training and in monitoring and guiding activities. Specific training will be provided to
upgrade the technical skill of, amongst others, engineers, procurement staff and environment
officers at district and regional level.
Support to Programme management: The Programme Coordinating Unit based in Arusha
is adequately staffed for the current workload apart from the engineering and procurement
staff who are overextended as there are too few staff to provide LGAs and communities with
the level of support needed. Support through the EU intervention to the Programme
Coordinating Unit will be reinforced with additional technical engineering and procurement
capacities to be based in the target areas to ensure the efficient and on time delivery of Action
results.

19
The Action will contribute to key policies and plans of the government: i) the Kilimo Kwanza
(Agriculture First), notably the fourth pillar: financing incentives for private-sector
investment, industrialization, and infrastructure development; ii) the Comprehensive African
Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) efforts and national investment plan
focusing on food security and infrastructure and trade related development; and iii) the
recently launched Big Results Now (BRN) initiative, to boost results in the agriculture sector,
notably promoting trade, and private sector investment through investment in rural
infrastructure and smallholder aggregation.
3.3. Risks and assumptions
Risks Mitigation measures
The rural infrastructure
rehabilitation works do not result
in significant impact in market
access for small and isolated
farmers and farmers’ groups
(medium).
The prioritization process for the infrastructure investments will be
designed (see section 3.2) to ensure the highest possible returns in terms
of facilitating physical access to market for smallholders’ farmers. Rural
infrastructure shall combine feeder roads, storage processing and
collection facilities.
Limited capacity and skills at
district level may lead to delays
and poor quality work (high)
Adequate support and capacity building will be provided through training of
district engineers and procurement staff, and, where necessary, use of
contractors for preparation of detailed design and supervision of works.
The District annual budget from
the Road Fund may be inadequate
for all routine and periodic
maintenance needs of upgraded
/rehabilitated roads, which would
jeopardize their sustainability.
(high)
Community Contracting will be encouraged for routine road maintenance
and minor repairs. Local Government Authorities will contract Community
Based Organizations from villages near the roads. The Community Based
Organizations will be trained in road maintenance, provided with basic
equipment and paid a set rate for the work, which will cost less than
employing private contractors. Periodic maintenance will remain the
responsibility of the District
Gender issue are not taken into
account during the implementation
phase (medium)
To ensure that women and other vulnerable groups are not side-lined, the
Action will make certain that all community activities include a high
percentage of people from these groups and that they are included in wage
earning opportunities. The EU intervention will ensure that the views and
concerns of women and other vulnerable groups are addressed in community
meetings and proposals. They will be provided with training in leadership,
improved agricultural techniques and businesses skills, and assisted to link
to credit facilities and markets. Possibilities for new high value niche
products that women producers might control better will be explored.
MIVARF has a target of at least 40% of beneficiaries of group activities to
be women and FHHs and this will apply to the EU intervention also. Special
consideration will be given to their needs by, for example, adjusting the
timing of activities to fit in with child care and other duties.
Assumptions: i) Government continues its support for a policy, regulatory, and institutional
framework that enable agricultural value chains to become stronger; ii) Project ensures close
coordination of activities between stakeholders through regular monitoring and effective
management of the project steering committee; iii) Discontinuity in institutions’
representatives does not hinder the implementation of the Project in the framework of the
agreed governance system; iv) There is a high level of coordination between government
institutions and with Development Partners; v) The Government of Tanzania continues its
commitment to the fight against corruption, improving transparency and strengthening
accountability through the media and civil society.

