1. 1
MID TERM REVIEW REPORT
“ALLEVIATING POVERTY THROUGH IMPROVED LIVELIHOOD
AND HEALTH PROJECT”
Funded by the European Commission
Contract Number: ONG-PVD/2005/095-808
MADAGASCAR NOVEMBER 2007
Written by:
Sirill T Benton, ADRA Norway
Pansi Katenga, ADRA UK
January 11, 2008

2. 2
TABLE OF CONTENT
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS...........................................................................................p.4
1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………… p.5
2. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES OF THE MID TERM REVIEW…………………………... p.5
3. METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………………….. p.6
3.1. Overview…………………………………………………………………………… p.6
3.2. Methodology used……………………………………………………………….. p.7
3.2.1. Review of existing information and secondary data……………………. p.7
3.2.2. Focus group discussions………………………………………………..… p.7
3.2.3. In-dept, individual interviews……………………………………………… p. 8
3.2.4. Most Significant Change Stories……………………………………….… p.8
3.2.5. Direct observation………………………………………………………….. p.8
3.2.6. Meetings…………………………………………………………………….. p.8
3.3. Sampling procedures……………………………………………………………. p.8
3.3.1. Selection of Craftswomen Associations for focus group discussions… p.8
3.3.2. Selection of Farmers Associations for focus group discussions….…… p.9
3.3.3. Selection of Health Volunteers for focus group discussions…………... p.9
3.3.4. Selection of individuals from Craftswomen Associations and Farmers. p.9
Associations
3.4. Limitations…………………………………………………………………………. p.9
4. THE AGRICULTURE COMPONENT…………………………………………………. p.9
4.1. Overview of the agriculture component………………………………………. p.9
4.2. Findings of the agriculture component…………………………………….... p.11
4.2.1. Summary of findings from the Farmers Associations…………………. p.11
4.2.2. Summary of individual interviews with farmers………………………... p.15
4.2.3. Summary of secondary data…………………………………...………… p.16
4.2.4. Summary of meetings with mayors……………………………………… p.17
4.3. Analysis……………………………………………………………………………. p.17
4.3.1. Sensitization and targeting process of the project……………………... p.17
4.3.2. Results and impact……………………………………………………..…. p.18
4.3.3. Project effectiveness………………………………………………..…….. p.22
4.3.4. Project relevance……………………………………………………….…. p.22
4.3.5. Project sustainability…………………………………………………….… p.23
4.3.6. Project constraints………………………………………………………… p.25
4.4. Recommendations……………………………………………………….……… p.25
5. THE CRAFTS COMPONENT……………………………………………………….... p.26
5.1. Findings……………………………………………………………………..…….. p.26
5.1.1. Summary of focus group discussions…………………………………… p.26
5.2. Analysis………………………………………………………………………..….. p.34
5.2.1. Results and impact……………………………………………...………… p.34
5.2.2. Project effectiveness…………………………………………………..….. p.35
5.2.3. Project relevance……………………………………………………….…. p.35

3. 3
5.2.4. Project sustainability……………………………………………….……… p.36
5.2.5. Project constraints………………………………………………………… p.36
5.3. Recommendations………………………………………………………...…….. p.36
6. THE HEALTH COMPONENT………………………………………………...………. p.37
6.1. Findings……………………………………………………………………..…….. p.37
6.1.1. Assessment of expected results for the health activities……………… p.37
6.1.2. Summary of interviews with project staff………………………...……… p.38
6.1.3. Summary of findings of individual interviews with health volunteers… p.40
6.2. Analysis…………………………………………………………………………... p. 43
6.2.1. Results and impact……………………………………………………….. p.43
6.2.2. Effectiveness…………………………………………………………..….. p.43
6.2.3. Relevance…………………………………………………………...…….. p. 44
6.2.4. Sustainability………………………………………………………………. p.44
6.2.5. Constraints…………………………………………………………………. p.45
6.3. Recommendations……………………………………………………….……… p.45
7. MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCY………………………………………………………... p.45
7.1. Findings…………………………………………………………………………… p.45
7.1.1. Findings of “Partners organization’s capacity and project
management”….. ……………………………………………………………..p.45
7.1.2. Findings of “Financial Management Health Check”…………………. ...p.48
7.1.3. Findings from meeting with the District Chief…………………………... p.49
7.2. Recommendations………………………………………………………….…… p.49
8. GENDER…………………………………………………………………………….….. p.49
9. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………….. p.50
9.1. Summary of recommendations agriculture component……………….………. p.50
9.2. Summary of recommendations crafts component……………………..………. p.50
9.3. Summary of recommendations health component……………….……………. p.50
9.4. Summary of recommendations management efficiency……………...………. p.51
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Terms of Reference
Appendix 2: Focus group discussion guide crafts associations
Appendix 3: Focus group discussion guide farmer associations
Appendix 4: Focus group guide health volunteers
Appendix 5: Questionnaire for individual farmers
Appendix 6: Financial check list
Appendix 7: Management check list
Appendix 8: List of focus groups conducted
Appendix 9: List of health volunteers interviewed
Appendix 10: List of individual farmers interviewed
Appendix 11: Revised timetable for the evaluation team
Appendix 12: List of documents reviewed
Appendix 13: Actual yield realized
Appendix 14: Summary of results interview with individual farmers
Appendix 15: Pictures

4. 4
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ADCOM = Administrative Committee
ADRA = Adventist Development and Relief Agency
Ariary = The local currency in Madagascar
Kapoka = small cup of measurement
NGO = Non governmental organization
PROCOM = Project Committee
SSD = District Health Department
SRA = Improved rice farming system
SRI = Intensive rice farming system
Vata = 24Kgs

5. 5
1. INTRODUCTION
In May 2006, Adventist Development and Relief Agency UK (ADRA-UK), in partnership
with ADRA Madagascar, began implementing the 3 year project “Alleviating Poverty
through Improved Livelihood and Health project (SMART Project)” in Fandriana, a region
within the Fianarantsoa province of Madagascar. The total project cost is 755,457 EUR,
and is funded by the European Commission (75%), ADRA UK (16 %), and ADRA
Norway (9%).
The overall objective of the project is to contribute to poverty alleviation for
disadvantaged communities in the region of Fandriana of Madagascar, with the specific
objective stated as improved income for vulnerable rural families.
The project aims at contributing to the alleviation of poverty among the poorest
households in the five communes of Tatamalaza, Milamaina, Miarinavaratra, Tsarazaza,
and Fandriana, in the Fandriana region through three main components; 1) Improved
food security through promotion of improved rice farming and kitchen gardening, 2)
improved opportunities for income-generating activities through promotion of income-
generating activities in agriculture and/or crafts, and 3) improved health practices
through establishing or reinforcing community-based health services. Capacity building
is a cross-cutting activity in all of the components.
The project works with 10 craftswomen and 65 farmers’ associations to improve their
productive, technical and marketing capacities and to ensure better availability of
community-based health services. The program activities aim to enhance the capacity of
the targeted farmers in adopting improved agricultural techniques, to increase crop
yields, increase income generation from handicraft products and overall improved health
among the population of the five targeted communes. The project has been formulated
in line with the concept that improved agricultural production is a pivotal component of
any tangible strategy to reduce the high poverty and food insecurity rates currently
prevalent in rural Madagascar.
Following 16 months of implementation, an internal midterm review of the project was
conducted by ADRA UK and ADRA Norway in cooperation with ADRA Madagascar.
2. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES OF THE MID TERM REVIEW
The mid term review for the project assessed operational aspects, such as project
management and implementation of activities, and also the progress towards fulfilling
outcomes and objectives. Second and equally an integral part, the review endeavored to
re-assess the strategic objectives and implementation mechanisms proposed during the
design of the project with particular attention paid to the income generating and health
component of the project, to establish whether the aims and operational mechanisms
are directly aligned to the overall “big picture”, in an attempt to facilitate a more efficient
and effective implementation process.
The following specific objectives guided the implementation of the mid term review:
1. Examine the results and impacts (where possible)
To review the progress (status) of project activities towards the overall objective
and specific objectives and where possible the potential development impact on
the primary stakeholder groups. This encompasses an assessment of the
identified existing verifiable, result and impact indicators.

