SlideShare a Scribd company logo
This project is funded by
The European Commission
A project implemented by
HTSPE Limited
Projectfunded by the European Union
Formulation of Annual Action programme
2015
11th European Development Fund
Interventions for Tanzania in the
Agriculture sector
Final Report
Project No. 2014/343611 - Version 1
2
HTSPE Limited
Thamesfield House
Boundary Way
Hemel Hempstead
Herts HP2 7SR
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1442 202400
Fax: +44 (0) 1442 266438
Email: htspe@htspe.com
Web: www.htspe.com
GEOtest a.s.
Smahova 1244/112
627 00 Brno
CZECH REPUBIC
Tel: 548 125 111
Fax: 545 217 979
Email: trade@geotest.cz
Website: www.geotest.cz
S.A. Sopex N.V.
Generaal Lemanstraat, 74
2600 Antwerpen
Belgium
Tel : 03 285 39 88
Fax : 03 285 39 96
Email : sopex@sopex.be
Web: www.sopex.be
This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication
are the sole responsibility of HTSPE Limited and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European
Union.
(5014069)
3
Table of Content
Acronyms...................................................................................................................................5
1 Summary of the assignment................................................................................................6
1.1 Introduction to the Assignment...................................................................................6
1.2 Work programme ........................................................................................................7
2 Key findings and conclusions.............................................................................................8
2.1 General ........................................................................................................................8
2.2 Sustainable agriculture ................................................................................................8
3 Annexe 1 – Enhancing access to market and value additions ..........................................10
3.1 Action Fiche ..............................................................................................................10
1. Identification.....................................................................................................................10
2. Rationale and Context.......................................................................................................10
2.1. Summary of the action and its objective ...................................................................10
2.2. Context, policies and challenges ...............................................................................11
2.3. Lessons learnt............................................................................................................13
2.4. Complementary actions.............................................................................................14
2.5. Donor coordination ...................................................................................................14
3. Detailed Description.........................................................................................................15
3.1. Objectives..................................................................................................................15
3.2. Expected results and main activities .........................................................................15
3.3. Risks and assumptions ..............................................................................................19
3.4. Cross-cutting Issues...................................................................................................20
3.5. Stakeholders ..............................................................................................................20
4. Implementation issues ......................................................................................................21
4.1. Financing agreement .................................................................................................21
4.2. Indicative operational implementation period...........................................................21
4.3. Implementation components and module .................................................................21
4.4. Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement and grants ..................................21
4.5. Indicative budget.......................................................................................................22
4.6. Performance monitoring............................................................................................22
4.7. Evaluation and audit..................................................................................................22
4.8. Communication and visibility...................................................................................22
3.2 Gender Screening Checklist......................................................................................29
3.3 TC/CD Checklist.......................................................................................................31
4 Annexe 2 - Support to food security and nutrition ...........................................................35
4
4.1 Action Fiche ..............................................................................................................35
5. Identification .................................................................................................................35
6. Rationale and Context..................................................................................................35
6.1. Summary of the action and its objective...........................................................35
6.2. Context, policies and challenges.........................................................................36
6.3. Lessons learnt ........................................................................................................39
6.4. Complementary actions.......................................................................................39
6.5. Donor coordination ..............................................................................................40
7. Detailed Description ....................................................................................................41
7.2. Expected results and main activities.................................................................41
7.3. Risks and assumptions.........................................................................................43
7.4. Cross-cutting Issues..............................................................................................44
8. Implementation issues ................................................................................................44
8.1. Financing agreement ............................................................................................44
Indicative operational implementation period.........................................................45
8.2. Implementation components and module.......................................................45
8.3. Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement and grants ....................45
8.4. Indicative budget...................................................................................................45
8.5. Performance monitoring.....................................................................................46
8.6. Evaluation and audit.............................................................................................46
8.7. Communication and visibility.............................................................................46
4.2 Gender Screening Checklist......................................................................................52
4.3 TC/CD Checklist.......................................................................................................54
4.4 Social cash transfer Checklist ...................................................................................58
5 Annexe 3 – Minutes of consultation meetings .................................................................68
5
Acronyms
AAP Annual Action Programme
AF Action Fiche
ASDS Agriculture Sector Development Strategy
ASR Agriculture Sector Review
DFID Department for International Development
DHS Demographic Health Survey
EU European Union
EUD European Union Delegation
GAIN Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition
GIZ German International Cooperation
HDDS Household Dietary Diversity Score
HFIAS Household Food Insecurity Access Scale
HLSCN High Level Steering Committee on Nutrition
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
JAST Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania
JIR Joint Implementation Review
MDG Millennium Development Goals
NAO National Authorising Officer
PANITA Partnership for Nutrition in Tanzania
PCU Programme Coordinating Unit
PMO Prime Minister’s Office
REACH UN Nutrition Coordination Mechanism
SUN Scaling Up Nutrition
6
TASAF Tanzanian Social Action Fund
TC/CD Technical Cooperation/Capacity Development
UNDP United Nations development Fund
VAM Vulnerability Analysis Mapping unit of WFP
WASH Water and Sanitation and Hygiene
WFP World Food Programme
1 Summary of the assignment
1.1 Introduction to the Assignment
The aim of this assignment is to formulate a comprehensive Annual Action programme
(Action Fiche and Annexes) in the areas of agriculture, rural infrastructure and nutrition in
specific locations of Tanzania to be funded under the 11th EDF – AAP 2015.
Based on the 2 Project Identification Fiches (Enhancing access to market and value chain,
Support to food security and nutrition), the assignment is to support the EU Delegation and
the Government of Tanzania/ National Authorizing Officer in assessing and formulating
different options based on the needs and challenges of targeted areas and populations and
preparing the necessary documents for launching the 2 Actions. The requested documents for
each identified Action are:
 Action Fiches
 Gender screening checklist
 TC/CD Checklist
 For the Nutrition Action Fiche the Social transfer Checklist
The Mission has provided also:
 AF Infrastructure – The EU Contribution Agreement with IFAD: Annex 1
Description of the Action
 AF Nutrition – The EU Contribution Agreement with WFP: Annex 1 Description of
the Action
The results should be in line with the Government policies and strategies and more
particularly with the Tanzania Agriculture and Food Security Investment Plan (TAFSIP-
2011)1
, and the 11th EDF NIP relevant focal sector and the Agenda for Change2
.
The Assignment started the 30/06 with a kick off meeting at the EU delegation and an
Inception meeting (02/07) during which the Inception report has been discussed and the
programme has been settled. The duration of the assignment has been 3 weeks (19 working
1
http://agrilinks.org/sites/default/files/resource/files/Tanzania%20Second%20Draft%20Summary%20TAFSIP.P
DF
2 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/documents/agenda_for_change_en.pdf
7
days). The Sundays have been used for internal travels and internal meetings for the
preparation of draft Action Fiches and Annexes 1.
Throughout the assignment, the Consultant has used quantitative and qualitative methods to
conduct analysis and reach recommendations. The experts deployed a participatory approach,
involving beneficiaries and all stakeholders concerned more specifically the WFP staff (HQ
and Dodoma) and the IFAD staff (HQ and Arusha). The work of the experts and the outputs
produced are in line with the principles that are governing EU's international aid policies and
the government strategy.
1.2 Work programme
ML JFB AvdH
Phase 1 – Assignment preparation (Home Based). 4 4 4
Desk study. Preparation of the Inception Report
(Sunday 29/07) - Travel to Tanzania
Phase 2: Desk study and Field work (in country) (30/06-18/07) 19 19 19
Monday 30/06 - Briefing with EU Delegation and proposal to organise a Steering Group
Setting up work plan and interview schedule in consultation with the EUD
Wednesday 02/07 - Presentation and discussion on the Inception report. It has been
decided that for each EU Intervention, the Mission will prepare a draft “Action Fiche” and
the “Annexe 1 to the contribution agreement between the EU and Partner Organisation –
Description of the Action”.
Interviews with WFP, IFAD, DfID, REACH, GAIN, VAM
Definition of geographical coverage and organisation of field visits in selected areas
Field visit in selected areas. A one week (06-13/07) field visit took place in Dodoma
(WFP sub office) to investigate the food security and nutrition status. Meetings and field
visits took place in Dodoma and Singida regions followed by a consolidation meeting and
an extensive debriefing session with the WFP Sub office team followed by a debriefing at
the WFP HQ Monday 14/07. During the field visit the Mission was accompanied by a
WFP programme officer. Three days dedicated with the IFAD PCU (Arusha) for
discussions and field visits followed by two days in Dodoma for field visits and
consolidation/debriefing with the IFAD/PCU.
Week 3 - Thorough desk study and consultation with Government officials (PMO
Secretariat), NGOs (Concerns, IrishAid, World Vision, Africare, GAIN, REACH) farmers
and agro processors association, Development Partners (UNIDO, AfDB, DfID) and other
relevant stakeholders.
Synthesis of options: Internal team meetings have taken place to discuss and consolidate
options. A first draft of Action Fiches has been proposed to the EU delegation (14/07) for
Comment (15/07). This has been followed by the drafting of the Annexe 1 to the
8
Contribution Agreement – Description of the Action for each proposed EU intervention.
Friday 18/07 – Debriefing at the EU Delegation. Presentation of the two Actions (AF and
Annexes 1). Revision of the drafts based on comment from the EU Delegation.
(21/07) - Official documents sent to the EU Delegation by HTSPE
(Saturday 19/07) - Travel from Tanzania
Phase 3: Synthesis and report writing (Home based 8 7 7
(04/08) - Comment from the EU Del on the AFs and Annexes 1
(14/08) - Final Report (Summary of the Assignment, Key findings and recommendations,
AFs and Annexes 1, Minutes of the Meetings)
TOTAL 31 30 30
2 Key findings and conclusions
2.1 General
The Phase 1 work gave an overview of:
 The agriculture sector in Tanzania and the main challenges existing in the field of
agriculture development in relation to the proposed fields of intervention.
 The existing policies, programmes and important projects as well as the on-going
donor activities in the fields concerned.
 The other focal sectors (Rural infrastructure, Food security and nutrition) as they
relate to agriculture and the potential synergies.
 The main potential private sector and civil society players in the region and their field
of intervention.
 The ways the EU can support the proposed identified interventions in the framework
of the AAP2015/11th EDF (2014-2020).
The Phase 2 proposed a ready to use Action Fiches (Infrastructure and Nutrition) including
relevant annexes and the Annexe 1 to the Contribution Agreement with the relevant
organisation – Description of the Action for both identified EU intervention. The two sets of
document have been drafted in close coordination with the relevant organisations which
should be in charge, and based on extensive programme of meetings and field visits in the
targeted areas.
The Phase 3 provided this Final report and final proposed Action Fiche and Annexes for both
identified EU interventions.
2.2 Sustainable agriculture
The identified EU interventions within the AAP2015/11th EDF “Enhancing access to market
and value chain” and “Support to food security and nutrition” are part of the Focal Sector 3 –
Sustainable Agriculture. Focus on development of productive infrastructure and food
9
security in the agriculture sector within selected Regions and targeted areas should be
developed in synergies with the concept of green economy. Processing of agricultural
products (including job creation, professional training, and innovation) as well as promotion
and facilitation of trade in processed products should be given considerable attention.
Application of climate change adaptation measures should be part of any Action related to
sustainable agriculture.
Employment and Social Protection: Focus on interventions that can contribute to