20
3.4. Cross-cutting Issues
The gender division of labour in the agricultural sector assigns the larger part of agricultural
work to women who traditionally lack access to land and other production and marketing
inputs. Women often lose control over agricultural produce when marketing is formalised or
value addition takes place to yield higher and more regular incomes. There is the risk,
therefore, that improved marketing and value addition that withdraws food crops from family
consumption might increase household incomes without substantially increasing family food
security and improving nutrition. The socio-economic empowerment of women and other
disadvantaged groups will be enhanced through improving their access to markets,
appropriate financial services, training and income earning opportunities such as work on
roads. MIVARF already has an established minimum quota of 40% for women membership
of participating groups, committee positions, and training opportunities. This will be applied
to EU funded activities also. Principles of good governance have been taken into account
with the view of promoting an enabling economic environment that can be implemented by
local institutions and private sector. Through activity 2.4, the EU intervention is directly
aimed at enhancing good governance at Local Government Administration level by
improving capacity and strengthening accountability of the public sector and involvement of
Non State Actors in action planning. Activity 1.1 aims at rehabilitating feeder road networks
and not extending them, therefore the impact on the environment should be minimal.
Nevertheless, the Programme will conduct environmental impact assessment, including
preparation of the associated environmental and social management plans (ESMPs), during
the road design process. Through the Activity 2.3 the EU intervention is expected to enhance
positive environmental outcomes by the promotion and adoption of improved and sustainable
farming practices through an integrated (value chain) approach. HIV/AIDS infection is a key
element of the poverty situation in Tanzania. Although there has been a decline in HIV
prevalence in the 15-49 years age group from 7.2% in 2004 to 5.5% in 2008, the decline has
been slower for females than for males. An estimated 1.8 million people in Tanzania are
living with HIV/AIDS. The impact of HIV is likely to be more severe in the rural areas
considering the lower access of rural people to potable water, sanitation and health facilities.
Through Activity 2.3, campaigns will be carried out to increase awareness of HIV/AIDS in
rural areas where access is improved through road rehabilitation. The Action shall ensure that
HIV/AIDS sufferers are not discriminated against and are able to participate in all activities.
Nutrition: Feeder roads providing better access to markets, health care, education and other
social services will enable women to access information (activity 2.3) that will help them
provide better nutrition to their children.
3.5. Stakeholders
The beneficiaries for the Action are: i) smallholder farmers; ii) farmer groups and women’s
groups, small and medium sized agribusinesses associations and Community Based
Organisations, which will enhance economies of scale for further infrastructure investment
and maintenance; iii) LGAs that will benefit from capacity building and some additional
resources. Key stakeholders are Districts Local Government Administrations that are facing
significant capacity constraints in planning and execution of public works. The challenges in
procurement, financial management and supervision are recognised and the EU intervention
shall enhance ongoing efforts in planning and implementation of socio-economic
development programmes at District level. At central level important stakeholders are PMO
and line ministries involved in the Programme Steering Committee. Other stakeholders are
actors involved in the agricultural value chain including input suppliers, producer and market
groups, crop processers, traders and financial service providers.

21
4. Implementation issues
4.1. Financing agreement
In order to implement this action, it is foreseen to conclude a financing agreement with the
partner country, referred to in Article 17 of Annex IV to the Cotonou Agreement.
4.2. Indicative operational implementation period
The Operational implementation period of this Action, during which the activities described
in sections 3.2 and 4.3 will be carried out starts from the entry into force of the Financing
Agreement and will have duration of 48 months subject to modifications to be agreed by the
responsible authorising officer in the relevant agreements. Closure phase of a duration of 24
months starts from the expiry date of the operational implementation phase. Contracts are
intended to be signed within the first 12 months following the signature of the Financing
Agreement. The European Parliament and the relevant Committee shall be informed of the
extension of the operational implementation period within one month of that extension being
granted.
4.3. Implementation components and module
Indirect Management with an International Organisation. Component 1 and Component 2
with the Objective of “increasing access for smallholder farmers to market links and value
chain addition” may be implemented through indirect management by the International
Agricultural Development Fund (IFAD) in accordance with Article 58(1)(c) of Regulation
(EU, Euratom) No 966/2012. As justification, IFAD is currently implementing the MIVARF
Programme, co-financed with AfDB, and the Government (125M€). MIVARF is a country-
wide17 integrated Programme combining hard and soft investments, notably construction or
rehabilitation of feeder roads, markets and storage facilities, as well as capacity building for
Local Government Authorities and CBOs toward access to finance and improved
management of rural infrastructures to facilitate the establishment of sustainable market
linkages and support to market information system. The IFAD would under this present
Action further support the improvement of livelihood of smallholder farmers in selected
target areas through the rehabilitation and development of rural infrastructure (feeder roads,
storage and processing facilities, collection centres, and market facility) ensuring a better
access to the market and strengthening the technical and institutional capacity of smallholder
farmers’ organisations and Local Government Administrations. The Contracting Authority
is the Ministry of Finance/National Authorizing Officer (NAO) of the EDF. The overall
responsibility for the implementation of the Programme lies with the NAO, who may request
the Commission to implement service contracts under Article 19.c.4 of Annex IV to the
revised Cotonou Agreement. The Prime Minister Office is the implementing agency, under
the existing Programme Coordinating Unit. The MIVARF Programme Steering Committee,
chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Office, is responsible for
providing policy guidance to the Programme, approving work plans, reviewing activities,
procurement and finance, and ensuring that all agencies represented on the Committee
understand and fulfil their obligations.
4.4. Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement and grants
N.A.
17 Tanzania, Mainland and Zanzibar