6. 6
2. Assess the project effectiveness
To assess the achieved results against the set objectives and make an overall
assessment of project cost-effectiveness. This includes an evaluation of the
progress of project activities in terms of delivery of project inputs and outputs.
Also ascertain if any adjustment is required in the project design to increase its
scope in impacting the target groups.
3. Assess the relevance and adequacy
To assess the relevance and adequacy of the Income generating and Health
component to the needs of the beneficiaries. This assessment will function as a
platform on which to conduct an analysis of these components of the project in
regards to its lineage to the overall strategic perspective. Providing clarity of
program obligations and expectations, to facilitate effective coordination.
4. Explore sustainability of the project
To assess if the key stakeholders have the potential for retaining results and
benefits after the conclusion of the intervention. Determine the critical success
factors for the project and the conditions required to implement it.
5. Assess Constraints encountered during the project implementation
To analyze the various factors and constraints which have exerted an influence
on the project implementation. Such as the operational mechanisms, managerial,
institutional, socio-economic policy issues and other external factors unforeseen
during design.
6. Assess Management Efficiency
a) To assess the performance of ADRA-UK in terms of quality of
supervision, efficiency in financial administration, ability to anticipate
problems and extend implementation support, adequacy of reporting,
recommendations and effectiveness of follow-up on recommendations.
b) To assess the performance of ADRA Madagascar in terms of project
implementation (Including human resources, financial management,
internal and external risk factors etc).
7. Assess the quality of cooperation with institutions and effectiveness of
coordination mechanisms.
8. Produce a clear set of lessons learned that can benefit the project in its
remaining life-span.
See appendix 1 for further information.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1. Overview
The midterm review process utilized a combination of methods, using both secondary
quantitative sources of data and qualitative data collected during the time frame of the
midterm review.
The review involved the major stakeholders of the project. The following stakeholders
were included:
 Craftswomen Associations

7. 7
 Farmers Associations
 Health Volunteers
 Individual Farmers
 The Mayors in each target Commune
 ADRA staff at project level
 ADRA staff at country level
 European Commission delegation (Courtesy visit)
When the evaluation team arrived in country it became clear that not all activities
planned during the mid term review could be implemented due to time constraint (one
main reason being travel time in the field). It was determined that the evaluation team
did not have enough time to conduct individual interviews with crafts women, additional
government representatives, or other NGOs.
3.2. Methodology used
3.2.1. Review of existing information and secondary data
The quantitative source of data included review of baseline survey, market survey (only
part of it had been translated to English), progress reports, proposal (including revised
log frame) and other data provided by the project staff. (See appendix 12 for list of
documents reviewed)
3.2.2. Focus group discussions
The methodology of focus group discussions was used to collect information from the
Farmer’s Associations and Crafts Women Associations. Data collection tools were
developed jointly by ADRA UK, ADRA Norway and ADRA Madagascar before arrival of
the evaluation team. Since ADRA Madagascar had experience in conducting focus
group discussions, the agreement was that the tools would be pre-tested before the
evaluation team arrived. Upon arrival it was determined that this had not been done due
to difficulties in communication (lack of e-mail access) between the Country Office and
the Project Office.
To make sure all the evaluation team members had the same understanding of what a
focus group discussion is, a short training session was conducted by ADRA Norway.
After the training was conducted, the evaluation tools were finalized by the evaluation
team. It was decided that after the first day of implementation a review would be made to
determine if any adjustments had to be made to the tools. (See appendix 2 - 7 for final
version of tools).
ADRA Madagascar facilitated the focus group discussions so that there was no need to
use an interpreter. Mr. Mamiseheno, the Monitoring & Evaluation Officer from ADRA
Madagascar, was the facilitator and conducted the focus group discussions in Malagasy.
During the first two days, the project cashier/secretary assisted the evaluation team in
note taking in Malagasy, and during the last 2 days of data collection, Joshua Poole, the
Programs Director of ADRA Madagascar assisted in note taking (direct from Malagasy).
ADRA UK and ADRA Norway were also present during the discussions and taking notes
via the help of a translator. After each day of focus group discussions each note taker
typed their notes, and all the notes have been compiled into one document. The focus
group discussions were also recorded by a digital voice recorder.
Focus group discussions for health volunteers were planned, but when the evaluation
team arrived in country it was discovered that the health component of the project had

8. 8
not progressed as thought. The health volunteers had not yet started to conduct health
education activities in the communities. It was therefore decided not to conduct the focus
group discussions, but conduct individual interviews with a couple of volunteers from
each commune.
3.2.3. In-depth, individual interviews
To obtain further information from the farmers, an individual interview was conducted
with farmers and health volunteers from each commune. Initially it was planned to
conduct individual interviews with women from the Craftswomen Associations. After
arrival in country the evaluation team realized due to time constrains, that most of the
questions that the team would have looked for in the individual interviews could be
solicited during the focus group discussions. It was therefore deemed unnecessary to
conduct individual interviews with crafts women.
3.2.4. Most Significant Change Stories:
The purpose of this methodology is to reveal unintended outcomes delivered by the
project. The plan was to utilize this methodology more in depth, but when the evaluation
team arrived in country it was realized that there was not enough time to train the
evaluation team, for them to be able to conduct this method in detail. During each focus
group discussion, the question “In your opinion, what is the most significant change that
has happen since the project started?” was asked.
3.2.5. Direct observation
During the evaluation team’s stay in-country they were able to observe the local context
of the implementation and also experience some of the logistical challenges
(communication and travel time) the project staff faces. The team visited some of the
beneficiary’s rice fields and kitchen gardens.
3.2.6. Meetings
Both formal and informal meetings took place with ADRA Madagascar staff while the
evaluation team was in country. After it was decided to reduce number the of focus
group discussions (see section 3.3.) part of the evaluation team visited the commune
that was deleted from the program (Miarinavaratra) and had discussions with both the
Farmers Association and Craft Association. Meetings were also held with mayors in all
the five communes where the project is being implemented.
3.3. Sampling procedures
3.3.1. Selection of Craftswomen’s associations for focus group discussions:
Focus group discussions were conducted with 4 craftswomen’s associations. Initially it
was planned to conduct focus group discussions with one craftswomen’s association in
each commune; a total of five associations (out of 10), but due to time constraints the
evaluation team decided to conduct only four. In communes with more than one
association, one association was picked randomly (drawing the name out of a hat). The
following crafts women’s associations were selected:
 Tatamalaza Commune – Miandrisoa craft’s association
 Milamaina Commune – Miaradia craft’s association
 Tsarazaza Commune – Tsiravaina craft’s association
 Fandriana Commune – Santatra craft’s association

9. 9
3.3.2. Selection of Farmers associations for focus group discussions:
Focus group discussions were conducted with 4 farmers associations. Initially it was
planned to conduct focus group discussions with one farmers’ association in each
commune; a total of five associations (out of 65) but due to time constraints the
evaluation team decided to conduct only 4. In communes with more than one
association, one association was picked randomly (drawing the name out of a hat). The
following farmer’s associations were selected:
 Tatamalaza Commune – Miaradia Farmer’s association
 Milamaina Commune – Tanjona Farmer’s association
 Tsarazaza Commune – Miaramizotra Farmer’s association
 Fandriana Commune – Miavotene Farmer’s association
3.3.3. Selection of Health Volunteers for focus group discussions:
It was initially planned that one focus group discussion with Health Volunteers would be
conducted in each commune. A total of 9 Health volunteers would participate in each
focus group. The participants were randomly selected from each commune. However,
when the evaluation team arrived in country it was clear that the health activities were
delayed; therefore the tools developed for the focus group discussions were not
relevant. Instead it was decided to conduct individual interviews with a couple of health
volunteers from each commune to learn about their experiences with the project so far.
The health volunteers were not randomly selected, due to the challenges of distance and
transportation in each commune. The Health Agent selected two volunteers from each
commune. (See appendix 9 for list of health volunteers interviewed)
3.3.4. Selection of individuals from Craftswomen’s associations and Farmers
associations
Due to time constraints, individual interviews with craftswomen were not conducted.
Purposive sampling was used to identify two farmers for in-depth interviews in each
commune. The agriculture agents in each commune were asked to select two farmers
based on the variation in yields. (See appendix 10 for list of farmers interviewed).
3.4. Limitations:
There are several limitations to the implementation of the mid term review:
1. The mid term review is mostly using qualitative data which limits the possibility to
compare the results to the baseline data and national data.
2. Due to limited time and resources, the scope of the work was limited to the most
critical aspect of the implementation. It is quite likely that the evaluation team has
not been able to obtain data about every issue pertinent to the project. The
recommendations are based on limited knowledge obtained during the time of
the mid term review. This has to be taken into consideration when reading the
report.
3. Representatives from ADRA UK and ADRA Norway do not speak French or
Malagasy and a translator was used.
4. The mid term review was carried out in areas that are assumed to represent the
entire project area, but the sample size was limited.
4. THE AGRICULTURE COMPONENT
4.1. Overview of the agriculture component
Fandriana, is one of the poorest and most food insecure districts in Madagascar. Food
insecurity is exacerbated by different factors among them:

10. 10
 Decreasing land availability: the decrease in land availability is more marked in
Fandriana because of its terrain and that has resulted in small arable land
holdings. The small land sizes coupled with big family sizes (on average 5.5)
results in most household only being able to produce rice enough to cover their
staple food for 4 to 8 months per year.
 Poor and depleted soil: soils in the area are mostly red or yellow ferralitic ones
which are not very productive. Inappropriate farming techniques have also
contributed to the depletion of soil structure and organic content. To restore the
soil there is need for use of fertilizer that is not affordable to many because of its
high prices. This results in declining yields year after year.
 Little or no use of improved farming techniques: though the population has some
knowledge of modern farming techniques, they do not apply them. Reasons
include (i) the lack of extension agents (one extension agent for a population
over 25,000) and (ii) the inability to invest in agricultural inputs due to extreme
poverty.
Activities of the project under the food security component were therefore designed to
address the food insecurity problem understanding the above constraint. The expected
results of the component are:
 Beneficiary households reporting 25% increase in their staple food production
 Beneficiary households reporting at least a 25% increase in financial income.
During the baseline and the mid term review leading1
indicators to show progress
towards achievement of the desired goals were developed and they included:
 Decrease in the hunger period
 Adoption of improved techniques
 Dietary diversification
 Coping strategies applied during the food gap
 Reduction in proportion of income going toward food purchases
For the food security component, the project was designed to target the following:
 Poor farming households who were practicing farmers and were producing rice to
cover no more than 6 months but at least 4 months of their annual needs
 Willingness to work in an association
 Households who to cope with food shortages practiced some form of income-
generating activities, which can be agricultural production or handicrafts to
supplement their incomes, but not as their main source of income.
 Beneficiaries of the household with no regular waged job member.
 Households that do not practice sharecropping.
 Households among the 80% of the population who are literate.
 90% of the beneficiaries from this category will be made up of couples, and 10%
of women who are heads of households.
65 farmers associations with membership of 992 beneficiary households were formed.
The total percentage of women in farmer’s associations is 37% (12% higher than the
expected 25%).
1
These types of indicators signal future events