employment generation and bringing the informal sector within a more real economy. The
sector will target also the most disadvantaged population groups (women, youths) for social
protection.
In line with the Government of Tanzania ongoing policies and reforms, consolidating the
nexus between sustainable agriculture, rural infrastructure, food security and nutrition
will be expected to boost production, storage, handling, transformation, distribution and
marketing of agricultural products and increase the income generation of smallholder farmers
from subsistence to commercial oriented farming.
Actions to be developed within the Sustainable Agriculture development sector should
support climate change mitigating measures to ensure an environmentally sustainable
growth of the sector. Farming practices should be improved in order to increase nutritional
resilience and also to introduce new crops and technologies that reverse potential negative
impacts on the environment and the climate. Adapted capacity building, extension work and
transfer of technology in favour of agricultural producers, service providers, and relevant
local authorities and farmers associations will contribute to the implementation of the
National Climate Change Policy.
The Mission has also identified the following key issues which have been taken into account
in the drafting of the document
 Market Infrastructure
o Integrated approach for construction and rehabilitation of rural infrastructure:
o The role of the Community Based Organisations:
o Sourcing the road fund and its management issue
 Food security and Nutrition
o The lack of accurate and updated food security and nutrition data necessary for
planning and monitoring
o The necessity for WFP to invest in agriculture expertise and staff at regional
and central levels
10
3 Annexe 1 – Enhancing access to market and value additions
3.1 Action Fiche
ANNEX 2
of the Commission Decision on the Enhancing Access to Market and Value Chain
Programme
1. Identification
Title/Number Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
CRIS number 2014 /037-446
Total cost Total estimated cost: EUR 15,0000,000 (2.4% of IP)
Total amount of EDF contribution: EUR 15,0000,000
11th European Development Fund (EDF)
Aid method / Method of
implementation
Project approach –Joint management with International Fund for
Agricultural Development (IFAD)
DAC-code 43040 Sector Trade Development
2. Rationale and Context
2.1. Summary of the action and its objective
The overall objective of the Programme to contribute to improving livelihoods of people
living in rural areas through generation of agricultural wealth and increase of smallholder
farmers’ income. The purpose is to support the development of an enabling agriculture
market environment in Tanzania (Mainland and Zanzibar). The Programme will support the
delivery of two interconnected Components (rural infrastructures, capacity building),
ensuring maximum impact on poverty reduction. It will foster the key principles of ownership
and partnership development at the Local Government Administration and Non State Actors
levels. The Programme is designed to support social inclusion and human development
11
through better access to market and promoting sustainable agriculture and natural resources
management.
2.2. Context, policies and challenges
Country context: The United Republic of Tanzania, comprising the Mainland and Zanzibar,
is an influential member of the East African Community (EAC), which also includes Kenya,
Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi. In 2012 and into 2013, the Tanzanian economy expanded at
an annualized rate of approximately 7%. The main drivers of Tanzania’s rapid economic
growth continue to be a small number of fast growing capital intensive sectors, particularly
communications, financial services, construction, manufacturing, mining and retail trade. The
service sector recorded the highest rate of annual growth in 2012, at 8.0%. By contrast,
labour intensive sectors, particularly the agricultural sector, in which approximately 80% of
households are primarily engaged, recorded an average annual growth rate of only 4.2%.
Poverty - Tanzania’s ranking in UNDP’s Human Development Index3 improved marginally
from 0.370 in 2005 to 0.398 in 2010. Still, poverty remains high suggesting that, despite
impressive macroeconomic achievements and sustained economic growth over the past
decade, there has been very little impact on the incomes and well-being of the rural poor.
Available evidence points to the weak redistributive aspect of growth, especially the weak
linkages with rural areas where the majority of the population lives. Poverty remains
predominantly rural (37.4% of the population) due largely to low agricultural growth caused
by drought, low marketing power and poor agriculture infrastructure and equipment. These
developments suggest that the MDG target of halving abject poverty by 2015 may not be
achieved4.
National development policy: The 2001 Agricultural Sector Development Strategy
(ASDS) objective was to achieve a sustained agricultural growth rate of 5% per year
primarily through the transformation from subsistence to commercial agriculture. The
transformation was to be private sector led through an improved enabling environment for
enhancing the productivity and profitability of agriculture. The implication is for policy and
public expenditure to be a means of inducing private sector investment in the agricultural
sector. The ASDS contributes to both the growth and poverty reduction objectives of the
National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty and to the Tanzania
Development Vision (TDV) 2025 which envisages raising the standard of living of
Tanzanians to a typical medium-income country through ensuring food security, improving
incomes and increasing export earnings. The medium term development goals are outlined in
the National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty - MKUKUTA II/MKUZA II
(2011-2015)5, which focus on broad clusters: i) growth and reduction of income poverty; ii)
improvement of quality of life and social wellbeing; and iii) governance and accountability
(MKUKUTA II) and i) growth and reduction of income poverty; ii) improvement of social
services and wellbeing; and iii) good governance and national unity (MKUZA II). The
strategies are fully linked with the Millennium Development Goals, results-based
management, and count on the contributions of all sectors to growth and poverty reduction.
The target is a real growth rate of 8% for 2015, setting the foundation for a higher growth of
10% from 2016 to 2025. To achieve these objectives the Government focuses on five key
priority areas: infrastructure, agriculture, industry, human capital and tourism.
3 http://countryeconomy.com/hdi/tanzania
4 http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/country/home/tags/tanzania
5 http://www.tzdpg.or.tz/external/national -development-framework/national-development-framework.html
12
In the context of the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program (CAADP),
Tanzania adopted in 2011 an Agriculture and Food Security Investment Plan (TAFSIP)
(2011-2021)6 to achieve the CAADP target of 6% annual growth in agricultural GDP.
TAFSIP aims to be the financing mechanism and framework for implementing the
Agricultural Sector Development Strategy through the Agricultural Sector Development
Programme. In fact it is well anchored to, and aligned with, other agricultural strategies. In
the context of the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition7, G8 members committed
agricultural financial and technical support within the priorities of the CAADP/TAFSIP. This
support has been designed to increase responsible private sector investment in agriculture in
line with Tanzania’s overarching ‘Kilimo Kwanza’ (“Agriculture First”) vision8. Within
the CAADP/TAFSIP, the Southern Agriculture Growth Corridor initiative (SAGCOT)
was launched in 20119 as a "public-private partnership" (PPP). The partnership brings
together commercial and public sector actors, as well as local and international organisations
working with agricultural value chains to develop “clusters” of profitable farming and
processing businesses, allowing small, medium and large farmers to share the benefits of
scales and access to infrastructure. In line with SAGCOT, the Big Results Now (BRN)10 is
Tanzania’s latest initiative to transform the country into a middle-income economy focusing
on six priority sectors including agriculture. Growth in agriculture GDP is to be driven by a
combination of small scale farming models and large scale commercial farming. Increased
smallholder income is to be achieved through smallholder aggregation with a strong emphasis
on infrastructure development, notably warehouses and small scale irrigation schemes.
According to the Agricultural Sector Review 2006 by the Tanzanian Ministry of
Agriculture, Food Security and Co-operatives, existing taxation (e.g. high corporate tax,
import duties on agro-processing equipment) discourages the production of food crops in
general and for the market in particular. The National Agricultural Policy 2013 (NAP 2013)
aims at addressing challenges that continue to hinder the development of the agricultural
sector. A more conducive policy environment is required for effective participation of all
actors in the sector in order to tap existing capabilities and potentialities so as to revitalise the
development of the sector. There is a policy shift towards increased investment in agriculture
and greater involvement of the private sector in the production and provision of support
services to the farming community. The existing legal and regulatory framework does not
provide the necessary provisions to ensure the development of a modern, efficient and
competitive sector and under NAP 2013 agricultural related laws, legislations and regulations
will be review, harmonization and formulated. Tanzania is party to various regional
integration and trade affiliations such as the East African Common Market which became
operational in July 2010 and will position Tanzania to participate in a market with a
population of 126 million, providing opportunities for tariff free market access and less
stringent sanitary and phytosanitary requirements.
Agri Infrastructure Sector context - policies and challenges: All agriculture related
national policies emphasize the importance of rural infrastructure development, particularly
the need for passable feeder roads, adequate rural energy, efficient communication and
post-harvest and marketing infrastructure, all of which are essential for agriculture
growth. More particularly the MKUKUTA II is targeting (i) increased rehabilitation of rural
feeder roads connecting agricultural areas to trunk roads by 50% by 2015; and (ii) scaled up
6 http://www.gafspfund.org/sites/gafspfund.org/files/Documents/TAFSIP_FINAL_FOR_PRINTING_AND_CIRCULATION.pdf
7 http://feedthefuture.gov/lp/new-alliance-food-security-and-nutrition
8 http://www.policyforum-tz.org/files/ReducingpovertythroughKilimoKwanza.pdf
9 http://www.sagcot.com/
10 http://www.africa-platform.org/resources/tanzanias -big-results-now-initiative
13
storage and agro-processing facilities to enhance value chains. Similarly, Kilimo Kwanza
identifies improved infrastructure as one of its pillars, including market centres, storage and
agri-processing facilities and increased access to input and produce markets. The AfDB11
report 2010 and the WB12 Tanzania Country Economic Memorandum 2012 – Concept
Note identify the most critical constraints for inclusive economic rural growth as: 1) land
tenure, access rights and management, 2) poor infrastructure, 3) financing the agriculture
sector and access to credit. The report notably highlights that agriculture remains the
dominant sector in the country's economy. It is also recognised that agricultural programmes
have failed to have any notable effect on smallholders due to the fact that Development
Partners’ initiatives remained project based, highly geographically focussed and relatively
disconnected. Increased institutional support for agriculture, particularly through
strengthening the Local Government Administration, is necessary and the institutional
framework of agricultural development must be strengthened alongside rural infrastructure,
market access, and rural credit. Improving income generation opportunities through the
agricultural sector mainly lies in addressing the sector needs and constraints such as the
competitiveness, production and marketing costs. The problems to be tackled can be
summarised under the following issues: i) restricted market access for local producers and
businesses; ii) scarce availability of financial services; iii) limited service delivery
capacity at district, and local government levels; iv) and lack of entrepreneurial and
business skills for local producers and businesses. These main issues are being considered
as the basis for the Action and are in line with the NIP 2014-2020 which identifies linking
farmers to processing and markets as part of the Focal Sector Sustainable Agriculture.
Furthermore they are in line with the EU Agenda for Change13 and particularly the focus on
inclusive and sustainable growth, as the Action will impact on sustainable agriculture and
enhance the business environment through promoting small and medium enterprises and
cooperatives.
2.3. Lessons learnt
Reducing aid fragmentation: To contribute to the ongoing effort to reduce fragmentation of
the sector, EU funded interventions need to foster synergies and collaboration with other
agencies and, where possible, build on existing successful programmes. EU support to the
ongoing Marketing Infrastructure Value Addition and Rural Finance Programme (MIVARF)
is considered as an opportunity to contribute to an integrated country-wide programme that
combines hard and soft investments. Rural infrastructure sector development is
recognised as having a clear impact on food security and economic growth; this has been
highlighted in the evaluation of the EU Food Facility initiative. However rural infrastructure
management and maintenance through public funding is a recurrent issue that needs to be
addressed through technical and institutional capacity building support for Local Government
Administration and Village communities. Focus on Local Government Administration
and Community Based Organisations: The Agriculture Sector Development Programme
(ASDP) Impact Assessment Report for the infrastructure component highlights that, because
of the wide geographical coverage, investments have been thinly spread, and the approach
has not been conducive to expanding agricultural production and value added in the sector.
The report recommends that in future support should be more strategically targeted towards
Local Government Authorities (LGAs) with high agricultural potential, including at least one
crop with good marketing potential, and aligned with other development opportunities
11 http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Publications/WORKING%20105%20%20PDF%20d.pdf
12http://www.worldbank.org/en/region/afr/
13 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/documents/agenda_for_change_en.pdf
14
identified for these areas. Limited capacity of stakeholders/Focus at Local Government
Administration and community level: The DFID funded African Community Access
Programme14 (2008-2014) and other rural infrastructure projects have found that in Tanzania
Local Government Administrations face significant capacity constraints in the planning,
implementation and maintenance of public works. Shortages of staff, frequent staff turnover
and limited availability of transport are particular issues. Capacity building for engineering
and procurement staff and contributing to transport costs will go some way towards
alleviating this problem. Infrastructure maintenance budgets, particularly for feeder roads, are
inadequate and projects such as the African Community Access Programme have found that
well trained and equipped Community Based Organizations can be effective for rural access
maintenance. Strengthening community ownership and responsibility: Most rural
infrastructure development projects (USAID, DANIDA, AfDB) have found that community
consultation and mobilization prior to any infrastructure development is essential to