22
4.5. Indicative budget
The budget available to implement the action is detailed here below.
The MIVARF budget from IFAD is USD 77.6M for activities in the 72 districts of 29
Regions. This covers producer empowerment USD19.7M, grassroots MFI support
USD23.0M and rural financial systems development USD34.9M. In addition, USD9.0M will
be met through the contributions of GoT, the districts/LGAs, beneficiaries and others.
4.6. Performance monitoring
Monitoring will be performed by IFAD in collaboration with the Programme Coordinating
Unit. Monitoring covers baseline survey18, monitoring plan and reporting. For monitoring
purposes the Action’s logframe matrix includes indicators disaggregated by sex. Adequate
resources will be made available to ensure that sex-disaggregated data can be collected for
monitoring/evaluation. The EC may carry out Results Oriented Monitoring (ROM) via
independent consultants. Where possible, any monitoring visits should be timed to be a joint
mission with IFAD/AfDB joint review missions which take place twice yearly in
February/March and August/September.
4.7. Evaluation and audit
Provision is made for a mid-term and final evaluation to be carried out by external
consultants. Government administration auditors will undertake yearly internal audits of
programme disbursements, applying international internal audit procedures and controls
including pre and post-payment audits.
4.8. Communication and visibility
Communication and visibility of the EU is a legal obligation for all external actions funded
by the EU. This action shall contain communication and visibility measures which shall be
18
Very little baseline data is available at present. The IFAD Joint Implementation Review of MIVARF, March 2014, was
critical of the type of information collected to date and recommended that Service Providers revise their surveys to focus on
the farmer groups and value chain actors that will participate in the Programme.
Component/Module ,000EUR Third party
Indirect management with IFAD 14.000 0
Component 1 – Improvement of rural infrastructures 10.000 0
Component 2 - Capacity building for rural communities on value chain
development
3.700 0
Evaluation and Audit 200 0
Communication and visibility 100 n.a.
Management by EC/NAO n.a.
Evaluation and audit 200
Contingencies 800 n.a.
Totals 15.000 0

23
based on a specific Communication and Visibility Plan of the Action, to be elaborated before
the start of implementation and supported with the budget indicated in section 4.5 above. The
measures shall be implemented either (a) by the Commission, and/or (b) by entrusted entity
(IFAD). Appropriate contractual obligations shall be included in, respectively, financing
agreements and delegation agreements. The Communication and Visibility Manual for
European Union External Action shall be used to establish the Communication and Visibility
Plan of the Action and the appropriate contractual obligations.

24
Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
Logical Framework Matrix
Project description Objectively verifiable indicators of
achievement
Sources and means
of verification
Assumptions
Overall
objective
To generate wealth and to increase
income and livelihood of the rural
population
Human Development Index UNDP Human
Development Index
Report
Programme
purpose
To increase access for smallholder
farmers to the input/output market
through the development of rural
infrastructures (feeder roads, storage and
agri-processing facilities, collection
centres, market facilities) and increased
capacities of Local Government
Administration and Community Based
Organisations
% increase in agricultural production
in selected targeted areas
% increase in agricultural produce
marketed
Intervention
Baseline survey and
Programme Progress
Reports
National statistics
Government retains
stance on rural
economic
development policies.
Continued
government
investment in rural
infrastructure
Continued general
economic growth
Expected
results
R1 - Smallholder access to input and
output market is improved through
construction/rehabilitation of rural
infrastructure
At least 30 CBOs participate in
design and social consensus-building
workshops.
At least 350 km of feeder roads
improved through local contractors.
At least 20 storage and agri-
processing facilities, collection
Programme reports
District and Region
reports and statistics
Traffic counts before
rehabilitation and at
intervals after
rehabilitation
Capacity of District
councils not impaired
by high staff turnover
Adequate support
from relevant
ministries and local
government
authorities

25
centres and market facilities
improved/constructed
50% Increase in the numbers of
vehicles & people using feeder roads
and reduced travel costs
25% Increased value of marketed
produce
Market surveys
R2 - Smallholders, Community Based
Organisations and Local Government
Administrations have the capacity for
efficient infrastructure maintenance and
market linkages.
During the intervention, increased
number of women associations
participating in the capacity building
training programmes
At least 350 km of feeder roads are
maintained in good conditions by
CBOs through contract with Districts
Constructed and upgraded storage and
agri-processing facilities, collection
centres and market facilities operated
and maintained effectively
numbers of men and women/ farmer
groups using improved technologies
numbers of men and women/ farmer
groups having improved marketing
skills, and using market information
skills
At least 20 SACCOs are providing
adequate financial support to rural
Programme reports
Service provider and
INGO reports
Training reports
District and Region
reports and statistics
Participatory
assessments