11. 11
Table 1: Number of selected farmer associations per commune and household membership
Communes Associations Membership 2006 Membership 2007
Miarinavaratra 14 219 221
Tsarazaza 14 180 207
Fandriana 13 205 216
Tatamalaza 12 144 180
Milamaina 12 150 168
TOTAL 65 898 992
4.2. Findings agriculture component
4.2.1. Summary of focus group discussions with Farmers Associations
The evaluation team conducted four focus group discussions with Farmers Associations
in four different communes (please see appendix 8). One general discussion was held
with farmers in Miarainavaratra (see section 3.2.6. and 3.3). During the focus group
discussions a semi-structured focus group guide was used, therefore in reporting the
findings, one topic might be listed several times under different sub headings. The
following section includes a summary of the findings.
4.2.1.1. What are the different ADRA activities that you have participated
in?
The participants of the focus group discussions revealed the following as the main
activities that they participated in:
4.2.1.1.1. Training in rice farming techniques:
The rice farming techniques were broken down into improved rice (SRA), intensive rice
farming (SRI) and non-irrigated rice. Regarding the improved rice farming the
participants described that they were trained to transplant after 15-20 days and when
sowing to observe the 20-25cm distance between plants and weed after every two
weeks. Regarding the intensive rice farming they reported that the difference between
improved rice farming and intensive rice farming is that intensive rice is transplanted
earlier, it’s being transplanted after 6-8 days. They also have to observe the 20 cm
spacing rule on either side to allow for weeding. The focus groups revealed that non-
irrigated rice is planted upland and is transplanted after 15 days. The reports revealed
that last years crop was affected by late delivery of seeds and the crop was destroyed by
a hailstorm.
4.2.1.1.2. Training in vegetable growing:
The participants responded that ADRA taught the beneficiaries how to grow the following
vegetables:
 Carrots – they started with smaller quantities because they were not sure of how
well carrots can grow in the area as they had never grown them before
 Leafy green – the results were good. A few people reported that their vegetable
garden is far from their houses and as a result some people stole their crop.
 Potatoes – most potatoes were small because they had diseases resulting in a
low yield.
 Cabbages – the beneficiaries were taught how to grow cabbages and learned
that cabbages cannot be planted in the same field as rice because they need soft
soil and the rice fields have lumps.
4.2.1.1.3. Compost making:
The participants revealed that the beneficiaries had been given seeds to grow plants so
that they can get leaves for composting in future. In addition, they were also taught how

12. 12
to make compost manually. One beneficiary described the process: “To make compost
manure the process starts by collecting both dried and green leaves. Then I cut the
leaves in 10cm and pile them together. On the top layer I put cow manure and water.
Cover the leaves with dirt with a stick in the middle. Every week I mix the content and by
the end of the 3 weeks the compost is ready.” The participants also reported that they
have been trained on how to use fertilizer (bone powder),
4.2.1.1.4. Training on Long cycle income generation activities:
The members reported that they had just started implementing activities like planting
orange trees, chicken raising, bee keeping and fish farming.
4.2.1.1.5 Study Tours:
The members also reported that representatives of the associations went on field trips to
Moramanga, Antsirabe and Antananarivo where they observed other ADRA
Madagascar’s initiatives.
4.2.1.1.6
The focus group discussions also revealed that the beneficiaries were taught about
association management. The also reported that they received training in family
planning training.
4.2.1.2. What are the new skills that you have learned from ADRA?
When asked to describe the new skills that the participants had learnt from ADRA the
main responses were a) techniques for SRA and SRI rice farming and b) how to plant
vegetables. A follow up question was made on how they found the techniques that they
had learnt and the following are sentiments that were shared by the participants in
comparison with their previous practices. Participants felt that the new techniques are
better than the traditional method because the yield has increased compared to
previously. The participants felt that the new techniques require more work than when
they used the traditional method but since the results are better they are not
discouraged. They reported that the new technique requires them to keep and manage
time and that is one skill that they have learnt.
The participants also reported that they were taught how to control water in their field.
They further reported that it was not easy to control the water because sometimes the
farmers of the neighboring field may not be practicing the same technique. Therefore it
makes it difficult to just control the water on one field alone. The farmers have been
taught that water should not be flooded and the 3cm minimum height should always be
observed. Although some fields get flooded, association members help each other to
follow the practice.
A follow up question was asked to the participants to report what material support they
had received from ADRA. The following summarizes the answers:
Farm equipment including weeders, sprayers, forks, dolemite fertilizer, rakes, and water
cans. The equipment is kept by the treasurer who makes plans for lending it out. People
use the equipment and are divided into groups based on distances from each other;
those in the same neighborhood form one group. According to the participants the
system is good and it works well because everyone has equal access to the equipment.
Some members alluded to the fact that the equipment that they wanted was not provided
to them. They reported that they needed oxen to help them with the ploughing of the
field. It was also reported that the equipment; especially the weeders are not enough as
most people want to use them at the same time. A lot of associations reported that they
have created a fund for use to maintain the equipment.

13. 13
In addition, the members reported that they also received seeds, manuals and fertilizer.
4.2.1.3. What does the improved rice farming concept involve?
The following is the summary of the answers from the participants:
The seeds are soaked in water and planted in the field. Rice is transplanted after 15-20
days. It is planted in rows and the distance between each plant should be 20-25cm to
enable them to weed properly in all directions. The space also gives the rice plant space
to breath. The participants reported that rice is transplanted when it is very young – with
just 2 leaves. There is also need to control water regularly so that the field is not
flooded. After transplanting the rice, the fields have to be weeded every two weeks even
if you do not see the weeds.
4.2.1.4. What does the non-irrigated rice farming involve?
The participants stated that this was the first time this technique was used by them as
they have always planted rice in the rice fields. Non-irrigated rice is planted upland and
transplanted after 15 days. However, during the last planting season, seeds were
delivered late and their crop was also attacked by pests. Furthermore, their crop was
destroyed by hail. Most of the participants reported that their yield was low.
4.2.1.5. What is the role of the Farmers Associations?
The participants reported that the associations are there for ”cooperation and to unite the
members.” In addition, the associations provide the members with an opportunity to
share knowledge and exchange ideas. The association also helps the members to plan
their work; they meet and schedule a work plan. The association also coordinates the
income generation components for funds to maintain equipment, to buy other agricultural
inputs and also for social activities. Members of the association pay a fee. Some pay
monthly and some paid a yearly fee soon after harvest. Associations have rules and
regulations that each member has to follow. One such rule is that all members should
attend meetings and if a member does not attend a meeting without a good reason they
are fined. However the association does not fine unnecessarily, they analyze the
reasons why a rule was not followed. Members were involved in setting up the rules and
regulations of associations so they feel the regulations are fair. Socially, the association
members help each other with work. Associations also help the farmers to work with
donors.
When asked if there are any disadvantages to belonging to an association, the members
said there were not any disadvantages. However one association reported that the
members are separated form the community. There were some comments that the
members are not able to follow all the techniques because of time constraints.
Attendance of meetings can sometimes be a problem due to multiple roles that they
have to carry out.
4.2.1.6. How do you think ADRA is contributing to food security in the
commune?
In response to the question, the participants felt that ADRA’s contribution to food security
has been through teaching them new farming techniques and providing them with the
required inputs (seeds and fertilizer) and also equipment to do their work better. They
added that ADRA has introduced crop diversity and that too has added to their food
security. The technicians who live in the commune also monitor their work so that they
have been able to master the techniques. Overall, all these efforts have resulted in
hunger period being reduced.