strengthening community ownership and long term sustainability of works.
2.4. Complementary actions
The EU is supporting in partnership with other institutions the rehabilitation of road
infrastructure and the development of energy infrastructure in key SAGCOT "clusters. The
10th EDF Rural Roads Programme implemented in Iringa, Rovuma, and Morogoro region is
creating opportunities to build synergies towards increased connectivity of feeder roads, rural
roads and main trunk roads enhancing access to inputs/outputs markets. The Action
complements efforts achieved under the EU Accompanying Measures for Sugar, which has
contributed to the development of small scale infrastructure (feeder roads) for out-growers
schemes. The EU Food Facility initiative has clearly demonstrated the positive impact of
rural infrastructure development on food security. Related to the 11th EDF, the Action has the
potential to complement the planned EU Support on Food Security and Nutrition programme
(AAP 2015). Member States such as UK (DFID) and Ireland (IrishAid) are participating
actively in the rural infrastructure sector development through the SAGCOT, BRN and
ASDP funding. DFID is providing £25M for the programme ‘Improving Rural Access in
Tanzania’ (2013-2017) delivered through the Tanzania Roads Fund Board and Local
Government Authorities. The use of labour based road construction methods is encouraged.
IFAD through the Marketing Infrastructure Value Addition and Rural Finance
(MIVARF) support is a key player in promoting warehouse receipt schemes, market linkages
and processing through support to capacity building and development of appropriate
infrastructures, as well as improving rural financial inclusion through capacity building of
existing financial institutions that provide services in the rural area. This programme is co-
funded with AfDB. USAID is providing support for planning, feasibility assessment, detailed
design, procurement support and construction supervision activities for two irrigation
schemes, Dakawa and Mgongola, including improved market access through rehabilitation
and maintenance of rural feeder roads. In addition, through Feed the Future, USAID is
supporting rice, maize and horticulture value chains in a number of regions. JICA is
providing support to ASDP particularly through technical and financial cooperation for some
120 small scale irrigation schemes and capacity building for rice industry development.
2.5. Donor coordination
The agriculture sector is coordinated through the Stakeholders Agriculture Consultative
Group Meetings which are held on a quarterly basis. The group is composed by Development
Partners (DPs), line ministries, NSA and academia's representatives. Development Partners
14 http://afcap.org/SitePages/Home.aspx
15
meet on a monthly basis within the Agriculture Working Group15 to share information and
agree on common positions for policy dialogue with the government on implementation of
the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS), priorities and plans. The annual
Agriculture Sector Review (ASR/PER) is expected to be carried out during last quarter 2014
and first quarter 2015; in parallel the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS) is
being reviewed and updated for the next coming years 2014-2020. Coordination mechanisms
in place are also being reviewed and streamlined to strengthen a sector approach role and the
leader ship of Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives, including recently
launched initiative such as BRN.
3. Detailed Description
3.1. Objectives
The overall objective of the Action is to generate wealth and to increase income and
livelihood of the rural population. The purpose of the Action is to increase access for
smallholder farmers to the input/output market through the development of rural
infrastructures (feeder roads, storage and agri-processing facilities, collection centres, market
facilities) and increased capacities of Local Government Administration and Community
Based Organisations.
3.2. Expected results and main activities
The Action is expected to contribute to smallholder farmers' food security and income
increase through better access to markets, storage facilities and value addition for their
commodities. Infrastructure investments are expected to have a direct positive impact on
quality, postharvest losses, transport cost, and access to better prices.
Strategy - The Action will build on activities developed through the MIVARF Programme
(2011/2018 - 125M Euro). MIVARF’s target group is low-income women and men in all the
rural districts/LGAs of the Mainland and Zanzibar who have a potential to improve their
productivity and incomes, as well as the food security of their households. It covers 72
districts in 29 regions of Tanzania Mainland and Zanzibar with three components: (1)
Marketing infrastructure; (2) Rural finance; and (3) Programme coordination. Criteria used to
prioritizing districts and wards include: (a) high incidence of poverty, food insecurity and
degree of vulnerability; (b) existence of smallholder farmers, small entrepreneurs and
artisans; (c) effective involvement of women and female headed households and other
vulnerable groups; (d) active participation of the private sector/NGOs/CBOs to enhance
public private partnership (PPP), commitment to community-driven development and
livelihood-based and gender-sensitive poverty reduction; and (e) entrepreneurship and market
potential. Districts compete for inclusion in the Programme. All districts submit proposals
(based on District Development Plans, which draw on village and ward plans), to the regional
offices where they are evaluated on the basis of the eligibility criteria and prioritised.
Successful proposals are forwarded to MIVARF, where they are reviewed by the PCT to
ensure that they meet eligibility criteria. MIVARF interventions take market demand as a
starting point, focusing on existing agribusiness and products with a high national or regional
demand, and helping smallholder groups match supply to the buyers’ requirements through
facilitating market information and improved policy environment. Participants in MIVARF
are also assisted to link up with existing larger enterprises under contract farming and out-
grower arrangements.
15 http://www.tzdpg.or.tz/index.php?id=952
16
At present MIVARF limits funding of feeder roads to 30-35km per district for full
rehabilitation of roads to gravel standard, including all necessary structures. There is no
ceiling on costs, but MIVARF works on the basis of an average cost of USD 30,000-35000
per km, depending on site conditions. For other types of infrastructure, each district is limited
to construction of one warehouse and one market, and rehabilitation of up to two warehouses.
Most proposals request only roads and warehouses. The budget limit is USD 200,000 for a
1,000 ton capacity warehouse and up to USD 400,000 for market facilities. There is also
provision for renovation and reequipping post-harvest training centres in some regions at a
cost of USD 40,000-50,000. For capacity building of producers and processors and market
linkages in each district by a Service Provider, the budget is USD 80,000/year for 3 years.
The rural finance components are more challenging as financing is based on Institutional
Business Development Plans prepared by various micro finance institutions participating in
Programme implementation. Infrastructure related investments are directly paid from donors
to contractors or by the coordination unit depending on contract amount. Districts receive
limited funds, disbursed on a quarterly basis, for supervision of marketing infrastructure and
other Programme components. The entry point for Programme intervention is the Region,
which has a MoU with the Programme. A MoU between the Region and the district
provides a basis for all activities being implemented at district level. Districts are monitored
on their adherence to what has been agreed in the MoU and evaluated in terms of what
support they provide to Programme activities. As no funds are provided directly to districts
for implementation of activities, evaluation is straightforward. For cost effectiveness,
MIVARF promotes a wide choice of service providers from both the public and private
sectors to work with the Programme. It is building the capacity of the private sector to
compete for service provision contracts in order to reduce dependence on public funding.
Under the programme MIVARF, private sector participation and commercial incentives are
seen as keys to sustainability of interventions. Activities are implemented mainly by farmer
groups (CBOs), warehouse managers, collaborating commercial banks and SACCOS, and
private sector partner agencies recruited through a competitive bidding process by the
Districts with support from the Programme Coordination Team
The proposed EU intervention will focus on MIVARF’s Component 1 which has the specific
objective to enhance rural incomes and food security through improved market access, and
increased skills of small-scale producers and processors. The EU Contribution will scale up
the MIVARF Programme impacts though investment in rural infrastructure (feeder
roads, post-harvest facilities, collection centres) and capacity building for Local
Government Administrations and Community Based Organisations. As added value, the
EU intervention will be integrated into the ongoing MIVARF implementation procedures,
focusing on areas where value chain and access to finance activities re being implemented but
short of financial resources for infrastructure. Following existing MIVARF procedures, the
EU intervention will use government institutional arrangements and planning systems in
order to enhance sustainability and strengthen alignment with government priorities. Drawing
on District Development Plans, which incorporate District Agricultural Development Plans,
LGAs in selected regions will propose packages of interventions for areas that: (i) have a
high incidence of poverty and food insecurity, but which have at least one major crop that
produces (or has the potential to produce) a surplus for marketing; and (ii) have smallholder
farmers and small entrepreneurs willing to be facilitated to increase their livelihood incomes.
LGA staff, with support from MIVARF, will procure contractors for construction, and will
ensure that Community Based Organisation, including women’s groups, are actively involved
in the design, implementation, operation and maintenance of the assets, ensuring their long
term sustainability. Service Providers will provide support in each participating district,
17
empowering small-scale farmers, traders and processors through assisting the formation of
cohesive groups, providing them with organisational, entrepreneurial and technical skills, and
facilitating access to markets and financial services.
The expected results are twofold: i) Results 1 - Smallholder access to input and output
market is improved through rural infrastructure (feeder roads, post-harvest facilities,
collection centres and market facilities); ii) Result 2 – Smallholders, Local Government
Administrations and village communities have the capacity for efficient infrastructure
maintenance and market linkages
Selection of target areas: currently 29 regions are planned to benefit from soft activities
(capacity building and access to finance) while only 23(18 mainland and 5 in Zanzibar) out of
the 2916 will benefit of hard activities (infrastructure investments) due to financial
availability constraints. Based on the selection criteria previously mentioned and availability
of EU resources, EU support will focus on two neighbouring regions: Mtwara and Lindi.
Mtwara and Lindi regions are: a) adjacent to one another; b) they are considerably poorer
than the other regions (20% poor/ 28.5% borderline food consumption in Mtwara and 5.3%
poor/ 28.5% borderline food consumption in Lindi); c) there is potential for developing value
chains for cashew nuts, sesame and rice; d) the Aga Khan Foundation (with DFID funding
and EC funding) is already supporting smallholder cultivation, value chain post-harvest
operations and marketing in a range of crops such as horticulture, sesame and rice; and e)
MIVARF has, or is planning, activities in three districts in each of the region, whereas only
two districts will be covered in Kagera, Kigoma, Mara and Tabora. EU intervention will be
an integrated package of infrastructure combined with community development, supported by
Local Government Administration.
The Action will focus on two integrated Components:
Component 1 - Rural Infrastructure improvement
Act. 1.1. Rehabilitation of feeder roads connecting local communities to markets and
essential social services facilities. It is expected to rehabilitate 350 km of feeder road, if
possible, using Labour Based Technology. Where an adequate local workforce is available
labour based, rather than machine based, rehabilitation is recommended in order to provide
wage earning opportunities for people in poor areas. Added benefits are that local people and
Community Based Organisations (CBOs) will be involved in the rehabilitation, acquiring
skill for routine and periodic maintenance of the road and building ownership on the assets.
Act. 1.2. Rehabilitation or construction of storage and agri-processing facilities, collection
centres and market facilities at village community level and/or district centre level. It is
expected that 20 facilities, identified as priorities in District Development Plans, will be
rehabilitated or constructed. At each site, a Community Based Organisation will be involved
in the design preparation ensuring possible management and ownership of assets.
Component 2 – Capacity building for rural communities and Local Government
Administration
Act. 2.1. Support a management system for the sustainable maintenance of the rehabilitated
feeder roads developed through training and engagement of Community Based Organisations
living along the rehabilitated feeder roads and Local Government Administration. It is
expected that the District council will sign a memorandum of understanding ensuring
16 Kagera,Kigoma, Mara, Tabora, Mtwara , Lindi are not covered by infrastructure component
18
continuing funding through the District Road Fund budget for the Community Based
Organisation contracted for the routine maintenance and minor repairs.
Act. 2.2. Support a management system for the sustainable maintenance and management of
the storage and processing facilities, collection centres and market facilities, developed
through Local Government Administration and Community Based Organisations
mobilisation process. Farmers will be expected to pay membership fees to the CBOs that will
cover the operation and maintenance of the facilities. Linkages between facilities and
microfinance sector (warehouse receipts) will be facilitated. The Warehouse receipt Act
no.10 of 2005 supports the participation of smallholder producers in agricultural commodities
trade, access to bank credit and the reduction of post-harvest losses. The Act provides the
legal foundation for farmers and traders to obtain credit from lenders through the use of
Warehouse Receipts when they deposit their produce in a licensed warehouse. Support will
be provided to facilitate the implementation of warehouse receipts systems to make the
system more accessible and usable by farmers. This will include workshops at regional and
district level to create awareness amongst government staff, farmers, SACCOS, commercial
banks and other actors on the benefits of WRS.
Act. 2.3. Support the ongoing training programme for smallholder farmers and processors to
facilitate access to information and knowledge on market, new technologies and agricultural
best practices. The aim will be to work with groups of rural men, women and youths with a
common interest through existing CBOs. Training topics will include group management
skills, post-harvest technology and value addition, marketing skills and accessing market
information, accessing and using credit, improved agricultural techniques and best practice,
natural resource management and climate change adaptation measures. If, and when
necessary, youth and women will be provided with foundation courses or literacy training in