26
communities
At year 4 of the intervention, % of
women benefiting from the SACCOs
Activities
Means Indicative costs Assumptions
Component 1 - Rural Infrastructure
improvement
Act. 1.1. Contract civil work for
rehabilitation of feeder roads connecting
local communities to markets and
essential social services facilities
Act. 1.2. Contract civil work for
construction / rehabilitation of storage
and agri-processing facilities, collection
centres and market facilities at village
community level and/or district centre
level
Districts identify feeder roads for
rehabilitation following MIVSARF
criteria. MIVARF committees ensure
criteria are followed. CBOs formed
along selected roads to ensure their
involvement in works. District staff
procure contractors and supervise
works. Capacity building for District
engineers and procurement staff
provided Programme and INGO
Districts identify storage facilities etc.
for construction/upgrading following
MIVARF criteria. MIVARF
committees ensure criteria are
followed. Capacity building by INGO
and Service Providers starts for CBOs
which will operate and maintain
infrastructure. District staff procure
contractors and supervise works.
Component 1.
Budget - Rural
infrastructure
improvement:
10.0M€
Act.1.1. Road
rehabilitation 8.75
M€.
Act 1.2. Storage and
agri-processing
facilities, etc. 1.4
M€.
District staff will
supervise contracts
and report on
progress.
Information on
progress will be
provided by regular
Programme site
visits and reports,
and reports from

27
INGO.
CBOs concerned
with operation and
maintenance of
infrastructure will be
asked to report on
activities and
problems.
Component 2 – Capacity building for
rural communities and Local
Government Administration
2.1. Support the management system for
the sustainable maintenance of the
rehabilitated feeder roads developed,
through training and engagement of
LGA and village community based
organisations living along the
rehabilitated feeder roads
2.2. Support the management system for
the sustainable maintenance and
management of the storage and
processing facilities, collection centres
and market facilities.
2.3. Provide training to smallholder
farmers and processors to improve the
business enabling environment and to
facilitate access to information and
knowledge on market and new
technologies and agricultural best
Rehabilitated feeder roads are
maintained by CBOs through contract
with Districts. CBOs are trained by
MIVARF and District engineers with
assistance of INGO. CBOs are
provided with sets of tools. District
engineers monitor and supervise
works.
Capacity building for CBOs for
operation and maintenance of
facilities provided by INGO and
Service Providers.
Training of farmers provided by
INGO and Service Providers overseen
by MIVARF.
Component 2.
Budget - Capacity
building for rural
communities on
value chain
development: 3.8M€
Act. 2.1. Feeder
road maintenance
0.59M€
Act. 2.2. Operation
and maintenance of
storage facilities etc.
0.12M€
Act. 2.3. Training
for farmers,
agricultural
processors etc.
0.15M€
Act. 2.4. LGA
training 0.96M€
Districts have
adequate funds for
periodic maintenance
(e.g. regravelling) and
major repairs of feeder
roads, and can fund
routine maintenance
in the long term.

28
practices.
2.4. Provide training to LGA to
a) support governance initiatives, such as
planning, policy development,
strengthening of monitoring with the aim
to reinforce the link between LGA and
local communities in terms of rural
infrastructure management and value
chain development funding. b) upgrade
the technical skill of engineers,
procurement and other technical staff.
Training to support planning, policy
development, monitoring etc.
provided by INGO together with
MIVARF staff.
Upgrading of skills of technical staff
provided by MIVARF engineers and
procurement specialist.
Information on
progress will be
provided by regular
Programme site
visits and reports,
and reports from
INGO.
Participatory
assessments by
MIVARF will
ensure farmers and
community groups
are able to express
their views on
activities
Support to Programme management
3.1. Provided additional technical full
time/part time staff (engineering,
procurement, supervision) to support the
PCU and ensure the efficient and on time
delivery of Results.
One engineer and one procurement
specialist will be added to MIVARF’s
PCU. An INGO will be contracted to
oversee and strengthen the capacity of
MIVARF Service Providers working
with farmers and CBOs.
 Act. 3.1.:
1.05M€
 Programme
reports

29
3.2 Gender Screening Checklist
Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
Gender Equality Screening Checklist (GESCf)
Has a full-scale gender analysis been done during the formulation stage?
Comments: The Gender Equality assessment has been made through discussions with key
partners of the proposed Action (IFAD Office Arusha, field visits community based
organizations (Kongwa District) and reports (Statement from 59th
Session of the
commission on the status of women-Feb 2012, http://tz.one.un.org/index.php/core-
commitments/gender ) analysis
Yes  No x
Have gender equality issues relevant to the project been identified?
Comments: The gender division of labour in the agricultural sector assigns the larger part of
agricultural work to women who traditionally lack access to land and other production and
marketing inputs. Women often lose control over agricultural produce when marketing is
formalised or value addition takes place to yield higher and more regular incomes. There is
the risk, therefore, that improved marketing and value addition that withdraws food crops
from family consumption might increase household incomes without substantially
increasing family food security.
Yes x No 
Are the gender equality issues identified supported by reference to the partner
government’s/EC’s policy commitments to gender equality?
Comments: The 1977 Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania (Articles 12 and 13)
guarantees equality between men and women and supports their full participation in social,
economic and political life. Gender equality and women’s empowerment also forms a
major component of the National Poverty Reduction Strategies (MKUKUTA II in
Mainland and MKUZA II in Zanzibar) under the goals on governance, education and
health. However, the country ranks 125th out of 155 countries on the Gender-related
Development Index for 2009. The 2008 Gender Empowerment Measure puts Tanzania at
48th place out of the 108 countries measured. And while Tanzania is on track to reach the
MDG target on gender, high drop-out rates for girls, and gender parity in secondary and
tertiary education remain a concern. As well, maternal mortality remains high and the
burden of HIV is still heavy, with higher infection rates in women than men.
Yes x No 
Are the statistics used for project formulation disaggregated by sex?
Comments: Most of the statistical data are not disaggregated by sex. However, a
monitoring system will be put in place that will provide data disaggregated by sex based o
a baseline survey to be conducted at the start of the Action.
Yes  No x
Has qualitative information on gender equality issues been used in the project formulation
stage?
Comments: Qualitative information has been issued based on the desk study phase and
more during the field visits and discussions with rural communities and local government
administration staff.
Yes x No 
Has the logframe been engendered?
Comments: A specific focus on gender will be included under the Component 1&2 of the
Yes x No 