14. 14
4.2.1.7. In your opinion, what aspects of the project have worked well,
what has not worked well and how can ADRA improve the aspects that
are currently not working well?
In describing what has worked well, the main responses were that their rice lasts longer.
They also felt that the introduction of new crops like cabbages was good. They also
reported that the training went well. The provision of the equipment and inputs was also
good as it allowed them to practice what they had learnt during the trainings. They also
reported that the manuals that were distributed during the training have been helpful as
they are able to refer to them when they forget how to do something. The participants
also reported that they have learnt to manage their time better and can undertake a lot of
activities in one day.
In describing what did not work well, the following were the main responses:
Their non-irrigated rice crop was destroyed by hail and their potatoes had diseases. The
participants also complained that the equipment that was distributed was not enough as
they all needed to use it at the same time. The participants also advised that the training
should be more practical than theory as practical training makes it easy for them to
understand.
In reporting the main areas that the participants wanted ADRA to improve, the
participants stressed that inputs should be delivered early to them as usually they need
time to transport them to the fields which are far from their houses. They also added
that ADRA should work towards assisting that the inputs that they have introduced to
make them are available on the local markets. The participants also added that their
non-irrigated rice field soil is very poor therefore requires more fertilizer than was
provided to them by the project. The participants also responded that they needed more
equipment especially oxen to help them with their labor needs.
4.2.1.8. What do you think will happen after the project has ended?
The participants responded that the associations will continue beyond ADRA’s project.
The participants will continue to use the skills and the knowledge that they have learnt.
They will continue to make compost. In addition, they will continue to encourage one
another. The associations have created funds so that they can enable them to buy
seeds, fertilizers and maintain equipment when ADRA leaves.
4.2.1.9. In your opinion, what has been the most significant change that
has occurred since the project started?
The following are the main responses that came up during the discussion:
 Access to inputs – didn’t buy seeds
 Improvement in rice production – food lasts longer
 Exchange ideas
 No need to buy seeds
 We are using less seeds for the same fields
 Soil has improved as a result of using bone powder
 Time management
 Ways of working – members felt they work hard and can achieve more
 Mentality change – to do away with traditional methods and apply techniques
 Price of rice is lower compared to last year
 Diverse diet
 Households have no problems to find rice accompaniments because they are
growing vegetables

15. 15
 Women and men treated equally
 Life difficulties have reduced
4.2.2. Summary of individual interviews with farmers
Individual interviews were conducted with 10 farmers – 2 from each commune. The two
farmers were strategically chosen and were representatives of those farmers who had
produced above average and those who had produced below expected average in their
communes. The interviews were conducted to understand how the project activities
have made a difference in their individual households and learn about the coping
mechanisms that would be applied in times of food shortages and if they have changed
since the project started. For those who had produced above average, the objective was
to understand what they had done different compared to other farmers, their experience
with the technique has been and if they sold part of their produce, what they spent their
money on.
The interviews revealed that all the farmers had adopted the techniques. Eight of the
ten farmers adopted improved rice techniques and only two reported to have adopted
the intensive rice farming technique. They all had however, tried the non-irrigated rice
technique for the first time. Compared to the 2005/6 season, most of the farmers (7)
reported to have increased the surface area of land where they have used the
technique. The reason behind the increase is that they are convinced that the
techniques work. Two farmers had adopted the technique on 100% of their land during
the 2005/6 agricultural season and therefore reported no change to the surface area.
One farmer reported to have reduced his surface area from 10 ara last season to 8 ara
during this season due to a bad harvest that he had. (100 ara = 1 hectare, 1 ara = rice
field 10 x 10 meters squared).
Despite Fandriana District experiencing one of the worst cyclones in this decade during
the last planting season, eight farmers reported that their yield had increased compared
to 2005/2006 season. Two farmers reported a reduced yield. All the farmers reported a
decrease in the hunger period of on average two months. This was attributed to better
harvest and introduction of vegetables like potatoes in their diets that reduced the
quantity of rice cooked. All the households reported that they used the vegetables for
own consumption and they sold some as well. They all reported that their annual
expenditure towards food had reduced because of the reduced number of months that
they needed to procure rice.
Each of the farmers interviewed revealed that they will be affected by food shortages
during the lean season and some strategies will be applied to cope. Eight of the farmers
reported that eating less preferred foods like cassava and potatoes was the main
strategy for coping with a food shortage. When asked to describe the two main ways
how they were planning to cope with the food gap/shortages during the lean season, the
following are the results in order of most applied strategy:
 Eating less preferred foods (8)
 Sell of chicken and pigs (3)
 Selling of crafts (3)
 Reducing meal quantities (1)
 Casual labor (4)
 Borrow money (1)
 Charcoal production (1)

16. 16
Two farmers out of the ten had produced a surplus of rice. They both had a total of 50
ara of land. One of the farmers had applied the intensive rice technique on all his land
and the other had applied the intensive rice technique on 35 ara and improved rice
technique on 15ara. After selling their rice, one used the money to pay school fees for
his two children attending university and employ laborers to work on his field and the
other one used his money, mainly to buy oxen to address labor constraint.
The two farmers described the techniques to be effective to address their food problems.
However, they both reported that they felt they reported a high yield because (i) they
have big land (ii) they had more people helping in the field and (iii) they applied the
intensive rice farming technique which is much more labor intensive than the improved
technique but produces much more rice. (Summary of individual farmers interview
appendix 14).
4.2.3. Summary of secondary data (reports, monitoring data etc)
From monitoring reports, the team was able to learn that rice is normally planted in
September and harvested around March. It was expected that during the 2006/7
agricultural season beneficiary households would apply their newly acquired knowledge
and skills therefore increase their yield. Monitoring reports show that all the beneficiary
households applied the techniques with the majority applying the techniques on part of
their land as a way of experimenting if the techniques would really work. Reports also
showed that there had been attempts in the past by other NGOs to introduced the similar
farming techniques in the same target area however adoption of the techniques were so
low due to lack of inputs.
4.2.3.1. Improved Rice techniques
The rice planted under the irrigated system was harvested and the following results have
been reported in self monitoring tools and agents activity reports (Appendix 13: Actual
yield realized):
 The maximum yield was 14 tons/ha reported in Miarinavaratra commune and the
minimum was 1,08 tons/ha.
 The general average yield of 5.23 tons/ha exceeded the average yield of 2.21
tons/ha that was reported in the baseline and more than the target set by the
project of 3-4tons/ha.The project goal of increasing the yield by 25% was
achieved and surpassed by nearly 100%.
 A total of 523 tons of irrigated rice was collected from 100 hectares of cultivated
area.
4.2.3.2. Non-irrigated Rice Production
Non-irrigated rice was promoted as a strategy to improve household food security and
was a completely new activity in the region. The average target yield was 1.5 to
2tons/ha however the actual yields reported were maximum of 3tons/ha and minimum of
0,05tons/ha.
Overall, the average yield was 0.53tons/ha way below the target.
4.2.3.3. Kitchen gardens
Kitchen gardening was introduced in the last quarter of year 1 and all beneficiary
households were targeted for the activity. (Appendix 13: Actual yield results).The potato
crops in the Fandriana district were attacked and virtually all potato fields were infected

17. 17
by diseases: anthracnose and oidium. Otherwise farmers had a good yield in the other
crops that help with the food situation at household level.
4.2.4. Summary of meetings with mayors
Each field visit started with meetings with the mayors who are the local government
representatives in their communes. Discussions with the mayors revealed that they are
working very closely with the project teams, especially the extension agents, and that the
project is supporting some of the needs mentioned in the development plans of their
various communes. They also reported that the project, especially the agricultural
component, was very well publicized and the targeting criteria were clear and
transparent. They reported that initially people were hesitant to join associations due to a
bad experience with a microfinance group lending project that was implemented in the
same five communes before, but after the mayors explained to the communities how this
project was different from the other one, more people were interested in being
beneficiaries.
4.3. Analysis
A baseline was conducted in January 2007. The mid term review just like the baseline
was carried out during the hunger period. Conducting both the baseline and the mid
term review during the lean season has made it possible to give an indication of
beneficiaries’ vulnerability as well as the progress towards achieving some indicators
that the baseline collected. For example: adoption rate of technique and hunger period
duration.
A review of the plan document reveals a largely positive process was followed, with a
thorough contextual review and a problem statement. Food security as was during the
designing of the project phase continues to be the priority area of focus in the newly
developed Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (2007) and has been outlined as challenge
7 to improve nutrition and food security. In addition the government has established a
national office of nutrition (ONN) to develop action plans.
The evaluation team found that core documents confirm that the project is addressing
key food security issues. Further it found that the strategies suggested seem to be
appropriate to the local context.
4.3.1. Sensitization and targeting process of the project
Direct observations revealed that due to the initial skepticism demonstrated at the
sensitization period of the project, some inclusion errors were noted e.g. inclusion of
regular waged people like the mayors. e.g. in Tatamalaza and Milamaina as
beneficiaries. Also noted was the fact that “willingness to work in an association” was
one of the criteria, would have led to self exclusion by some poor households who may
not have taken the courage to join the associations. However, despite a few inclusion
errors, the review team concluded that the process was transparent and worked with
community leaders who helped to identify and verify that the beneficiaries that were
selected were the poor households in their communities. One lesson learnt is that for
future projects rather than focusing on just social indicators the criteria should make an
attempt to include some economic criteria like possession of productive assets by a
household. A targeting meeting where all the villagers understand the criteria and can be
part of the selection process would be beneficial.