order to participate effectively in the training programme. The Act 2.3 will organise
awareness campaigns on issues such as HIV/AIDS, climate change adaptation and
environmental management.
Act. 2.4. Local Government Administration training to support governance initiatives, such
as District Development Plan preparation, development, and monitoring with the aim to
reinforce the link between Local Government Administration and local communities in terms
of rural infrastructure management and value chain development funding. The LGA planning
process is intended to be a bottom up procedure with inputs from communities, village
committees and ward committees feeding into the District Agricultural Development Plans
and District Development Plans. At present the procedure is often poorly implemented due to
lack of resources and data, and delays in the system. The EU intervention will work with
LGAs and communities to identify community priorities and ensure that District plans take
them into account. Prime Minister Office staff at central and local levels will be involved in
training and in monitoring and guiding activities. Specific training will be provided to
upgrade the technical skill of, amongst others, engineers, procurement staff and environment
officers at district and regional level.
Support to Programme management: The Programme Coordinating Unit based in Arusha
is adequately staffed for the current workload apart from the engineering and procurement
staff who are overextended as there are too few staff to provide LGAs and communities with
the level of support needed. Support through the EU intervention to the Programme
Coordinating Unit will be reinforced with additional technical engineering and procurement
capacities to be based in the target areas to ensure the efficient and on time delivery of Action
results.
19
The Action will contribute to key policies and plans of the government: i) the Kilimo Kwanza
(Agriculture First), notably the fourth pillar: financing incentives for private-sector
investment, industrialization, and infrastructure development; ii) the Comprehensive African
Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) efforts and national investment plan
focusing on food security and infrastructure and trade related development; and iii) the
recently launched Big Results Now (BRN) initiative, to boost results in the agriculture sector,
notably promoting trade, and private sector investment through investment in rural
infrastructure and smallholder aggregation.
3.3. Risks and assumptions
Risks Mitigation measures
The rural infrastructure
rehabilitation works do not result
in significant impact in market
access for small and isolated
farmers and farmers’ groups
(medium).
The prioritization process for the infrastructure investments will be
designed (see section 3.2) to ensure the highest possible returns in terms
of facilitating physical access to market for smallholders’ farmers. Rural
infrastructure shall combine feeder roads, storage processing and
collection facilities.
Limited capacity and skills at
district level may lead to delays
and poor quality work (high)
Adequate support and capacity building will be provided through training of
district engineers and procurement staff, and, where necessary, use of
contractors for preparation of detailed design and supervision of works.
The District annual budget from
the Road Fund may be inadequate
for all routine and periodic
maintenance needs of upgraded
/rehabilitated roads, which would
jeopardize their sustainability.
(high)
Community Contracting will be encouraged for routine road maintenance
and minor repairs. Local Government Authorities will contract Community
Based Organizations from villages near the roads. The Community Based
Organizations will be trained in road maintenance, provided with basic
equipment and paid a set rate for the work, which will cost less than
employing private contractors. Periodic maintenance will remain the
responsibility of the District
Gender issue are not taken into
account during the implementation
phase (medium)
To ensure that women and other vulnerable groups are not side-lined, the
Action will make certain that all community activities include a high
percentage of people from these groups and that they are included in wage
earning opportunities. The EU intervention will ensure that the views and
concerns of women and other vulnerable groups are addressed in community
meetings and proposals. They will be provided with training in leadership,
improved agricultural techniques and businesses skills, and assisted to link
to credit facilities and markets. Possibilities for new high value niche
products that women producers might control better will be explored.
MIVARF has a target of at least 40% of beneficiaries of group activities to
be women and FHHs and this will apply to the EU intervention also. Special
consideration will be given to their needs by, for example, adjusting the
timing of activities to fit in with child care and other duties.
Assumptions: i) Government continues its support for a policy, regulatory, and institutional
framework that enable agricultural value chains to become stronger; ii) Project ensures close
coordination of activities between stakeholders through regular monitoring and effective
management of the project steering committee; iii) Discontinuity in institutions’
representatives does not hinder the implementation of the Project in the framework of the
agreed governance system; iv) There is a high level of coordination between government
institutions and with Development Partners; v) The Government of Tanzania continues its
commitment to the fight against corruption, improving transparency and strengthening
accountability through the media and civil society.
20
3.4. Cross-cutting Issues
The gender division of labour in the agricultural sector assigns the larger part of agricultural
work to women who traditionally lack access to land and other production and marketing
inputs. Women often lose control over agricultural produce when marketing is formalised or
value addition takes place to yield higher and more regular incomes. There is the risk,
therefore, that improved marketing and value addition that withdraws food crops from family
consumption might increase household incomes without substantially increasing family food
security and improving nutrition. The socio-economic empowerment of women and other
disadvantaged groups will be enhanced through improving their access to markets,
appropriate financial services, training and income earning opportunities such as work on
roads. MIVARF already has an established minimum quota of 40% for women membership
of participating groups, committee positions, and training opportunities. This will be applied
to EU funded activities also. Principles of good governance have been taken into account
with the view of promoting an enabling economic environment that can be implemented by
local institutions and private sector. Through activity 2.4, the EU intervention is directly
aimed at enhancing good governance at Local Government Administration level by
improving capacity and strengthening accountability of the public sector and involvement of
Non State Actors in action planning. Activity 1.1 aims at rehabilitating feeder road networks
and not extending them, therefore the impact on the environment should be minimal.
Nevertheless, the Programme will conduct environmental impact assessment, including
preparation of the associated environmental and social management plans (ESMPs), during
the road design process. Through the Activity 2.3 the EU intervention is expected to enhance
positive environmental outcomes by the promotion and adoption of improved and sustainable
farming practices through an integrated (value chain) approach. HIV/AIDS infection is a key
element of the poverty situation in Tanzania. Although there has been a decline in HIV
prevalence in the 15-49 years age group from 7.2% in 2004 to 5.5% in 2008, the decline has
been slower for females than for males. An estimated 1.8 million people in Tanzania are
living with HIV/AIDS. The impact of HIV is likely to be more severe in the rural areas
considering the lower access of rural people to potable water, sanitation and health facilities.
Through Activity 2.3, campaigns will be carried out to increase awareness of HIV/AIDS in
rural areas where access is improved through road rehabilitation. The Action shall ensure that
HIV/AIDS sufferers are not discriminated against and are able to participate in all activities.
Nutrition: Feeder roads providing better access to markets, health care, education and other
social services will enable women to access information (activity 2.3) that will help them
provide better nutrition to their children.
3.5. Stakeholders
The beneficiaries for the Action are: i) smallholder farmers; ii) farmer groups and women’s
groups, small and medium sized agribusinesses associations and Community Based
Organisations, which will enhance economies of scale for further infrastructure investment
and maintenance; iii) LGAs that will benefit from capacity building and some additional
resources. Key stakeholders are Districts Local Government Administrations that are facing
significant capacity constraints in planning and execution of public works. The challenges in
procurement, financial management and supervision are recognised and the EU intervention
shall enhance ongoing efforts in planning and implementation of socio-economic
development programmes at District level. At central level important stakeholders are PMO
and line ministries involved in the Programme Steering Committee. Other stakeholders are
actors involved in the agricultural value chain including input suppliers, producer and market
groups, crop processers, traders and financial service providers.
21
4. Implementation issues
4.1. Financing agreement
In order to implement this action, it is foreseen to conclude a financing agreement with the
partner country, referred to in Article 17 of Annex IV to the Cotonou Agreement.
4.2. Indicative operational implementation period
The Operational implementation period of this Action, during which the activities described
in sections 3.2 and 4.3 will be carried out starts from the entry into force of the Financing
Agreement and will have duration of 48 months subject to modifications to be agreed by the
responsible authorising officer in the relevant agreements. Closure phase of a duration of 24
months starts from the expiry date of the operational implementation phase. Contracts are
intended to be signed within the first 12 months following the signature of the Financing
Agreement. The European Parliament and the relevant Committee shall be informed of the
extension of the operational implementation period within one month of that extension being
granted.
4.3. Implementation components and module
Indirect Management with an International Organisation. Component 1 and Component 2
with the Objective of “increasing access for smallholder farmers to market links and value
chain addition” may be implemented through indirect management by the International
Agricultural Development Fund (IFAD) in accordance with Article 58(1)(c) of Regulation
(EU, Euratom) No 966/2012. As justification, IFAD is currently implementing the MIVARF
Programme, co-financed with AfDB, and the Government (125M€). MIVARF is a country-
wide17 integrated Programme combining hard and soft investments, notably construction or
rehabilitation of feeder roads, markets and storage facilities, as well as capacity building for
Local Government Authorities and CBOs toward access to finance and improved
management of rural infrastructures to facilitate the establishment of sustainable market
linkages and support to market information system. The IFAD would under this present
Action further support the improvement of livelihood of smallholder farmers in selected
target areas through the rehabilitation and development of rural infrastructure (feeder roads,
storage and processing facilities, collection centres, and market facility) ensuring a better
access to the market and strengthening the technical and institutional capacity of smallholder
farmers’ organisations and Local Government Administrations. The Contracting Authority
is the Ministry of Finance/National Authorizing Officer (NAO) of the EDF. The overall
responsibility for the implementation of the Programme lies with the NAO, who may request
the Commission to implement service contracts under Article 19.c.4 of Annex IV to the
revised Cotonou Agreement. The Prime Minister Office is the implementing agency, under
the existing Programme Coordinating Unit. The MIVARF Programme Steering Committee,
chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Office, is responsible for
providing policy guidance to the Programme, approving work plans, reviewing activities,
procurement and finance, and ensuring that all agencies represented on the Committee
understand and fulfil their obligations.
4.4. Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement and grants
N.A.
17 Tanzania, Mainland and Zanzibar
22
4.5. Indicative budget
The budget available to implement the action is detailed here below.
The MIVARF budget from IFAD is USD 77.6M for activities in the 72 districts of 29
Regions. This covers producer empowerment USD19.7M, grassroots MFI support
USD23.0M and rural financial systems development USD34.9M. In addition, USD9.0M will
be met through the contributions of GoT, the districts/LGAs, beneficiaries and others.
4.6. Performance monitoring
Monitoring will be performed by IFAD in collaboration with the Programme Coordinating
Unit. Monitoring covers baseline survey18, monitoring plan and reporting. For monitoring
purposes the Action’s logframe matrix includes indicators disaggregated by sex. Adequate
resources will be made available to ensure that sex-disaggregated data can be collected for
monitoring/evaluation. The EC may carry out Results Oriented Monitoring (ROM) via
independent consultants. Where possible, any monitoring visits should be timed to be a joint
mission with IFAD/AfDB joint review missions which take place twice yearly in
February/March and August/September.
4.7. Evaluation and audit
Provision is made for a mid-term and final evaluation to be carried out by external
consultants. Government administration auditors will undertake yearly internal audits of
programme disbursements, applying international internal audit procedures and controls
including pre and post-payment audits.
4.8. Communication and visibility
Communication and visibility of the EU is a legal obligation for all external actions funded
by the EU. This action shall contain communication and visibility measures which shall be
18
Very little baseline data is available at present. The IFAD Joint Implementation Review of MIVARF, March 2014, was
critical of the type of information collected to date and recommended that Service Providers revise their surveys to focus on
the farmer groups and value chain actors that will participate in the Programme.
Component/Module ,000EUR Third party
Indirect management with IFAD 14.000 0
Component 1 – Improvement of rural infrastructures 10.000 0
Component 2 - Capacity building for rural communities on value chain
development
3.700 0
Evaluation and Audit 200 0
Communication and visibility 100 n.a.
Management by EC/NAO n.a.
Evaluation and audit 200
Contingencies 800 n.a.
Totals 15.000 0
23
based on a specific Communication and Visibility Plan of the Action, to be elaborated before
the start of implementation and supported with the budget indicated in section 4.5 above. The
measures shall be implemented either (a) by the Commission, and/or (b) by entrusted entity
(IFAD). Appropriate contractual obligations shall be included in, respectively, financing
agreements and delegation agreements. The Communication and Visibility Manual for
European Union External Action shall be used to establish the Communication and Visibility
Plan of the Action and the appropriate contractual obligations.
24
Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
CRIS number 2014 /037-446
Logical Framework Matrix
Project description Objectively verifiable indicators of
achievement
Sources and means
of verification
Assumptions
Overall
objective
To generate wealth and to increase
income and livelihood of the rural
population
Human Development Index UNDP Human