30
Action. Specific indicators on gender are incorporated in the Programme Logical
Framework Matrix.
Do the management systems established by the project respect the principles of gender
equality and equal opportunities?
Comments: The current management system of the Programme implemented and
coordinated by IFAD in which the Action will participate is respecting the main principles
of gender equality and equal opportunities for the Programme management.
Yes x No 
Have all factors potentially affecting the sustainability of gender equality actions been
thoroughly addressed?
Comments: The Component 2 of the Action has the aim to empower women and youth in
the maintenance and management of the rural infrastructure through Community Based
Organization strengthening. The Programme will ensure that women and youth are part of
the decision making process. If, and when necessary, youth and women will be provided
with foundation courses or literacy training in order to participate effectively in the training
programme
Yes x No 

31
3.3 TC/CD Checklist
Title/Number Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
implementation
Project approach – Joint management with International Fund for Agricultural
Development (IFAD)
DAC-code 43040 Sector Trade Development
Country Tanzania
Programme Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
Total Amount of the Programme 15 million Euro
TC/CD support component (if a separate
component)
No specific component
If yes, amount of the TC/CD support
component
Short description of the TC/CD component (if
not included in the Action Fiche)
Purpose(s) of the TC/CD support
More than one option possible (see section 2.2 and 4.1 of the Guidelines)
1. Capacity development: comprehensive approach that addresses a w ide set of
constraints in one or more organisations and w hich is linked to clear performance targets.
□ Main objective
□ Secondary
objective
□ Not an objective
2. Providing policy and/or expert advice (normally of short term duration). □ Main objective
□ Secondary
objective
3. Support to implementation of projects/programmes. It may include activities as
planning, management, supervision or direct gap filling. The support focuses directly on
□ Main objective
□ Secondary

32
"getting things done". objective
4. Preparation/facilitation of EU cooperation (or broader donor cooperation). Includes
feasibility and preparatory studies, facilitation of dialogue betw een EU and partners,
facilitation of programme development etc.
□ Main objective
□ Secondary
objective
Please add comments about the purpose of the TC/CD support if relevant (see pages 10-12 of the Guidelines):
1. Fit to the context and existing capacity
See section 3.2 of the Guidelines
1.1 Are there critical constraints in the context w hich could make
CD support ineffective and impede achieving the purpose of the
support? If yes, how w ill they be addressed?
Context constraints can include weak governance arrangements in
the sector, limited incentives for civil servants to perform, or limited
effective priority of the area in national politics, etc. See page 22-23
of the Guidelines.
Conversely, are there opportunities in the context w hich could
make CD support more effective ?
No there are no critical constraints that
could make CD support ineffective. The EU
intervention will be implemented through
the ongoing IFAD/AfDP funded MIVARF
Programme, which already has considerable
experience of CD. The EU intervention will
enable the recruitment of additional staff
and an INGO to provide the technical
support needed to cover the CD
requirements for LGA staff, Service
Providers, CBOs and other stakeholders.
1.2 Has the existing capacity of the concerned partner(s)
organisation(s) been assessed? Is it confirmed that the
objectives and the scope of the CD support match the existing
capacity to lead, manage and absorb the support?
See page 23-24 of the Guidelines.
The capacity of concerned partners,
including MIVARF, LGAs and Service
Providers, has been assessed and CD
recommendations are appropriate.
1.3 How have similar programmes and types of CD support w orked
in the current context? Please indicate w hich, if any, and w hy
they have been successful. See page 22 of the Guidelines.
MIVARF started in 2011 and has
successfully undertaken a range of capacity
building activities.