18. 18
4.3.2. Results and Impact
4.3.2.1. Training of farmers
As mentioned in the findings section farmers were asked to report the training that they
had conducted and all the associations were able to demonstrate an understanding of
the methodology. They clearly articulate the training that they received and the technical
specifications for each of the rice farming methods for example:
 How to prepare the seeds for sowing
 How to prepare the land before sowing
 Spacing between seedlings for each of the methods
 Weeding requirements
 And how to generally take care of their crops
It is the view of the mid term review team that the farmers understanding of the
techniques is good and that the training methodology was effective.
4.3.2.2. Provision of farm inputs
Complimenting the training with provision of skills, inputs and equipment and on going
presence of an extension agent in the commune was the frequently cited answers to
respond to the ‘what worked well in the project’ question and is the element that has
made the project unique and successful according to beneficiaries according to the
mayors and the beneficiaries. Training has been conducted before by other NGOs in
improved techniques of rice farming and the baseline showed that only 29% of the
beneficiaries adopted the techniques. The main reasons for not adopting the techniques
were that the farmers could not afford the inputs that were suggested. After ADRA
provided seeds, fertilizers and small equipment, 100% of the beneficiaries adopted the
techniques. An important lesson for the future is that the training alone in poor
communities without initial provision of inputs and ongoing supervision is not effective.
The training approach that was taken by the project is worth replicating when designing
similar projects.
4.3.2.3. Food Security
The mid term review team relied on focus groups, farmers own experiences during the
individual farmer interviews and secondary data to get an indication as to progress
towards the food security and economic security theme.
Food security can be measured in a variety of ways. For the project, increased
production for the main staple food is the critical indicator. One common way such as
number of months of household food supply, ostensibly from own production, is the most
commonly cited factor. Monitoring reports (agents activity reports and farmers self
monitoring tools), complimented by discussions with project staff, mayors, farmer
associations as well as interviews with the individual farmers indicated that, for those
households who have adopted improved farming methods, their yield has improved.
Focus group discussions and interviews with farmers revealed that the food gap, which
used to range from 6-9 months (July to March) has been reduced to on average 4-5
months. Most of the households reported a reduction of the hunger period by 2 months.
The main reason provided for the reduction in the hunger period was the increased
production of rice that the households experienced after adopting the techniques.
Appendix 13 demonstrates the increase in production that mainly exceeded the targets
that were set for the communes. All the associations that were met during the mid-term
review reported positive results from their last harvest and felt that the improved
techniques produced more rice compared with the traditional method.

19. 19
Personal Experiences
Ms. Aline Labao of Tsarazaza reported that she planted a total of 20 ara of rice.
She divided her land in half and planted 10 ara using the traditional method and
10 ara using the improved rice technique. She reported that her harvest was 96
containers from the 10 ara where she used the improved technique and
harvested 62 containers from the field where she planted using the traditional
method.
Mr. Jacque Alfred Razakamanana applied Intensive Rice technique on 6 out of
his 40 ara land. He reported that he harvested 600kgs from the 6 ara which was
the same as what he harvested on the remaining 34 ara where the traditional
method was used.
In Miarinavaratra, a lower rice price in markets was reported to demonstrate the
increased supply of rice. In 2006, during the month of November, the price of a kapoka
of rice was 440 Ariary. This year the price has reduced to 330 Ariary/kapoka and this is
the cheapest that they have seen in rice prices for the past 5 years.
Baseline results showed that only 29% of the beneficiaries were practicing the improved
techniques. Monitoring reports and focus group discussions showed that all the farmers
have adopted the technique during the last agricultural season with varying surface
sizes. In the second rice planting season, many farmers have also reportedly increased
the surface area where the techniques have been adopted. Monitoring reports revealed
that 87% of the farmers have increased surface area with 10% reporting no change
while 3% have reportedly reduced the surface area. As a way of verification, interviews
were conducted with ten individual farmers seven had increased surface area and only
one had reduced the surface area. Two out of the ten reported to have planted 100% of
their land with the technique both seasons.
Most households reported eating rice with vegetables from their own production. The
inclusion of such new foods in their diet signified a major change in their life style as
previously rice had been eaten dry without accompaniments. In Miarinavaratra (the
furthest commune visited), all members of the farmers’ association revealed that they
had never eaten cabbage and carrots before. Although a significant number reported to
have sold their vegetables, all the households that were individually interviewed revealed
that they also had used some of the vegetables for their own consumption in addition to
selling. None of the households reported to have stored any of the vegetables. From
lessons learnt in other projects, the review team observed that introduction of new crops
to the diet is good but to achieve better results it should be complimented with training
on its preparation for micronutrient retention. In addition dealing with food preservation
issues when there is high supply for use during the lean season is fundamental to
ensure that the nutrition status is maintained throughout the year. Teaching people on
how they can preserve their food for use during food shortages periods should be
considered as the project finalizes its health strategy. Promotion of nutrition awareness
was also observed to be an important area of focus after discussions with agents
revealed that because vegetables are a new inclusion in a Malagasy diet, some
households would sell most of their vegetable production and not include it in their
knowledge because of lack of information on the importance of eating a well balanced
diet.

20. 20
Types of coping strategies2
that households apply in times of food shortages revealed
the vulnerability of targeted households. A coping strategy index was not developed for
this mid term review and secondary reports were used to identify strategies that have
generally been considered severe. For example, reducing the quantity of a meal but
maintaining the same number of meals is considered less severe than skipping a meal.
In the local context, eating less preferred foods (which was cited as the main coping
strategy) is considered less severe compared with borrowing money especially to buy
food which in the Malagasy culture is considered to be an extremely embarrassing
situation an option that is the last resort when all has failed. Charcoal production is
considered unsustainable because of the effects of deforestation that could further result
in more problems. Casual labor though, was considered normal but is not sustainable as
it results in people neglecting their own field. In the long term this would affect their own
yield and overall food security at the household level.
Although the responses according to the beneficiaries revealed an improvement in the
way they had coped previously, most of them revealed that they would have added to
their strategies – borrowing money to go and buy foods. It is still important that the
coping strategies are reviewed regularly during monitoring visits to ensure that
households are not resorting to destructive activities. It is anticipated that the long cycle
income generation activities will improve the household’s resilience to food shortages.
The reduction in the months in which they need to buy food has helped them. In
addition, the mid term review team observed that association members seem to be
socially responsible for one another. Reduction in percentage of household expenditure
going towards food is a good indicator as well that shows improved livelihood. The
reduction in the food gap has resulted in a decrease in expenditure going towards food
purchases
4.3.2.4. Adoption of technique by non beneficiaries
All the associations and mayors that were met during the mid term review reported that
there are a lot of non beneficiaries who have expressed an interest to join the
associations and asked if the project could increase its coverage. In addition, it was also
learnt that a lot of non beneficiaries are copying the techniques. Direct observations of
the rice fields during the visits also revealed that non beneficiaries have adopted the
techniques during the 2007/8 season. All the agents revealed that they had been
approached by non beneficiaries in the communes where they were working to find out
more about the techniques. The extension agent in Miarinavaratra –reported to have
conducted additional training to 124 non beneficiaries. In Miaradia and Miaramizotra the
chief of the fokontany has included on the agenda for his meetings some basic training
on the techniques.
Due to financial constraints, the project cannot increase its coverage, however it seems
that the non beneficiaries are interested in learning about the techniques and asking
beneficiaries to share their knowledge with them. Considering this demand for
information, it might be a good opportunity to identify lead farmers to conduct and
provide support to this group. This could lead to overall food security in the area. One
2
The term ‘coping strategies’ as used here is meant to denote a range of responses to ‘shock’.
These responses will comprise intensifying existing livelihood activities as well as expanding
activities in order to diversify food and income sources. The sustainability, legality and adverse
impact of these activities (on adopters and the community) will vary depending on the severity
and duration of the shock

21. 21
way of doing this would be to provide in-depth training to especially those who seem to
have grasped the techniques as demonstrated by their yields. This would create a model
farmer system proven effective in other ADRA Madagascar interventions. In addition
chiefs of fokontany could be called upon to spread information to interested parties.
4.3.2.5. Economic Impact
This theme is closely linked with food security as food must largely be purchased in the
months prior to harvest. The project seeks to achieve sustainable increases in income
for its beneficiary population to be demonstrated through purchase of productive assets
etc. Since the project has been implemented only for one agricultural season, while a
reduction in the food gap was reported, most households are still not self sufficient in
food. Some indication on the increased income were sought during the individual
interviews especially among those who had exceeded the planned production targets
and some positive results were reported.
 Reportedly in one area, the Rabemiafara family who did not hesitate to apply the
improved techniques on their 50 ara land (15 ara improved rice and 35 ara
Intensive rice) produced 100 Vata3
and sold 40Vata of their rice. The family sold
each Vata for 4,000 Ariary. This household reported an improved cash income
and was able to pay for their two children university fees without borrowing from
anyone.
 The Randriamihasoa family after calculating their yearly food requirement was
able to sell 1 ton of their rice at 500 Ariary/kg. The proceeds from the sale were
used to buy an oxen to help with the field work on their 50 ara land that they have
cultivated using the improved technique.
4.3.2.6. Long cycle Income generation activities
Four main activities have been identified as long cycle income generating activities
(i) Chicken raising (ii) Agriculture (iii) Fish farming (iv) and fruit trees or essential oil
trees. Long cycle income generation activities are those which farmers will implement to
further improve their livelihood and alleviate themselves from poverty. As this activity has
just been introduced in year two most of the discussions were centered on the strategy
of implementation for the activity. Discussions with the project staff revealed that the
four activities that were identified during the design phase are still relevant. However,
observation of the mid term review team is that the implementation strategy for the
activity is not clear especially for fish farming and bee keeping. It was felt that minimal
attention has been paid to the demand side to make them viable business operations. A
general lesson that has been learnt during implementation of the project especially for
the craft component of the project has been the isolation of Fandriana to major centers
and how linkages to markets have proven to be problematic. The mid term review team
felt that this lesson should be considered in the implementation of the long cycle
activities as well as it is anticipated that there will be buyers for the proposed products.
The mid term review team also felt that although the project had proposed the 4
activities at design stage, a more study should be carried out to understand their
appropriateness for each of the 5 communes. Although culturally the people in the
communes may be the same, certain aspects of the commune need to be considered
and uniform activities should not be applied to all communes. Factors to consider before
implementation include access to markets, quality issues and storage and packaging
facilities. A cost and benefit analysis will also need to be carried out with set targets in
for income and production and monitoring tools developed to measure them. When the
3
Vata = 24Kgs