Development Index
Report
Programme
purpose
To increase access for smallholder
farmers to the input/output market
through the development of rural
infrastructures (feeder roads, storage and
agri-processing facilities, collection
centres, market facilities) and increased
capacities of Local Government
Administration and Community Based
Organisations
% increase in agricultural production
in selected targeted areas
% increase in agricultural produce
marketed
Intervention
Baseline survey and
Programme Progress
Reports
National statistics
Government retains
stance on rural
economic
development policies.
Continued
government
investment in rural
infrastructure
Continued general
economic growth
Expected
results
R1 - Smallholder access to input and
output market is improved through
construction/rehabilitation of rural
infrastructure
At least 30 CBOs participate in
design and social consensus-building
workshops.
At least 350 km of feeder roads
improved through local contractors.
At least 20 storage and agri-
processing facilities, collection
Programme reports
District and Region
reports and statistics
Traffic counts before
rehabilitation and at
intervals after
rehabilitation
Capacity of District
councils not impaired
by high staff turnover
Adequate support
from relevant
ministries and local
government
authorities
25
centres and market facilities
improved/constructed
50% Increase in the numbers of
vehicles & people using feeder roads
and reduced travel costs
25% Increased value of marketed
produce
Market surveys
R2 - Smallholders, Community Based
Organisations and Local Government
Administrations have the capacity for
efficient infrastructure maintenance and
market linkages.
During the intervention, increased
number of women associations
participating in the capacity building
training programmes
At least 350 km of feeder roads are
maintained in good conditions by
CBOs through contract with Districts
Constructed and upgraded storage and
agri-processing facilities, collection
centres and market facilities operated
and maintained effectively
During the intervention, increased
numbers of men and women/ farmer
groups using improved technologies
During the intervention, increased
numbers of men and women/ farmer
groups having improved marketing
skills, and using market information
skills
At least 20 SACCOs are providing
adequate financial support to rural
Programme reports
Service provider and
INGO reports
Training reports
District and Region
reports and statistics
Participatory
assessments
26
communities
At year 4 of the intervention, % of
women benefiting from the SACCOs
Activities
Means Indicative costs Assumptions
Component 1 - Rural Infrastructure
improvement
Act. 1.1. Contract civil work for
rehabilitation of feeder roads connecting
local communities to markets and
essential social services facilities
Act. 1.2. Contract civil work for
construction / rehabilitation of storage
and agri-processing facilities, collection
centres and market facilities at village
community level and/or district centre
level
Districts identify feeder roads for
rehabilitation following MIVSARF
criteria. MIVARF committees ensure
criteria are followed. CBOs formed
along selected roads to ensure their
involvement in works. District staff
procure contractors and supervise
works. Capacity building for District
engineers and procurement staff
provided Programme and INGO
Districts identify storage facilities etc.
for construction/upgrading following
MIVARF criteria. MIVARF
committees ensure criteria are
followed. Capacity building by INGO
and Service Providers starts for CBOs
which will operate and maintain
infrastructure. District staff procure
contractors and supervise works.
Component 1.
Budget - Rural
infrastructure
improvement:
10.0M€
Act.1.1. Road
rehabilitation 8.75
M€.
Act 1.2. Storage and
agri-processing
facilities, etc. 1.4
M€.
District staff will
supervise contracts
and report on
progress.
Information on
progress will be
provided by regular
Programme site
visits and reports,
and reports from
Service provider and
27
INGO.
CBOs concerned
with operation and
maintenance of
infrastructure will be
asked to report on
activities and
problems.
Component 2 – Capacity building for
rural communities and Local
Government Administration
2.1. Support the management system for
the sustainable maintenance of the
rehabilitated feeder roads developed,
through training and engagement of
LGA and village community based
organisations living along the
rehabilitated feeder roads
2.2. Support the management system for
the sustainable maintenance and
management of the storage and
processing facilities, collection centres
and market facilities.
2.3. Provide training to smallholder
farmers and processors to improve the
business enabling environment and to
facilitate access to information and
knowledge on market and new
technologies and agricultural best
Rehabilitated feeder roads are
maintained by CBOs through contract
with Districts. CBOs are trained by
MIVARF and District engineers with
assistance of INGO. CBOs are
provided with sets of tools. District
engineers monitor and supervise
works.
Capacity building for CBOs for
operation and maintenance of
facilities provided by INGO and
Service Providers.
Training of farmers provided by
INGO and Service Providers overseen
by MIVARF.
Component 2.
Budget - Capacity
building for rural
communities on
value chain
development: 3.8M€
Act. 2.1. Feeder
road maintenance
0.59M€
Act. 2.2. Operation
and maintenance of
storage facilities etc.
0.12M€
Act. 2.3. Training
for farmers,
agricultural
processors etc.
0.15M€
Act. 2.4. LGA
training 0.96M€
Districts have
adequate funds for
periodic maintenance
(e.g. regravelling) and
major repairs of feeder
roads, and can fund
routine maintenance
in the long term.
28
practices.
2.4. Provide training to LGA to
a) support governance initiatives, such as
planning, policy development,
strengthening of monitoring with the aim
to reinforce the link between LGA and
local communities in terms of rural
infrastructure management and value
chain development funding. b) upgrade
the technical skill of engineers,
procurement and other technical staff.
Training to support planning, policy
development, monitoring etc.
provided by INGO together with
MIVARF staff.
Upgrading of skills of technical staff
provided by MIVARF engineers and
procurement specialist.
Information on
progress will be
provided by regular
Programme site
visits and reports,
and reports from
Service provider and
INGO.
Participatory
assessments by
MIVARF will
ensure farmers and
community groups
are able to express
their views on
activities
Support to Programme management
3.1. Provided additional technical full
time/part time staff (engineering,
procurement, supervision) to support the
PCU and ensure the efficient and on time
delivery of Results.
One engineer and one procurement
specialist will be added to MIVARF’s
PCU. An INGO will be contracted to
oversee and strengthen the capacity of
MIVARF Service Providers working
with farmers and CBOs.
 Act. 3.1.:
1.05M€
 Programme
reports
29
3.2 Gender Screening Checklist
Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
CRIS number 2014 /037-446
Gender Equality Screening Checklist (GESCf)
Has a full-scale gender analysis been done during the formulation stage?
Comments: The Gender Equality assessment has been made through discussions with key
partners of the proposed Action (IFAD Office Arusha, field visits community based
organizations (Kongwa District) and reports (Statement from 59th
Session of the
commission on the status of women-Feb 2012, http://tz.one.un.org/index.php/core-
commitments/gender ) analysis
Yes  No x
Have gender equality issues relevant to the project been identified?
Comments: The gender division of labour in the agricultural sector assigns the larger part of
agricultural work to women who traditionally lack access to land and other production and
marketing inputs. Women often lose control over agricultural produce when marketing is
formalised or value addition takes place to yield higher and more regular incomes. There is
the risk, therefore, that improved marketing and value addition that withdraws food crops
from family consumption might increase household incomes without substantially
increasing family food security.
Yes x No 
Are the gender equality issues identified supported by reference to the partner
government’s/EC’s policy commitments to gender equality?
Comments: The 1977 Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania (Articles 12 and 13)
guarantees equality between men and women and supports their full participation in social,
economic and political life. Gender equality and women’s empowerment also forms a
major component of the National Poverty Reduction Strategies (MKUKUTA II in
Mainland and MKUZA II in Zanzibar) under the goals on governance, education and
health. However, the country ranks 125th out of 155 countries on the Gender-related
Development Index for 2009. The 2008 Gender Empowerment Measure puts Tanzania at
48th place out of the 108 countries measured. And while Tanzania is on track to reach the
MDG target on gender, high drop-out rates for girls, and gender parity in secondary and
tertiary education remain a concern. As well, maternal mortality remains high and the
burden of HIV is still heavy, with higher infection rates in women than men.
Yes x No 
Are the statistics used for project formulation disaggregated by sex?
Comments: Most of the statistical data are not disaggregated by sex. However, a
monitoring system will be put in place that will provide data disaggregated by sex based o
a baseline survey to be conducted at the start of the Action.
Yes  No x
Has qualitative information on gender equality issues been used in the project formulation
stage?
Comments: Qualitative information has been issued based on the desk study phase and
more during the field visits and discussions with rural communities and local government
administration staff.
Yes x No 
Has the logframe been engendered?
Comments: A specific focus on gender will be included under the Component 1&2 of the
Yes x No 
30
Action. Specific indicators on gender are incorporated in the Programme Logical
Framework Matrix.
Do the management systems established by the project respect the principles of gender
equality and equal opportunities?
Comments: The current management system of the Programme implemented and
coordinated by IFAD in which the Action will participate is respecting the main principles
of gender equality and equal opportunities for the Programme management.
Yes x No 
Have all factors potentially affecting the sustainability of gender equality actions been
thoroughly addressed?
Comments: The Component 2 of the Action has the aim to empower women and youth in
the maintenance and management of the rural infrastructure through Community Based
Organization strengthening. The Programme will ensure that women and youth are part of
the decision making process. If, and when necessary, youth and women will be provided
with foundation courses or literacy training in order to participate effectively in the training
programme
Yes x No 
31
3.3 TC/CD Checklist
Title/Number Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
CRIS number 2014 /037-446
Total cost Total estimated cost: EUR 15,0000,000 (2.4% of IP)
Total amount of EDF contribution: EUR 15,0000,000
11th European Development Fund (EDF)
Aid method / Method of
implementation
Project approach – Joint management with International Fund for Agricultural
Development (IFAD)
DAC-code 43040 Sector Trade Development
Country Tanzania
Programme Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition
Total Amount of the Programme 15 million Euro
TC/CD support component (if a separate
component)
No specific component
If yes, amount of the TC/CD support
component
Short description of the TC/CD component (if
not included in the Action Fiche)
Purpose(s) of the TC/CD support
More than one option possible (see section 2.2 and 4.1 of the Guidelines)
1. Capacity development: comprehensive approach that addresses a w ide set of
constraints in one or more organisations and w hich is linked to clear performance targets.
□ Main objective
□ Secondary
objective
□ Not an objective
2. Providing policy and/or expert advice (normally of short term duration). □ Main objective
□ Secondary
objective
□ Not an objective
3. Support to implementation of projects/programmes. It may include activities as
planning, management, supervision or direct gap filling. The support focuses directly on
□ Main objective
□ Secondary
32
"getting things done". objective
□ Not an objective
4. Preparation/facilitation of EU cooperation (or broader donor cooperation). Includes
feasibility and preparatory studies, facilitation of dialogue betw een EU and partners,
facilitation of programme development etc.
□ Main objective
□ Secondary
objective
□ Not an objective
Please add comments about the purpose of the TC/CD support if relevant (see pages 10-12 of the Guidelines):
1. Fit to the context and existing capacity
See section 3.2 of the Guidelines
1.1 Are there critical constraints in the context w hich could make
CD support ineffective and impede achieving the purpose of the
support? If yes, how w ill they be addressed?
Context constraints can include weak governance arrangements in
the sector, limited incentives for civil servants to perform, or limited
effective priority of the area in national politics, etc. See page 22-23
of the Guidelines.
Conversely, are there opportunities in the context w hich could
make CD support more effective ?
No there are no critical constraints that
could make CD support ineffective. The EU
intervention will be implemented through
the ongoing IFAD/AfDP funded MIVARF
Programme, which already has considerable
experience of CD. The EU intervention will
enable the recruitment of additional staff
and an INGO to provide the technical
support needed to cover the CD
requirements for LGA staff, Service
Providers, CBOs and other stakeholders.
1.2 Has the existing capacity of the concerned partner(s)
organisation(s) been assessed? Is it confirmed that the
objectives and the scope of the CD support match the existing
capacity to lead, manage and absorb the support?
See page 23-24 of the Guidelines.
The capacity of concerned partners,
including MIVARF, LGAs and Service
Providers, has been assessed and CD
recommendations are appropriate.
1.3 How have similar programmes and types of CD support w orked
in the current context? Please indicate w hich, if any, and w hy
they have been successful. See page 22 of the Guidelines.
MIVARF started in 2011 and has
successfully undertaken a range of capacity
building activities.
33
2. Adequate demand, commitment and ownership from the country partners
See section 3.1 of the Guidelines
2.1 How have key stakeholders demonstrated demand for CD
support, beyond reacting to proposals from the EU or
consultants?
See page 20-21 of the Guidelines.
The CD requirements have been identified
and formulated jointly with MIVARF staff
and concerned governmental partners,
including LGAs.
2.2 How have the country partners lead or participated in the design
of CD support, beyond formal consultation and endorsement of
proposals and other requirements?
See page 16 of the Guidelines.
NAO and PMO representatives support the
CD recommendations in the proposal.
3. Clear link to results and expected outcomes
See section 4.2 of the Guidelines
3.1 Are results and/or outcomes defined beyond w hat the CD
support w ill deliver? Please give examples of key targeted
results at the level of enhanced capacity of organisation(s), if
relevant outputs that the organisation(s) produce or at the
level of outcomes.
See page 30-36 in the Guidelines, including figure 4 and 5.
MIVARF is undertaking baseline study that
will identify supplementary CD needs.
3.2 Have the country partners' inputs, w hich are required to
sustain the results of the programme, been identified and
specified?
Resources can include staff, managers, involvement of senior
staff and leaders, facilities and logistics. See pages 15-17 in the
Guidelines.
Yes, at Regional and District level.
3.3 What innovative forms of CD support have been considered,
e.g. regional sources, staff exchanges or netw orking?
See Box 25 on page 38 of the Guidelines.
Not considered – but MIVARF organizes
visits for stakeholders to sites where
activities are particularly successful.
34
4. Harmonized support