33
2. Adequate demand, commitment and ownership from the country partners
2.1 How have key stakeholders demonstrated demand for CD
support, beyond reacting to proposals from the EU or
consultants?
The CD requirements have been identified
and formulated jointly with MIVARF staff
and concerned governmental partners,
including LGAs.
2.2 How have the country partners lead or participated in the design
of CD support, beyond formal consultation and endorsement of
proposals and other requirements?
See page 16 of the Guidelines.
NAO and PMO representatives support the
CD recommendations in the proposal.
3. Clear link to results and expected outcomes
3.1 Are results and/or outcomes defined beyond w hat the CD
support w ill deliver? Please give examples of key targeted
results at the level of enhanced capacity of organisation(s), if
relevant outputs that the organisation(s) produce or at the
level of outcomes.
See page 30-36 in the Guidelines, including figure 4 and 5.
MIVARF is undertaking baseline study that
will identify supplementary CD needs.
3.2 Have the country partners' inputs, w hich are required to
sustain the results of the programme, been identified and
specified?
Resources can include staff, managers, involvement of senior
staff and leaders, facilities and logistics. See pages 15-17 in the
Guidelines.
Yes, at Regional and District level.
3.3 What innovative forms of CD support have been considered,
e.g. regional sources, staff exchanges or netw orking?
See Box 25 on page 38 of the Guidelines.
Not considered – but MIVARF organizes
visits for stakeholders to sites where
activities are particularly successful.

34
4. Harmonized support
4.1 Has CD support from other donors in the sector been screened
to ensure complementarity w ith that proposed by the EU? Have
other main donors been consulted on the proposed CD support
and have they endorsed the proposal?
DFID activities have been screened and
assessed through their various operations
in the road and infrastructure sector.
4.2 Which synergies and harmonisation options have been explored
w ith country partners and other donors? If no harmonisation is
possible at this stage, w hich steps w ill be taken to ensure that the
CD support from the EU w ill be harmonised w ith other donors’
interventions in the future?
Synergies and harmonisation options have
been assessed and supplementary actions
have been worked out such as support to
LGAs for ensuring efficient monitoring
and management of the infrastructure.
5. Appropriate programme implementation arrangements
See Chapter 5 of the Guidelines
5.1 Briefly describe the Project Implementation Arrangement. Will
country partners lead and manage the programme? Is primary
accountability of the programme appointed to domestic
stakeholders?
IFAD is already working closely (jointly)
with LGAs. All CD activities will be
channeled through governmental services.
5.2 Will civil servants w orking in the programme receive topping-
up (salary supplements, special allow ances etc.) funded by
the EU? Are they linked to clear performance targets? If these
incentives are not follow ing government regulations, w hich
steps w ill be taken to align them, diminish any negative
distortion and/or abandon the use of donor-funded topping-
up?
See page 14 and pages 43-51 in the Guidelines.
There will be no topping-up.
The only support will come in the form of
assistance towards LGA costs for
implementing and supervising activities at
district level – transport costs etc.
5.3. Given the nature of the programme and of the expected
results, explain its level of integration in the broader structure
The programme is carried out with full
implementation of national and regional

35
or its level of autonomy.
See page 46-47 in the Guidelines.
structures.
5.4 Are the EU’s and/or other donors’ role in the governance of
the programme limited to oversight functions?
See page 47-50 of the Guidelines
The implementing partner MIVARF/PCU
will be bound to the responsibilities etc. as is
laid down in the agreement that will be
signed with the EU.
4 Annexe 2 - Support to food security and nutrition
4.1 Action Fiche
ANNEX 2
of the Commission Decision on the “Support to Food Security and Nutrition Programme”
5. Identification
Title/Number Support to Food Security and Nutrition
CRIS number 2014 / 037-445
implementation
Project approach – Indirect management with World Food
Programme (WFP)
DAC-code 52010 Sector Food Security
6. Rationale and Context
6.1. Summary of the action and its objective
The overall objective is to improve food and nutrition security, and ultimately reduce the
high stunting rate in Tanzania. The specific objective is to promote diversification of food
production, awareness and access to nutritious food and enhance women empowerment in the
Dodoma and Singida Regions. The Programme will support the delivery of three
interconnected Components (i) Knowledge and Information, ii) Social transfer for targeted
groups and iii) strengthening and capacity building of key stakeholders. The programme will
work through district health facilities, Non-Government Organisations and Community Based
Organisations. Key partners of the Programme are government Regional and District
agencies, more particularly nutrition officers and Non-Government Organisations and
Community Based Organisation active in the sector.