22. 22
project team was asked basic information as to the price they expected to sell a
kg/honey or a comparison of what those currently practicing bee keeping are producing
and what the project expects them to produce after the project activities was also not
easy to obtain. The mid term review team recommends that more ground work be
carried out with attention paid to markets, processing, packaging and quantity and
financial targets.
4.3.3. Project effectiveness
At this level, the mid term review team examined the extent to which results had been
achieved against set objectives. Overall the mid-term review team concluded that the
agricultural production activities that have been implemented so far are on track to meet
the desired outcomes. However, lessons learnt from other projects and using the
definition of food security to be “ability to acquire sufficient quality and quantity of food to
meet all household’s member nutritional requirements for productive lives” 4
it was felt
that these agricultural interventions to be effective, nutrition aspects of food security
need to be addressed to ensure that the high production of food in resulting in correct
usage reported in detail above. The mid term review team felt that the newly introduced
long cycle activities need to be reviewed as above if they are to be effective in reaching
the desired goals.
4.3.4. Project relevance
This section is trying to assess whether the project interventions continue to be relevant.
This section goes slightly further by also considering whether the strategies chosen by
the project were and remain appropriate given contextual trends, community needs, the
priorities of the Malagasy government and are within the European Community thematic
and geographic priorities.
Meetings with the mayors indicated that the project activities are in line with what has
been identified as priority areas in their commune’s development plans.
Monitoring reports and discussions with the project team and beneficiaries revealed that
the project has carried out activities aimed at increasing food availability and access at
the household level. Realizing that the project cannot increase land size, the project
provided training in farming methods that can increase yields. Also introduced were new
activities aimed to further improve the food situation like non-irrigated rice techniques
and kitchen gardening on land that would otherwise have remained idle because of its
unsuitability for rice farming.
The problem of soil depletion was addressed by providing farmers with bone powder and
fertilizer to address the specific needs that were identified. The target beneficiaries are
poor people who cannot afford to buy chemical fertilizers. Therefore addressing this
problem in a sustainable way required an inexpensive method. Beneficiaries were
provided skills for making compost manure which is sustainable in that they don’t need
to buy inputs. In addition farmers were given seeds to plant trees that would in the long
term produce leaves which they can use for compost production.
The lack of knowledge of improved techniques was addressed by teaching the
beneficiaries about improved farming techniques. Additionally, the project was designed
with the support of local governments that the extension agents would stay in their
4
USAID’s definition from Food Nutrition Technical Assistance.

23. 23
communes to provide adequate support to the farmers. To address the input problems,
farmers were provided with inputs and equipment that has contributed to food security.
When asked “how is ADRA contributing to food security” the responses were through
training, provision of seeds, equipment and knowledge.
The activities continue to be relevant as many beneficiaries, though they have reported
yield increases, are still NOT producing enough food for the whole year.
All the beneficiaries who were interviewed reported that in order for the techniques to be
effective, they also need a lot of labor and although they require less seeds, the seeds
are expensive. These two reasons were cited as the most prohibitive factors for many
beneficiaries to increase the surface area. The farmers were given seeds that they can
recycle for another two years so the problem is dealt with for now and hopefully the
funds that the associations have created will address the challenge. ADRA’s role though
could be working with seed producers to create outlet shops in Fandriana. At the
moment the seeds that ADRA provided are only available in Antananarivo. In fact some
of the participants do not know what the names of the seeds were and called them
‘ADRA’s seeds’.
The review team were however noted how certain associations are creating community
based initiatives to support each other to address the labor constraint like creating a
roaster when all the members would work on one field using part of their funds to hire
labor for those most in need of help. Promotion of such initiatives as best practices is
one of the ways of addressing the labor issue.
On responsiveness, the team was interested in establishing the extent to which the
program responded to emerging challenges on the ground and whether this response
was timely and appropriate. From reports and discussion with project team, an example
of a situation where the project responded to issues on the ground in an excellent way
was when an implementation strategy for training was changed. Initially, the project was
designed to have a total of 10 commune model plots that were to be provided by the
communal chiefs. However, due to problems identified during the theory sessions such
as division of labor to maintain the communal farm and distance to communal plots, the
project management decided to establish demo plots for each association (this plot
would belong to one of the members of the association but would be used by the group
and the agent to conduct the practical training). A total of 65 Demo plots for each
association were established. In addition, when it was learnt that farmers found it easier
to follow practical training than theory more time was spent on practical training sessions
that were conducted on the demo plots. Furthermore, a study tour to ADRA’s other
project in Moramanga was made to enable farmers to see for themselves how the
techniques can make a difference in their lives. Most farmers were motivated after the
trip to do much more.
4.3.5. Project Sustainability
With regard to the project, associations were very confident that development activities
would continue even when ADRA phased out their activities. The main elements for
sustainability were the knowledge and skills, creation of revolving funds, equipment
maintenance plans as well as ways of working together as an association that would
continue to be used into the future: “We have acquired different skills and we will
continue using these skills”, said one respondent. Another respondent said: “we have
found out that what ever we have learnt is for our benefit. We will continue drawing on

24. 24
the knowledge and skills. Another one responded “I received technical training for free. I
can teach my children and next generation…” An association member reported “we
have been taught how to manage associations and we plan to remain as an association
and become an autonomous entity by 2010”.These sentiments are certainly believable
especially with regard to some of the activities introduced by the project. For example, it
is difficult to imagine why people would abandon the improved ways of cultivation
introduced by ADRA, which are clearly improving food security. The first year of
implementation concentrated on agricultural production and from year two the project
has added elements of possible income generation activities including poultry, fish
farming, bee keeping and livestock production which will enable the farmers to continue
with the techniques as they will have income to buy inputs.
In terms of exit strategies, the project will stop its implementation in April 2009. After
having operated in one district for three years it is important to see if communities can
continue to function without external input. The final year of the project will focus on
activities aimed at enhancing the capacity of associations to operate on their own.
Already mid way through the project, the review team had seen some creative ways in
which different associations are dealing with the issue of sustainability. It is therefore
recommended that identification of best practices be documented for sharing among
associations.
Some best practices:
In Tatamalaza commune, Miaradia 1 Association collected a portion of rice soon after
harvest and stored it. When the hunger period started they sold the rice to the members
at a cheaper price rate than the market price. The money has been used to create a
fund for association business but also for festivities like during Christmas time.
Miaramizotra Association in Tsarazaza commune collected part of the rice yield from
each member that they kept and sold during the lean season when the price had
increased. With this money, they created a fund and will use the money to buy more
rice this year for resale during the next lean season. In addition they have created a
separate equipment fund. Each member pays 100 Ariary whenever they use the
weeder. This money is kept by the treasurer for use to repair the equipment or to buy
more equipment when needed.
Miavotena association in Fandriana has created a communal kitchen garden. One
member volunteered usage of her land. Labor, harvesting and selling of products was
done by all the associations together. The proceeds from the sale have enabled them to
create a revolving fund. Next year another member will provide land for the communal
garden.
One association in Miarinavarata (a drought prone commune) collected rice from each
other during the last harvest and sold it during the lean season and used the money to
buy additional farm equipment: 11 hoes and 3 pedal pump pipes.
In Marinavarata 12 communal storage facilities have been built for storage of food for
use during the lean season.
To deal with labor constraints and to meet the timetable that is required for the improved
techniques, women in the Miavotena association work together in one field to transplant.
This has addressed the labor constraints.