See section 3.4 of the Guidelines
4.1 Has CD support from other donors in the sector been screened
to ensure complementarity w ith that proposed by the EU? Have
other main donors been consulted on the proposed CD support
and have they endorsed the proposal?
See page 26 of the Guidelines.
DFID activities have been screened and
assessed through their various operations
in the road and infrastructure sector.
4.2 Which synergies and harmonisation options have been explored
w ith country partners and other donors? If no harmonisation is
possible at this stage, w hich steps w ill be taken to ensure that the
CD support from the EU w ill be harmonised w ith other donors’
interventions in the future?
See page 26 of the Guidelines.
Synergies and harmonisation options have
been assessed and supplementary actions
have been worked out such as support to
LGAs for ensuring efficient monitoring
and management of the infrastructure.
5. Appropriate programme implementation arrangements
See Chapter 5 of the Guidelines
5.1 Briefly describe the Project Implementation Arrangement. Will
country partners lead and manage the programme? Is primary
accountability of the programme appointed to domestic
stakeholders?
See page 47-50 of the Guidelines.
IFAD is already working closely (jointly)
with LGAs. All CD activities will be
channeled through governmental services.
5.2 Will civil servants w orking in the programme receive topping-
up (salary supplements, special allow ances etc.) funded by
the EU? Are they linked to clear performance targets? If these
incentives are not follow ing government regulations, w hich
steps w ill be taken to align them, diminish any negative
distortion and/or abandon the use of donor-funded topping-
up?
See page 14 and pages 43-51 in the Guidelines.
There will be no topping-up.
The only support will come in the form of
assistance towards LGA costs for
implementing and supervising activities at
district level – transport costs etc.
5.3. Given the nature of the programme and of the expected
results, explain its level of integration in the broader structure
The programme is carried out with full
implementation of national and regional
35
or its level of autonomy.
See page 46-47 in the Guidelines.
structures.
5.4 Are the EU’s and/or other donors’ role in the governance of
the programme limited to oversight functions?
See page 47-50 of the Guidelines
The implementing partner MIVARF/PCU
will be bound to the responsibilities etc. as is
laid down in the agreement that will be
signed with the EU.
4 Annexe 2 - Support to food security and nutrition
4.1 Action Fiche
ANNEX 2
of the Commission Decision on the “Support to Food Security and Nutrition Programme”
5. Identification
Title/Number Support to Food Security and Nutrition
CRIS number 2014 / 037-445
Total cost Total estimated cost: EUR 10,0000,000 (1.6% of IP)
Total amount of EDF contribution: EUR 10,0000,000
11th European Development Fund (EDF)
Aid method / Method of
implementation
Project approach – Indirect management with World Food
Programme (WFP)
DAC-code 52010 Sector Food Security
6. Rationale and Context
6.1. Summary of the action and its objective
The overall objective is to improve food and nutrition security, and ultimately reduce the
high stunting rate in Tanzania. The specific objective is to promote diversification of food
production, awareness and access to nutritious food and enhance women empowerment in the
Dodoma and Singida Regions. The Programme will support the delivery of three
interconnected Components (i) Knowledge and Information, ii) Social transfer for targeted
groups and iii) strengthening and capacity building of key stakeholders. The programme will
work through district health facilities, Non-Government Organisations and Community Based
Organisations. Key partners of the Programme are government Regional and District
agencies, more particularly nutrition officers and Non-Government Organisations and
Community Based Organisation active in the sector.
36
6.2. Context, policies and challenges
Country context: In 2012 and 2013, the Tanzanian economy expanded at an annualized rate
of approximately 7%. The main drivers of Tanzania’s rapid economic growth continue to be
a small number of fast growing capital intensive sectors, particularly the communication and
financial services, construction, manufacturing, mining and retail trade sectors. The service
sector recorded the highest rate of annual growth in 2012, at 8.0%. By contrast, labour
intensive sectors, particularly the agricultural sector, in which approximately 80% of
households are primarily engaged, recorded an average annual growth rate of only 4.2%.
Poverty - Tanzania’s ranking in UNDP’s Human Development Index19 improved marginally
from 0.370 in 2005 to 0.398 in 201020 (159/187). Still, poverty remains high21 suggesting
that, despite impressive macroeconomic achievements and sustained economic growth over
the past decade, there has been very little impact on the incomes and well-being of the rural
poor. Available evidence points to the weak redistributive aspect of growth, especially the
weak linkages with rural areas where the majority of the population lives. Poverty remains
predominantly rural as high as 37.4% of the population due largely to low agricultural growth
caused by drought, low rainfall and lack of and/or poor agriculture equipment and
productivity, low marketing power. These developments suggest that the MDG target of
halving abject poverty by 2015 may not be achieved. Nutrition - Tanzania has made progress
in many health indicators over the past decade, but not in nutritional status. According to the
2010 Demographic and Health Survey (DHS 2010)22 stunting rate was 42% of the under-
five children, and was only 2% lower than five years before. According to the DHS 2010,
stunting rates in rural area were 44.5%23 and 31.5% in urban areas .The highest level of
stunting was found in Dodoma District with a level of 56.0%. The burden of stunting in
Tanzania ranks third in Sub-Saharan Africa, after Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of
Congo. Tanzania is not on track to achieve the MDG 1 target to reduce underweight by one-
half by the year 2015. The nutrition situation of adolescent girls and women in Tanzania is
also alarming. About 30% of women are deficient in iron, vitamin A and iodine, 20% of
women are anaemic and 10% of women are undernourished. Malnourished adolescent girls
and women are more likely to give birth to low birth weight infants, who malnourished in
childhood and later life will transfer under nutrition to the next generation. The high levels of
stunting in the country, affecting over three million under-five children, constitute a
silent emergency. Food security - The food security situation in Tanzania is directly linked
to the availability and access to food, the food diversity situation and the Water, Sanitation
and Hygiene (WASH) situation. In many districts the food insecurity situation is either
chronic or temporary depending on the availability of food but also the access to sufficient
and diversified diet. The high stunting rates nationwide are not only caused by general food
insecurity but also due to a poor WASH situation and poor behaviour attitudes of mothers.
Improving the food and nutrition security situation is a combination of improving feeding
practices, improving behaviour practices, improved and diversified food production,
improved WASH situation.
National Food security and Nutrition development policy: The signing up to the ‘Scaling
Up Nutrition (SUN)’ movement24 in June 2011 and the recent Presidential "Call to Action
in Nutrition" on May 16th 2013, highlights commitment from the highest levels of
19 http://countryeconomy.com/hdi/tanzania
20 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
21 http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/country/home/tags/tanzania
22 http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR243/FR243[24June2011].pdf
23 Figures from DHS survey 2010. Stunting and wasting rates are expresses in -2SD and stand for global rates.
24 http://scalingupnutrition.org/
37
government to focus on nutrition as a national priority. Tanzania is a member of the SUN
Movement Lead Group25. Within the SUN movement initiative, the government has
established a High-Level Steering Committee for Nutrition, which is convened by the
Prime Minister’s office and involves representatives from nine key ministries, development
partners, UN agencies, civil society, faith-based organisations, academia and business. With
the support and participation of this Committee, the government finalised its National
Nutrition Strategy26 and is now working to complete a corresponding financial
implementation plan. The government is placing strong emphasis on decentralisation to
ensure that nutrition is on the agenda at district and ward levels. Advocacy on nutrition issues
with Regional Commissioners has been undertaken to ensure they are sensitised on the need
to take action on nutrition. In addition, nutrition officers are being recruited and nutrition
budget training is being provided at the district level. With support from the UN nutrition
coordination mechanism (REACH)27, the government is undertaking a mapping exercise to
increase understanding on how to best align all actors who have a role to play in scaling up
nutrition, and ensure they can work together as efficiently as possible. The Permanent
Secretary to the Prime Minister’s Office who is also SUN Government Focal Point chaired
the High Level Steering Committee on Nutrition (HLSCN) as a multi-stakeholder
platform. The SUN Government Focal Point is responsible for coordination, advocacy, and
resource mobilization for scaling up nutrition. The HLSCN operates within and leverages
existing government systems and dialogue mechanisms for developing cooperation, such as
the Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania (JAST) and the Food Security Thematic
Group within the agriculture sector, which promote national ownership and enhance
effectiveness. A Council Steering Committee on Nutrition has also been established at
district level chaired by the Executive Director and has full inclusion of all stakeholders,
including representatives of relevant departments, UN agencies, civil society and private
sector. Currently, collaborative advocacy efforts between the civil society-led Partnership
for Nutrition in Tanzania (PANITA)28 and the government are underway to raise
awareness on the importance of nutrition and solicit action. Launched in August 2011,
PANITA includes over 230 civil society organization (CSO) members working on nutrition-
specific interventions across Tanzania with nine zonal coordinators. The National Nutrition
Public Expenditure Review of 2014 made a detailed review showing that only 0.22% of
government expenditure was allocated to nutrition in FY 2012/13 and therefore few activities
have been carried out to implement the National Nutrition Strategy (2011-2015).
The 2013 EC Communication “Enhancing Maternal and Child Nutrition in External
Assistance”29 builds on the Agenda for Change 2011. The EU adopted a multi-sector
approach, combining sustainable agriculture, rural development, food and nutrition
security, public health, water and sanitation, social protection and education. This policy
document on nutrition highlights the need for a better coordination between humanitarian and
development aid in order to increase the resilience of affected populations. The
Communication is based on three strategic priorities: i) Enhance mobilisation and political
commitment for nutrition; ii) Scale up actions at country level; iii) Knowledge for nutrition
(strengthening the expertise and the knowledgebase).
25 http://scalingupnutrition.org/sun-countries/tanzania
26 https://extranet.who.int/nutrition/gina/sites/default/files/TZA%202011%20National%20Nutrition%20Strategy.pdf
27 http://www.reachpartnership.org/reach-countries/tanzania
28http://scalingupnutrition.org/news/the-partnership-for-nutrition-in-tanzania-panita-supports-the-ministry-of-healths-world-
breastfeeding-week-celebration#.U8YRiaTlrIU
29 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/documents/enhancing_maternal-child_nutrition_in_external_assistance_en.pdf
38
Food security and nutrition Sector context: policies and challenges: Government food
security and nutrition related policies emphasise the importance of better nutrition
intervention, coordination, data surveillance and monitoring systems. Better nutrition
education activities, WASH situation improvement, increased food production and
diversification, improved feeding practices and development of income generating activities
for vulnerable households are considered as keys to tackle the nutrition issues. Stunting is a
nationwide critical issue and its aetiology30 should be assessed in a systematic way. It is
recognised that stunting is directly related to growth delays, indicating the development
history of the child. It is necessary to analyse the problem and causes at regional and district
levels. Assessment should focus on food intake, feeding practices, infant morbidity rates,
WASH situations and knowledge/attitude/practices (KAP) of mothers. HDDS (Household
Dietary Diversity Score) and HFIAS (Household Food Insecurity Access Scale) should also
be analysed.
Dodoma and Singida Regions nutrition status: Based on DHS 2010 report, the national
average stunting rate is 42% and the average wasting rate is 4.8%. Dodoma Region has the
highest stunting rate (56%) but a low wasting rate (5.2%). The neighbouring Singida Region
stunting rate is lower (39.0%) and wasting rate is higher (9.2%). Updated data for both
Regions are currently not available. Irish Aid has taken the lead to produce a national update
every 2,5 years nationwide. Currently, in the Dodoma Region, the USAID/AFRICARE
Mwanzo Bora programme focuses mainly on behaviour change at the community level, while
in Singida Region World Vision Canada works on community and at health facility level on
behaviour change, capacity building and prevention and rehabilitation. The impact of their
interventions is assumed to be positive on the reduction of stunting rates but also improving
the wasting or acute malnutrition prevalence. Their monitoring systems have not yet
produced concrete data. World Food Programme (WFP) works in Dodoma and Singida
Regions directly with the District health services households treating moderate acute
malnutrition amongst children under 5 and pregnant lactating women, food provision of
Special Nutritious Foods (SNF) to pregnant and lactating women and children under 2 to
prevent stunting and capacity building to health workers and working on behaviour change
with mothers coming to the District health facilities. Currently, global updated information on
impact is not available.
Issues to be tackled: Save the Children International reports31 and more particularly the 2014
Communication32 identified key recommendations i) Improved household access to diverse
and nutrient rich foods through own production and purchase from the local market
working with women’s and CBOs on awareness raising on stunting and malnutrition and the
right choice of diet to prevent them, looking into gender roles and division of labour in order
to ensure that women’s involvement into agriculture does not hinder maternal and infant and
young child feeding practices; ii) Improved maternal, infant and young child feeding
practices through traditional community trainings, community group meetings and popular
mobilisation events which are conducted by civil society organisations; iii) Enhanced reach
and quality of health and nutrition services delivered through the health system through
the identification of needs to prevent or treat key diseases that contribute to chronic
malnutrition; and iv) Improved multi-sectoral response to nutrition at sub-national levels
(Health, Agriculture, WASH, Education, Community Development, Livelihoods),
facilitating the establishment of district level nutrition steering councils.
30
Aetiology: study of causes and origins of diseases.
31 http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/docs/social-protection-Tanzania-briefing.pdf
32
Save the Children recommendations on reducing malnutrition in Tanzania 2014
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118
Final report 20141118