36
6.2. Context, policies and challenges
Country context: In 2012 and 2013, the Tanzanian economy expanded at an annualized rate
of approximately 7%. The main drivers of Tanzania’s rapid economic growth continue to be
a small number of fast growing capital intensive sectors, particularly the communication and
financial services, construction, manufacturing, mining and retail trade sectors. The service
sector recorded the highest rate of annual growth in 2012, at 8.0%. By contrast, labour
intensive sectors, particularly the agricultural sector, in which approximately 80% of
households are primarily engaged, recorded an average annual growth rate of only 4.2%.
Poverty - Tanzania’s ranking in UNDP’s Human Development Index19 improved marginally
from 0.370 in 2005 to 0.398 in 201020 (159/187). Still, poverty remains high21 suggesting
that, despite impressive macroeconomic achievements and sustained economic growth over
the past decade, there has been very little impact on the incomes and well-being of the rural
poor. Available evidence points to the weak redistributive aspect of growth, especially the
weak linkages with rural areas where the majority of the population lives. Poverty remains
predominantly rural as high as 37.4% of the population due largely to low agricultural growth
caused by drought, low rainfall and lack of and/or poor agriculture equipment and
productivity, low marketing power. These developments suggest that the MDG target of
halving abject poverty by 2015 may not be achieved. Nutrition - Tanzania has made progress
in many health indicators over the past decade, but not in nutritional status. According to the
2010 Demographic and Health Survey (DHS 2010)22 stunting rate was 42% of the under-
five children, and was only 2% lower than five years before. According to the DHS 2010,
stunting rates in rural area were 44.5%23 and 31.5% in urban areas .The highest level of
stunting was found in Dodoma District with a level of 56.0%. The burden of stunting in
Tanzania ranks third in Sub-Saharan Africa, after Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of
Congo. Tanzania is not on track to achieve the MDG 1 target to reduce underweight by one-
half by the year 2015. The nutrition situation of adolescent girls and women in Tanzania is
also alarming. About 30% of women are deficient in iron, vitamin A and iodine, 20% of
women are anaemic and 10% of women are undernourished. Malnourished adolescent girls
and women are more likely to give birth to low birth weight infants, who malnourished in
childhood and later life will transfer under nutrition to the next generation. The high levels of
stunting in the country, affecting over three million under-five children, constitute a
silent emergency. Food security - The food security situation in Tanzania is directly linked
to the availability and access to food, the food diversity situation and the Water, Sanitation
and Hygiene (WASH) situation. In many districts the food insecurity situation is either
chronic or temporary depending on the availability of food but also the access to sufficient
and diversified diet. The high stunting rates nationwide are not only caused by general food
insecurity but also due to a poor WASH situation and poor behaviour attitudes of mothers.
Improving the food and nutrition security situation is a combination of improving feeding
practices, improving behaviour practices, improved and diversified food production,
improved WASH situation.
National Food security and Nutrition development policy: The signing up to the ‘Scaling
Up Nutrition (SUN)’ movement24 in June 2011 and the recent Presidential "Call to Action
in Nutrition" on May 16th 2013, highlights commitment from the highest levels of
19 http://countryeconomy.com/hdi/tanzania
20 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
21 http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/country/home/tags/tanzania
22 http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR243/FR243[24June2011].pdf
23 Figures from DHS survey 2010. Stunting and wasting rates are expresses in -2SD and stand for global rates.
24 http://scalingupnutrition.org/

37
government to focus on nutrition as a national priority. Tanzania is a member of the SUN
Movement Lead Group25. Within the SUN movement initiative, the government has
established a High-Level Steering Committee for Nutrition, which is convened by the
Prime Minister’s office and involves representatives from nine key ministries, development
partners, UN agencies, civil society, faith-based organisations, academia and business. With
the support and participation of this Committee, the government finalised its National
Nutrition Strategy26 and is now working to complete a corresponding financial
implementation plan. The government is placing strong emphasis on decentralisation to
ensure that nutrition is on the agenda at district and ward levels. Advocacy on nutrition issues
with Regional Commissioners has been undertaken to ensure they are sensitised on the need
to take action on nutrition. In addition, nutrition officers are being recruited and nutrition
budget training is being provided at the district level. With support from the UN nutrition
coordination mechanism (REACH)27, the government is undertaking a mapping exercise to
increase understanding on how to best align all actors who have a role to play in scaling up
nutrition, and ensure they can work together as efficiently as possible. The Permanent
Secretary to the Prime Minister’s Office who is also SUN Government Focal Point chaired
the High Level Steering Committee on Nutrition (HLSCN) as a multi-stakeholder
platform. The SUN Government Focal Point is responsible for coordination, advocacy, and
resource mobilization for scaling up nutrition. The HLSCN operates within and leverages
existing government systems and dialogue mechanisms for developing cooperation, such as
the Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania (JAST) and the Food Security Thematic
Group within the agriculture sector, which promote national ownership and enhance
effectiveness. A Council Steering Committee on Nutrition has also been established at
district level chaired by the Executive Director and has full inclusion of all stakeholders,
including representatives of relevant departments, UN agencies, civil society and private
sector. Currently, collaborative advocacy efforts between the civil society-led Partnership
for Nutrition in Tanzania (PANITA)28 and the government are underway to raise
awareness on the importance of nutrition and solicit action. Launched in August 2011,
PANITA includes over 230 civil society organization (CSO) members working on nutrition-
specific interventions across Tanzania with nine zonal coordinators. The National Nutrition
Public Expenditure Review of 2014 made a detailed review showing that only 0.22% of
government expenditure was allocated to nutrition in FY 2012/13 and therefore few activities
have been carried out to implement the National Nutrition Strategy (2011-2015).
The 2013 EC Communication “Enhancing Maternal and Child Nutrition in External
Assistance”29 builds on the Agenda for Change 2011. The EU adopted a multi-sector
approach, combining sustainable agriculture, rural development, food and nutrition
security, public health, water and sanitation, social protection and education. This policy
document on nutrition highlights the need for a better coordination between humanitarian and
development aid in order to increase the resilience of affected populations. The
Communication is based on three strategic priorities: i) Enhance mobilisation and political
commitment for nutrition; ii) Scale up actions at country level; iii) Knowledge for nutrition
(strengthening the expertise and the knowledgebase).
25 http://scalingupnutrition.org/sun-countries/tanzania
26 https://extranet.who.int/nutrition/gina/sites/default/files/TZA%202011%20National%20Nutrition%20Strategy.pdf
27 http://www.reachpartnership.org/reach-countries/tanzania
28http://scalingupnutrition.org/news/the-partnership-for-nutrition-in-tanzania-panita-supports-the-ministry-of-healths-world-
breastfeeding-week-celebration#.U8YRiaTlrIU
29 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/documents/enhancing_maternal-child_nutrition_in_external_assistance_en.pdf