25. 25
4.3.6. Project Constraints:
Beneficiaries cited the following constraints:
 Last season Fandriana had one of the worst cyclone seasons.
 Lack of seeds on the specific seeds that ADRA provided on the local market
 Labor was cited as a major constraint for households to apply the techniques on
a bigger surface area.
 Theft of vegetables was experienced by some farmers
 Pests affected the yield of rain field rice
 Diseases that affected potatoes
Project staff cited the following constraints:
 Lack of communication facilities
 Travel problems due to bad roads
4.4. Recommendations:
4.4.1. Nutrition Education
The review team observed that in an area reported to have high incidences of
malnutrition, introduction of new crops to the diet is good but to achieve better results
should be complimented with nutrition education focusing on food preparation for
maximum nutrient retention. The health strategy should include this aspect of nutrition
education including food preparation seminars and storage of food for use during the
lean season.
4.4.2. Long cycle Income generation activities
A clear strategy on how the market side of the long cycle income generation activities
including a basic cost and benefit analysis should be developed considering the issues
raised by the mid term review team in the above section 4.3.2.6.
1.4.3 Seed availability on the markets
It was noted many households would like to increase surface area where the techniques
are applied; however, lack of availability of seeds on the local markets is a limiting factor
for both beneficiaries and non beneficiaries who may want to adopt the technique. The
fact that the exact seeds that ADRA provided to the farmers are not available locally
makes them very expensive to access as someone has to travel far to buy them. ADRA
should liaise with seeds organization and pursue the possibility of creating an outlet for
their products in Fandriana.
4.4.3. Best practices
As part of monitoring, the project agents should conduct a study and document all the
best practices especially those to do with creation of revolving funds and share them
with each other to promote learning. For example, Tanjona Association that has not yet
created a fund, would benefit from experiences of other associations who have already
established funds like in Miarinavatra.
There are no clear targets in the logical framework in terms of what the project expected
to be the adequate surface area to be cultivated using the technique. Despite that initial
omission, this information can easily be available from the extension agents reports and
the farmers self monitoring tools. It is important for extension agents to record the
changes in the surface area that are taking place and in the long run can help us

26. 26
understand and learn the reasons behind some people not applying the techniques to
the whole land.
5. THE CRAFTS COMPONENT
5.1. Findings
5.1.1. Summary of the focus group discussions with Craftswomen Associations
The evaluation team conducted four focus group discussions with Craftswomen
Associations in four different communes (please see appendix 8). During the focus
group discussions a semi-structured focus group guide was used, therefore in reporting
the finding, one topic might be listed several times under different sub headings. The
following section includes a summary of the findings.
5.1.1.1. What is the role of the craftswomen association?
The focus group participants believe the associations are good because it gives them a
forum where they can work together and share experiences. The associations help them
to improve their lives. Through the association they learn new skills, both from trainings
provided by ADRA and from each other. Through the training sessions they have been
able to improve existing skills; the quality of their products has improved. One focus
group reported that only a few of them had worked with crafts before, while another
focus group mentioned that half of the members had worked with crafts in the past and
the rest of the members just wanted to learn the skills.
When the project started, ADRA staff visited the villages and talked to the women about
the project and the formation of crafts associations. According to the participants; the
women who were interested were welcome to join an association. There are currently
between 10-15 members of each association. ADRA’s criterion was to have maximum
15 women in each association. A couple of associations mentioned that more than15
women were interested in joining but it was the first 15 women who showed interest that
became members of the association. A couple of other associations mentioned that
more than 15 women were interested because women are now coming to the workshop
and want to learn from the association members and the association members teach
them. Some of the villages had crafts associations before the project started. One
association mentioned they had started the association in 2001.
Each association has internal regulations. The members decided the regulations
themselves and think they are appropriate. The regulations are needed to “keep order”
to have “good organization”, “coordinate work” and “control the members” in the
associations. For example, the internal regulations decide work hours. Several of the
associations mentioned the regulations help them work together, they start at a precise
time and if some of the members cannot attend (e.g. due to illness) they have to inform
the associations why they cannot work. “The regulations control the actions of the group
and make it equal for everyone. The same rules apply to all and if there are no
regulations “people do what they like.”
Only one association reported that none of its members had quit the association. In a
couple of associations the number of people who had left was seven and five. Several
reasons for why some women left were mentioned:
 The women who left thought they would get paid
 They left because they did not have immediate benefits.
 They did not like the regulations.
 They were concerned it would conflict with other priorities.

27. 27
 Some were discouraged because they didn’t have time to take care of own
house.
5.1.1.2. What type of training have you received from ADRA?
When asked what type of training the associations had received from ADRA it varied
from association to association. The main skills mentioned were as follow; a) weaving, b)
crochet, c) wickerwork, and d) embroidery. They all received training in how to improve
the finish of their products.
There were many different answers when asked the duration of the training sessions.
The answers varied from 2 to 5 days pending on the type of craft they were being trained
in. All of the associations mentioned that the training they had received was good but
not sufficient, especially because some of the skills taught were new to the women.
ADRA had hired a consultant to conduct the crafts training. The training sessions
consisted of both theory and practical training. Some also mentioned that the training
consisted of too much theory and too little practice. There were also complaints that the
practical training sessions were not enough; they had to share items to practice.
Some of the associations had members that had not received training because they had
not been part of the association from the beginning. The association members, who had
received training, taught the new members how to do the different crafts.
5.1.1.3. What type of support has ADRA been giving after completion of
the training?
All the associations mentioned that they have received equipment and raw material from
ADRA. Some of the equipment that was mentioned was; sewing machines, knives,
scissors, wooden rulers, cupboards to store the products, tables, pots for paint, iron,
raffia, paint. One association mentioned that they have also received manuals about
crafts. The manuals help them to learn how to produce the different crafts. They thought
the manuals were good, but they were not able to apply all of it, because there are some
things they just don’t know. It was also mentioned that some of the members are not
able to read and therefore the manuals were not very useful to all.
The evaluation team obtained different information when it comes to the quality of the
equipment and raw material. One association mentioned that the equipment was of good
quality and they are using it well. Several associations mentioned that the scissors were
very fragile and would easily break because they are made of plastic. One of the
associations reported that some of the machines have already broken down and have
not been repaired. They are now using the machines that they have rented.
Most of the associations mentioned the poor quality of raffia. Some mentioned that the
raffia was too hard and that it could not be used to make hats, while others mentioned
that raffia was wet and therefore sometimes rotten. One association reported that of the
raffia that they received; only two thirds of it was usable and as a result they used the
bad raffia to practice.
The associations are managing the equipment that they have received from ADRA.
Some of the equipment was distributed individually and some of the equipment belongs
to the association. Several of the associations were divided into groups and took turns
using the different equipment. Those who need equipment may come to the association

28. 28
and borrow it as needed. One association mentioned that all the equipment is stored at
the associations president’s house. When asked what happens when the equipment
need repair, one association mentioned that each member pays 500 Ariary each month
to the association. That money is separate from the revolving funds (funds from sale of
products). This money is used to repair equipment. Per the date of the evaluation, no
money had been spent on repairs yet.
Each association had a workshop, a place where they can meet and produce their
crafts. Some of the associations had contracts with the house owner until the activities
have been completed. Some of the associations had improved the rooms by applying
mud to the walls for example. According to one association, the workshop is a place
where everyone can meet.
The associations have a work schedule which varies from association to association.
Following are some of the responses from the participants:
 “We work Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday in the afternoons.”
 “Before we worked everyday. It was not a good idea because now we are
transplanting rice. For the past month we have not worked in the workshop.”
 “During the transplanting season, we cannot work in the workshop, during
October through November we transplant rice and during March and April we
harvest rice.”
 “If we have orders we work every day… 8 am through 4 pm or 5 pm.”
 “We work everyday, if there are orders we work harder.”
 “We work every afternoon from 2 – 4 pm. If we work in the mornings we work
from 8 – 11 am.”
 “We only work in the afternoon because we have kitchen gardens and a house to
take care of.”
ADRA has provided study trips for some of the association members. One trip was to
Antananarivo to the International Fair and another trip was made to Ambositra. The
study trips gave the members an opportunity to observe the type of crafts and quality of
crafts that are being sold in other markets. These are some of the observations from the
members during their study trips:
 They saw good quality products and saw the adequate prices for their products
 They saw that the prices in Ambositra are higher compared to Fandriana
 They saw that the quality of their products are not as good as the products they
saw in Antananarivo
 They saw that the “finish” of their crafts were not as good as elsewhere.
 They realized they did not sell many products at the Fair because of the quality of
their products
 They have not been able to reproduce what they saw in Antananarivo due to lack
of training.
One of the major issues that was mentioned during all focus group discussions was the
lack of markets. All groups asked if ADRA could find markets for their products. They
were all aware that they needed markets to sell their products and they wanted to sell
their products at a higher price. Most of the current markets were in Fandriana. The
prices in Fandriana are much lower than the prices at the markets in Ambositra or
Antananarivo. For example: in Ambositra they can sell one basket for 8,000 Ariary, while
at the market in Fandriana they only receive 2,000 Ariary for it. Since they cannot find
other markets they sell their products in Fandriana at a lower price. It was also