More Related Content

Similar to Final report 20141118

FARM SUCCESS Summary Report EN
FARM SUCCESS Summary Report ENFARM SUCCESS Summary Report EN
FARM SUCCESS Summary Report EN
Rosa Schiaffino
 
Overview of Social Farming and Rural Development
Overview of Social Farming and Rural DevelopmentOverview of Social Farming and Rural Development
Overview of Social Farming and Rural Development
School Vegetable Gardening - Victory Gardens
 
Global financing facility
Global financing facility Global financing facility
Global financing facility
Mauro Bassotti
 
National guidelines and manual for innovation fund for green jobs creation
National guidelines and manual for innovation fund for green jobs creation National guidelines and manual for innovation fund for green jobs creation
National guidelines and manual for innovation fund for green jobs creation
Ayebazibwe Kenneth
 
Memorandum dac peer review
Memorandum dac peer review Memorandum dac peer review
Memorandum dac peer review
Dr Lendy Spires
 
Monitoring Toolkit for School Gardens, Community Gardens, Institutional Garde...
Monitoring Toolkit for School Gardens, Community Gardens, Institutional Garde...Monitoring Toolkit for School Gardens, Community Gardens, Institutional Garde...
Monitoring Toolkit for School Gardens, Community Gardens, Institutional Garde...
School Vegetable Gardening - Victory Gardens
 
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
HFG Project
 
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
HFG Project
 
Synergies between ESIF funds, Horizon 2020 and other research programmes
Synergies between ESIF funds, Horizon 2020 and other research programmesSynergies between ESIF funds, Horizon 2020 and other research programmes
Synergies between ESIF funds, Horizon 2020 and other research programmes
Parma Couture
 
Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa
Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa
Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa
Z3P
 
1 esab01astrategy ethiopia_march_fnal
1 esab01astrategy ethiopia_march_fnal1 esab01astrategy ethiopia_march_fnal
1 esab01astrategy ethiopia_march_fnal
Gorfneh Gurmu
 
GR e health forum 2015 final
GR e health forum 2015   finalGR e health forum 2015   final
GR e health forum 2015 final
Stella I. Tsartsara
 
an-avoidable-crisis-wash-gaps
an-avoidable-crisis-wash-gapsan-avoidable-crisis-wash-gaps
an-avoidable-crisis-wash-gaps
Kirsten de Vette
 
Directory of DCFTA-related support programmes and projects
Directory of DCFTA-related support programmes and projectsDirectory of DCFTA-related support programmes and projects
Directory of DCFTA-related support programmes and projects
DCFTAProject_2014
 
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Dr Lendy Spires
 
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Dr Lendy Spires
 
INTERREG IVC analysis report
INTERREG IVC analysis reportINTERREG IVC analysis report
INTERREG IVC analysis report
Nuno Quental
 
D3 2 labour mobility in EU member states best practices policies digital jo...
D3 2 labour mobility in EU member states  best practices  policies digital jo...D3 2 labour mobility in EU member states  best practices  policies digital jo...
D3 2 labour mobility in EU member states best practices policies digital jo...
Ricardo Nobre
 
Labour mobility in EU member states
Labour mobility in EU member states   Labour mobility in EU member states
Labour mobility in EU member states
Cross border Talents
 
Ulaanbaatar 2020 gcap eng
Ulaanbaatar 2020 gcap engUlaanbaatar 2020 gcap eng
Ulaanbaatar 2020 gcap eng
Mr Nyak
 

Similar to Final report 20141118 (20)

FARM SUCCESS Summary Report EN
FARM SUCCESS Summary Report ENFARM SUCCESS Summary Report EN
FARM SUCCESS Summary Report EN
 
Overview of Social Farming and Rural Development
Overview of Social Farming and Rural DevelopmentOverview of Social Farming and Rural Development
Overview of Social Farming and Rural Development
 
Global financing facility
Global financing facility Global financing facility
Global financing facility
 
National guidelines and manual for innovation fund for green jobs creation
National guidelines and manual for innovation fund for green jobs creation National guidelines and manual for innovation fund for green jobs creation
National guidelines and manual for innovation fund for green jobs creation
 
Memorandum dac peer review
Memorandum dac peer review Memorandum dac peer review
Memorandum dac peer review
 
Monitoring Toolkit for School Gardens, Community Gardens, Institutional Garde...
Monitoring Toolkit for School Gardens, Community Gardens, Institutional Garde...Monitoring Toolkit for School Gardens, Community Gardens, Institutional Garde...
Monitoring Toolkit for School Gardens, Community Gardens, Institutional Garde...
 
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
 
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
2013-14 HIV and AIDS Public Expenditure Review: Tanzania Mainland
 
Synergies between ESIF funds, Horizon 2020 and other research programmes
Synergies between ESIF funds, Horizon 2020 and other research programmesSynergies between ESIF funds, Horizon 2020 and other research programmes
Synergies between ESIF funds, Horizon 2020 and other research programmes
 
Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa
Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa
Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa
 
1 esab01astrategy ethiopia_march_fnal
1 esab01astrategy ethiopia_march_fnal1 esab01astrategy ethiopia_march_fnal
1 esab01astrategy ethiopia_march_fnal
 
GR e health forum 2015 final
GR e health forum 2015   finalGR e health forum 2015   final
GR e health forum 2015 final
 
an-avoidable-crisis-wash-gaps
an-avoidable-crisis-wash-gapsan-avoidable-crisis-wash-gaps
an-avoidable-crisis-wash-gaps
 
Directory of DCFTA-related support programmes and projects
Directory of DCFTA-related support programmes and projectsDirectory of DCFTA-related support programmes and projects
Directory of DCFTA-related support programmes and projects
 
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
 
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
Policy option and actions for expediting progress in implementing rural devel...
 
INTERREG IVC analysis report
INTERREG IVC analysis reportINTERREG IVC analysis report
INTERREG IVC analysis report
 
D3 2 labour mobility in EU member states best practices policies digital jo...
D3 2 labour mobility in EU member states  best practices  policies digital jo...D3 2 labour mobility in EU member states  best practices  policies digital jo...
D3 2 labour mobility in EU member states best practices policies digital jo...
 
Labour mobility in EU member states
Labour mobility in EU member states   Labour mobility in EU member states
Labour mobility in EU member states
 
Ulaanbaatar 2020 gcap eng
Ulaanbaatar 2020 gcap engUlaanbaatar 2020 gcap eng
Ulaanbaatar 2020 gcap eng
 

More from Aart van der heide

ACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura finalACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura final
Aart van der heide
 
ACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura finalACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura final
Aart van der heide
 
ACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura finalACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura final
Aart van der heide
 
ACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura finalACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura final
Aart van der heide
 
Visit to the villages in Waku Kungu in Angola
Visit to the villages in Waku Kungu in AngolaVisit to the villages in Waku Kungu in Angola
Visit to the villages in Waku Kungu in Angola
Aart van der heide
 
Quelques observations sur le projet
Quelques observations sur le projetQuelques observations sur le projet
Quelques observations sur le projetAart van der heide
 
Draft Final Report (3)
Draft Final Report (3)Draft Final Report (3)
Draft Final Report (3)
Aart van der heide
 
7. reference HCL
7. reference HCL7. reference HCL
7. reference HCL
Aart van der heide
 
9. Reference Olga Keita WFP
9. Reference Olga Keita WFP9. Reference Olga Keita WFP
9. Reference Olga Keita WFP
Aart van der heide
 
RAPPORT FINAL_EVALUATION MI-PARCOURS_JANVIER 2013
RAPPORT FINAL_EVALUATION MI-PARCOURS_JANVIER 2013RAPPORT FINAL_EVALUATION MI-PARCOURS_JANVIER 2013
RAPPORT FINAL_EVALUATION MI-PARCOURS_JANVIER 2013Aart van der heide
 
FINAL REPORT FSN long version 16 may
FINAL REPORT FSN long version 16 mayFINAL REPORT FSN long version 16 may
FINAL REPORT FSN long version 16 may
Aart van der heide
 
Rapport Final Revision SAP_Aart_ 11AVRIL2011
Rapport Final Revision SAP_Aart_ 11AVRIL2011Rapport Final Revision SAP_Aart_ 11AVRIL2011
Rapport Final Revision SAP_Aart_ 11AVRIL2011Aart van der heide
 