38
Food security and nutrition Sector context: policies and challenges: Government food
security and nutrition related policies emphasise the importance of better nutrition
intervention, coordination, data surveillance and monitoring systems. Better nutrition
education activities, WASH situation improvement, increased food production and
diversification, improved feeding practices and development of income generating activities
for vulnerable households are considered as keys to tackle the nutrition issues. Stunting is a
nationwide critical issue and its aetiology30 should be assessed in a systematic way. It is
recognised that stunting is directly related to growth delays, indicating the development
history of the child. It is necessary to analyse the problem and causes at regional and district
levels. Assessment should focus on food intake, feeding practices, infant morbidity rates,
WASH situations and knowledge/attitude/practices (KAP) of mothers. HDDS (Household
Dietary Diversity Score) and HFIAS (Household Food Insecurity Access Scale) should also
be analysed.
Dodoma and Singida Regions nutrition status: Based on DHS 2010 report, the national
average stunting rate is 42% and the average wasting rate is 4.8%. Dodoma Region has the
highest stunting rate (56%) but a low wasting rate (5.2%). The neighbouring Singida Region
stunting rate is lower (39.0%) and wasting rate is higher (9.2%). Updated data for both
Regions are currently not available. Irish Aid has taken the lead to produce a national update
every 2,5 years nationwide. Currently, in the Dodoma Region, the USAID/AFRICARE
Mwanzo Bora programme focuses mainly on behaviour change at the community level, while
in Singida Region World Vision Canada works on community and at health facility level on
behaviour change, capacity building and prevention and rehabilitation. The impact of their
interventions is assumed to be positive on the reduction of stunting rates but also improving
the wasting or acute malnutrition prevalence. Their monitoring systems have not yet
produced concrete data. World Food Programme (WFP) works in Dodoma and Singida
Regions directly with the District health services households treating moderate acute
malnutrition amongst children under 5 and pregnant lactating women, food provision of
Special Nutritious Foods (SNF) to pregnant and lactating women and children under 2 to
prevent stunting and capacity building to health workers and working on behaviour change
with mothers coming to the District health facilities. Currently, global updated information on
impact is not available.
Issues to be tackled: Save the Children International reports31 and more particularly the 2014
Communication32 identified key recommendations i) Improved household access to diverse
and nutrient rich foods through own production and purchase from the local market
working with women’s and CBOs on awareness raising on stunting and malnutrition and the
right choice of diet to prevent them, looking into gender roles and division of labour in order
to ensure that women’s involvement into agriculture does not hinder maternal and infant and
young child feeding practices; ii) Improved maternal, infant and young child feeding
practices through traditional community trainings, community group meetings and popular
mobilisation events which are conducted by civil society organisations; iii) Enhanced reach
and quality of health and nutrition services delivered through the health system through
the identification of needs to prevent or treat key diseases that contribute to chronic
malnutrition; and iv) Improved multi-sectoral response to nutrition at sub-national levels
(Health, Agriculture, WASH, Education, Community Development, Livelihoods),
facilitating the establishment of district level nutrition steering councils.
30
Aetiology: study of causes and origins of diseases.
31 http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/docs/social-protection-Tanzania-briefing.pdf
32
Save the Children recommendations on reducing malnutrition in Tanzania 2014

Final report 20141118

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Final report 20141118

Similar to Final report 20141118 (20)

More from Aart van der heide

More from Aart van der heide (20)

Final report 20141118