29. 29
mentioned that craft collectors came to the different villages and collected crafts that
they had made. The profit was not very high. Sometimes they sell to the collectors and
sometimes they go to the market. When they went to Antananarivo they searched for
markets but the quality of their products is only suitable for the local Fandriana market.
They wanted more training so they can improve the quality of their products and hence
increase their market options. Some of the associations mentioned the possibilities of
finding other markets. For example there were markets in the north and they could visit
other towns, but the problem was lack of money for transportation.
5.1.1.4. What are the major successes that you have experienced in
production and selling of your crafts?
When this question was asked many different issues were mentioned. Many examples
were given regarding how the associations had helped the members. These are some of
the responses:
 “It has helped us a bit. In the past we had to buy raw materials, but after ADRA
started the association, we received raw materials for free. That is a great benefit
for us. Although we have to return the price of the raw materials to the
association, we now have money to buy things like soap.”
 “Our knowledge (skills) of crafts has improved, our minds have also changed.
Working in a group allows us to learn new things and improve our minds. We are
happy and joyful. Our living conditions have changed.”
 “It has changed our living conditions; we have more income now after ADRA.”
 “It has changed my life a bit. At this period of the year, we usually don’t have rice
anymore. Rice is very expensive and I used to borrow money to buy rice. This
year I have less debts; that is a change in life.”
 “My knowledge has increased, I can do more crafts. Now I can be more creative,
change design, create design according to what people want at the market. Can
make more elaborate.”
 “I’ve improved my skills. Before I could just make basic things. Now I can
decorate the bags, which add to the value. Before I sold a basket for 200 Ariary,
now with decoration, now maybe 2,000 – 3,000 Ariary for the ones that are well
done
It also became clear that most of the associations have a revolving fund, when the
women sell their products; part of the money has to be returned to the association (the
production price is being returned to the association). The funds returned to the
association are with the purpose of continuing the work after ADRA leaves; because of
the revolving funds the associations will be able to purchase raw materials so the
members can produce more crafts. The revolving funds could also be used to help
members of the association when needed. For example if someone was sick or just had
delivered a baby. All members agree with how the fund is being used.
Another success mentioned was the associations themselves. By being members of an
association the women have been able to learn new skills (they learn from each other),
they are able to share experiences and encourage each other. One of the benefits is that
they now have equipment and raw materials provided by ADRA. They don’t have to
spend money on purchasing raw material. Another benefit is that two representatives of
the association can go to the market and sell the products while the rest of the members
continue to work. The associations can also be represented by a few members to attend
regional meetings. The members claimed to have better health and improved household
income.

30. 30
The women also talked about their income. One association mentioned that the income
in October had been good because they had an order of hats. They made 100 hats in
four days (from Sunday to Wednesday) and they received 1,000 Ariary per hat. They
thought the price should have been 3,000 Ariary per hat if they included all the expenses
(price of raffia, time spent, and the food they consumed). It was mentioned that the cost
of raw materials for one hat was 2,000 Ariary. One group mentioned that the cost of 1
meter of raffia was 1,000 Ariary and they can make 2 hats with that material, which gives
them a profit of 400 Ariary per hat. When the women were asked how long it takes to
make a hat there were many different answers. The time frame varied from 1 hour to ½
day, from 2 hats in a day to 10 hats in a day.
The associations had been trained in how to calculate the price of the products. When
deciding on the price they take the cost of raw material and time spent into
consideration. Before the project they did not calculate the price as they do now. They
still mentioned that they do not make enough money and if crafts were their only means
of livelihood “we would quarrel with our husbands because the benefits are low.”
One of the associations reported that the income to date from sale of products was
222,280 Ariary (about $125).
5.1.1.5. What are the major challenges that you are facing in production
and selling of your crafts?
The number one major challenge mentioned by all associations was access to markets.
They were all mentioning lack of markets and their desire to sell their products at a
higher price. The Fandriana market offered low prices. They also thought it was hard to
identify new markets and wanted ADRA to identify markets for them. Some of the
associations realized that the quality of their products was not up to standard; therefore
at this point they could not sell their products on markets other than their local markets.
They therefore wished that ADRA would provide additional training so they can improve
their skills and the quality of their products. Hence, it will be easier to find markets and
they can also increase the price of the products. At the time of the mid term review one
of the challenges related to the local markets was access. Due to the rainy season and
bad road conditions, the women were not able to sell the products outside of their
commune. Another challenge was the cash flow of the population. This time of year is
the lean season and people are spending money on buying food, not products. If the
women take their products to the markets, many times they will not be sold.
Some of the members had visited other markets. There was one trip to Antananarivo to
the International Fair. Some of the associations sold some products there, but mostly
people just looked and asked for their address. In general, after the Fair the associations
brought back with them many unsold products, now the products are just sitting in
storage. The reason they gave for not being able to sell their products were that there
were too many products there and their prices were higher than the others. One reason
for the higher price is the time spent on producing the crafts. The skills are new to the
women so it takes longer to make a product, for example it takes 3 days to make a
basket. One person suggested that they should have sold a lower price instead of
bringing the products back with them, and having to sell them a lower price at the local
markets. The members who visited the Fair did not think there were many buyers there
but they saw many good ideas. One association had visited the market in Majunga (west
coast town). Regarding the quality of the products one association thought their products
were similar to those of others at the Fair and some thought their products were better.

31. 31
When asked how the women would be able to find markets, after they have increased
the quality of the products, the following responses were recorded:
 “For example, I have relatives in Tulear, and I can tell them we have products to
sell if they are needed there.”
 “I have relatives out of the region; they can sell our products”
 “When there are guests here, we can send some items with them and they can
sell them for us.”
 “Talked to hat merchants in Antsirabe and they told us that hats sell better in
January when people have money after selling fruits.”
Another topic that was mentioned was the work hours. At the time of the mid term
review, the women did not spend much time on production of crafts because it was
transplanting season for rice. They work on the field during the day and some of the
associations tried to work on crafts during the evenings (7-9pm). The problem is that
there is no electricity, so making items in the evening takes longer time and the quality is
less. Some other associations mentioned that they only work 1 or 2 days at the
workshop, because the rest of the time they have to spend on activities in their homes.
The production time of products varied from association to association and there were of
course individual variations. For example the production time of bags varied from 2 bags
to 10 bags per week (for the association). Or individually, from one bag in 3-4 days to 2
bags in a week.
The participants also mentioned raw materials. They all agreed that raw materials are
expensive. One explanation given was that there are many weavers in the area so the
demand for raw material is high, thus the high prices. But the price of the finished
product is not so high, so the expenses do not correspond to the income. When it came
to the quality of the raw material, several different responses were recorded. Several
associations felt that the quality of the raw material was good, while another association
though the quality of the raw material varied greatly. One association reported that they
almost had a quarrel with ADRA because the raw materials they provided were so bad.
In some instances 1.5 kg out of every 5 kg was no good, rocks and sand were found in
the raffia. Some were very short and the ends were not good. The quality of the products
depends on the quality of the raw materials. The better materials are more expensive.
Two members told us than they have now started to plant the raw material. There was
also a difference in opinions when it came to equipment. Some associations thought
they had enough equipment and raw material while other associations reported that they
did not have enough tools and machines. Some of the equipment lacking was sewing
machines and irons. Since the associations did not receive an iron from ADRA, one of
them has been able to buy one, while another association mentioned that they are now
renting sewing machines for 5,000 Ariary per month and the rent is paid from the
associations’ fund.
The prices are also a challenge. During the training they were taught what the prices
should be for the different items. For example, “people buy one decorated basket for
1,500 Ariary, and it should be 3,000 Ariary, while the training taught us we can sell at
7000 Ariary.”

32. 32
5.1.1.6. In your opinion, what aspects of the project have worked well,
what has not worked well and how can ADRA improve the aspects that
are currently not working well?
When asked what aspects of the project had worked well, most of the participants
mentioned that they now have increased skills; they are able to make more items and/or
make the items of better quality. Some of the skills mentioned were; make hats, bags,
and table mats. They thought the training went well, but would like more training. They
also thought the distribution of equipment went well. In the past they did have
equipment, but it was not sufficient. Now they have access to equipment through the
association.
When the participants were asked what can be done to improve the project, two main
issues were identified; improvements to workshops and trainings.
Several associations mentioned that improvement of the workshops was necessary
because they need a house for the equipment and a place to work. One association
mentioned their workshop is not adequate because not all of the members can fit inside
at the same time. Another association mentioned they would like to improve their
workshop by painting, making cement floor and inserting a door.
The associations also suggested additional training sessions. They want to improve their
existing skills and they would like to learn new skills. They suggested that the training
should include how to design items. The suggested time frame for the training was from
5 days for each activity to one month. These are some of the responses that were
recorded:
- “There wasn’t enough training, too much theory and not enough practice.”
- “Embroidery was too much talk, little practice”
- “We should have practical training straight away, that’s what we
expected. We shared table clothes 6 to 1; we should have our own
clothes to practice on.”
- “The training period should be longer, we need embroidery training and it
should be more practical.”
- “We need crochet training because we just had ½ day”
- “We need more training in how to crochet hats because they sell well.
When we go to market people ask if we know how to make those hats.”
- “We did not get embroidery training and we need it because we want to
improve our lifestyle and we can sell them.”
5.1.1.7. What do you think will happen after the project has ended?
After the project ends the participants think they will continue to work together as an
association. The associations will be able to function due to the revolving funds that the
members have created. When the project ends, the associations will be able to spend
that money on purchasing of raw materials for its members. Following are some of the
responses from the participants:
The continuity depends on the markets unless they have markets where they can sell
their products it will be difficult. They would like to search for markets and they would like
ADRA to assist. Some of the associations did not know what they could do to find
markets. Most of the associations mentioned the lack of transportation money to search
for markets as the main constraint.
The project has provided the associations with monitoring tool. Most of the associations
reported that they are using them but they did not understand fully how to fill them in