7. reference HCL
7. reference HCL7. reference HCL
7. reference HCL
Aart van der heide
 
Sumario Executivo Estudo de Base2013_Portugues
Sumario Executivo Estudo de Base2013_PortuguesSumario Executivo Estudo de Base2013_Portugues
Sumario Executivo Estudo de Base2013_Portugues
Aart van der heide
 
FINAL Projet 2013-311764 Tchad - Rapport Final VFF V1 plus
FINAL Projet 2013-311764 Tchad - Rapport Final VFF V1 plusFINAL Projet 2013-311764 Tchad - Rapport Final VFF V1 plus
FINAL Projet 2013-311764 Tchad - Rapport Final VFF V1 plusAart van der heide
 

More from Aart van der heide (20)

ACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura finalACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura final
 
ACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura finalACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura final
 
ACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura finalACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura final
 
ACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura finalACMKS-brochura final
ACMKS-brochura final
 
diploma WUR
diploma WURdiploma WUR
diploma WUR
 
RAPPORT FINAL UNICEF PASA
RAPPORT FINAL UNICEF PASARAPPORT FINAL UNICEF PASA
RAPPORT FINAL UNICEF PASA
 
Visit to the villages in Waku Kungu in Angola
Visit to the villages in Waku Kungu in AngolaVisit to the villages in Waku Kungu in Angola
Visit to the villages in Waku Kungu in Angola
 
Quelques observations sur le projet
Quelques observations sur le projetQuelques observations sur le projet
Quelques observations sur le projet
 
Draft Final Report (3)
Draft Final Report (3)Draft Final Report (3)
Draft Final Report (3)
 
7. reference HCL
7. reference HCL7. reference HCL
7. reference HCL
 
9. Reference Olga Keita WFP
9. Reference Olga Keita WFP9. Reference Olga Keita WFP
9. Reference Olga Keita WFP
 
reference hamata Energie
reference hamata Energiereference hamata Energie
reference hamata Energie
 
RAPPORT FINAL_EVALUATION MI-PARCOURS_JANVIER 2013
RAPPORT FINAL_EVALUATION MI-PARCOURS_JANVIER 2013RAPPORT FINAL_EVALUATION MI-PARCOURS_JANVIER 2013
RAPPORT FINAL_EVALUATION MI-PARCOURS_JANVIER 2013
 
FINAL REPORT FSN long version 16 may
FINAL REPORT FSN long version 16 mayFINAL REPORT FSN long version 16 may
FINAL REPORT FSN long version 16 may
 
diploma WUR
diploma WURdiploma WUR
diploma WUR
 
Lettre recommandation (4)
Lettre recommandation (4)Lettre recommandation (4)
Lettre recommandation (4)
 
Rapport Final Revision SAP_Aart_ 11AVRIL2011
Rapport Final Revision SAP_Aart_ 11AVRIL2011Rapport Final Revision SAP_Aart_ 11AVRIL2011
Rapport Final Revision SAP_Aart_ 11AVRIL2011
 
7. reference HCL
7. reference HCL7. reference HCL
7. reference HCL
 
Sumario Executivo Estudo de Base2013_Portugues
Sumario Executivo Estudo de Base2013_PortuguesSumario Executivo Estudo de Base2013_Portugues
Sumario Executivo Estudo de Base2013_Portugues
 
FINAL Projet 2013-311764 Tchad - Rapport Final VFF V1 plus
FINAL Projet 2013-311764 Tchad - Rapport Final VFF V1 plusFINAL Projet 2013-311764 Tchad - Rapport Final VFF V1 plus
FINAL Projet 2013-311764 Tchad - Rapport Final VFF V1 plus
 

Final report 20141118

  • 1. This project is funded by The European Commission A project implemented by HTSPE Limited Projectfunded by the European Union Formulation of Annual Action programme 2015 11th European Development Fund Interventions for Tanzania in the Agriculture sector Final Report Project No. 2014/343611 - Version 1
  • 2. 2 HTSPE Limited Thamesfield House Boundary Way Hemel Hempstead Herts HP2 7SR United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) 1442 202400 Fax: +44 (0) 1442 266438 Email: htspe@htspe.com Web: www.htspe.com GEOtest a.s. Smahova 1244/112 627 00 Brno CZECH REPUBIC Tel: 548 125 111 Fax: 545 217 979 Email: trade@geotest.cz Website: www.geotest.cz S.A. Sopex N.V. Generaal Lemanstraat, 74 2600 Antwerpen Belgium Tel : 03 285 39 88 Fax : 03 285 39 96 Email : sopex@sopex.be Web: www.sopex.be This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of HTSPE Limited and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. (5014069)
  • 3. 3 Table of Content Acronyms...................................................................................................................................5 1 Summary of the assignment................................................................................................6 1.1 Introduction to the Assignment...................................................................................6 1.2 Work programme ........................................................................................................7 2 Key findings and conclusions.............................................................................................8 2.1 General ........................................................................................................................8 2.2 Sustainable agriculture ................................................................................................8 3 Annexe 1 – Enhancing access to market and value additions ..........................................10 3.1 Action Fiche ..............................................................................................................10 1. Identification.....................................................................................................................10 2. Rationale and Context.......................................................................................................10 2.1. Summary of the action and its objective ...................................................................10 2.2. Context, policies and challenges ...............................................................................11 2.3. Lessons learnt............................................................................................................13 2.4. Complementary actions.............................................................................................14 2.5. Donor coordination ...................................................................................................14 3. Detailed Description.........................................................................................................15 3.1. Objectives..................................................................................................................15 3.2. Expected results and main activities .........................................................................15 3.3. Risks and assumptions ..............................................................................................19 3.4. Cross-cutting Issues...................................................................................................20 3.5. Stakeholders ..............................................................................................................20 4. Implementation issues ......................................................................................................21 4.1. Financing agreement .................................................................................................21 4.2. Indicative operational implementation period...........................................................21 4.3. Implementation components and module .................................................................21 4.4. Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement and grants ..................................21 4.5. Indicative budget.......................................................................................................22 4.6. Performance monitoring............................................................................................22 4.7. Evaluation and audit..................................................................................................22 4.8. Communication and visibility...................................................................................22 3.2 Gender Screening Checklist......................................................................................29 3.3 TC/CD Checklist.......................................................................................................31 4 Annexe 2 - Support to food security and nutrition ...........................................................35
  • 4. 4 4.1 Action Fiche ..............................................................................................................35 5. Identification .................................................................................................................35 6. Rationale and Context..................................................................................................35 6.1. Summary of the action and its objective...........................................................35 6.2. Context, policies and challenges.........................................................................36 6.3. Lessons learnt ........................................................................................................39 6.4. Complementary actions.......................................................................................39 6.5. Donor coordination ..............................................................................................40 7. Detailed Description ....................................................................................................41 7.2. Expected results and main activities.................................................................41 7.3. Risks and assumptions.........................................................................................43 7.4. Cross-cutting Issues..............................................................................................44 8. Implementation issues ................................................................................................44 8.1. Financing agreement ............................................................................................44 Indicative operational implementation period.........................................................45 8.2. Implementation components and module.......................................................45 8.3. Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement and grants ....................45 8.4. Indicative budget...................................................................................................45 8.5. Performance monitoring.....................................................................................46 8.6. Evaluation and audit.............................................................................................46 8.7. Communication and visibility.............................................................................46 4.2 Gender Screening Checklist......................................................................................52 4.3 TC/CD Checklist.......................................................................................................54 4.4 Social cash transfer Checklist ...................................................................................58 5 Annexe 3 – Minutes of consultation meetings .................................................................68
  • 5. 5 Acronyms AAP Annual Action Programme AF Action Fiche ASDS Agriculture Sector Development Strategy ASR Agriculture Sector Review DFID Department for International Development DHS Demographic Health Survey EU European Union EUD European Union Delegation GAIN Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition GIZ German International Cooperation HDDS Household Dietary Diversity Score HFIAS Household Food Insecurity Access Scale HLSCN High Level Steering Committee on Nutrition IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development JAST Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania JIR Joint Implementation Review MDG Millennium Development Goals NAO National Authorising Officer PANITA Partnership for Nutrition in Tanzania PCU Programme Coordinating Unit PMO Prime Minister’s Office REACH UN Nutrition Coordination Mechanism SUN Scaling Up Nutrition
  • 6. 6 TASAF Tanzanian Social Action Fund TC/CD Technical Cooperation/Capacity Development UNDP United Nations development Fund VAM Vulnerability Analysis Mapping unit of WFP WASH Water and Sanitation and Hygiene WFP World Food Programme 1 Summary of the assignment 1.1 Introduction to the Assignment The aim of this assignment is to formulate a comprehensive Annual Action programme (Action Fiche and Annexes) in the areas of agriculture, rural infrastructure and nutrition in specific locations of Tanzania to be funded under the 11th EDF – AAP 2015. Based on the 2 Project Identification Fiches (Enhancing access to market and value chain, Support to food security and nutrition), the assignment is to support the EU Delegation and the Government of Tanzania/ National Authorizing Officer in assessing and formulating different options based on the needs and challenges of targeted areas and populations and preparing the necessary documents for launching the 2 Actions. The requested documents for each identified Action are:  Action Fiches  Gender screening checklist  TC/CD Checklist  For the Nutrition Action Fiche the Social transfer Checklist The Mission has provided also:  AF Infrastructure – The EU Contribution Agreement with IFAD: Annex 1 Description of the Action  AF Nutrition – The EU Contribution Agreement with WFP: Annex 1 Description of the Action The results should be in line with the Government policies and strategies and more particularly with the Tanzania Agriculture and Food Security Investment Plan (TAFSIP- 2011)1 , and the 11th EDF NIP relevant focal sector and the Agenda for Change2 . The Assignment started the 30/06 with a kick off meeting at the EU delegation and an Inception meeting (02/07) during which the Inception report has been discussed and the programme has been settled. The duration of the assignment has been 3 weeks (19 working 1 http://agrilinks.org/sites/default/files/resource/files/Tanzania%20Second%20Draft%20Summary%20TAFSIP.P DF 2 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/documents/agenda_for_change_en.pdf
  • 7. 7 days). The Sundays have been used for internal travels and internal meetings for the preparation of draft Action Fiches and Annexes 1. Throughout the assignment, the Consultant has used quantitative and qualitative methods to conduct analysis and reach recommendations. The experts deployed a participatory approach, involving beneficiaries and all stakeholders concerned more specifically the WFP staff (HQ and Dodoma) and the IFAD staff (HQ and Arusha). The work of the experts and the outputs produced are in line with the principles that are governing EU's international aid policies and the government strategy. 1.2 Work programme ML JFB AvdH Phase 1 – Assignment preparation (Home Based). 4 4 4 Desk study. Preparation of the Inception Report (Sunday 29/07) - Travel to Tanzania Phase 2: Desk study and Field work (in country) (30/06-18/07) 19 19 19 Monday 30/06 - Briefing with EU Delegation and proposal to organise a Steering Group Setting up work plan and interview schedule in consultation with the EUD Wednesday 02/07 - Presentation and discussion on the Inception report. It has been decided that for each EU Intervention, the Mission will prepare a draft “Action Fiche” and the “Annexe 1 to the contribution agreement between the EU and Partner Organisation – Description of the Action”. Interviews with WFP, IFAD, DfID, REACH, GAIN, VAM Definition of geographical coverage and organisation of field visits in selected areas Field visit in selected areas. A one week (06-13/07) field visit took place in Dodoma (WFP sub office) to investigate the food security and nutrition status. Meetings and field visits took place in Dodoma and Singida regions followed by a consolidation meeting and an extensive debriefing session with the WFP Sub office team followed by a debriefing at the WFP HQ Monday 14/07. During the field visit the Mission was accompanied by a WFP programme officer. Three days dedicated with the IFAD PCU (Arusha) for discussions and field visits followed by two days in Dodoma for field visits and consolidation/debriefing with the IFAD/PCU. Week 3 - Thorough desk study and consultation with Government officials (PMO Secretariat), NGOs (Concerns, IrishAid, World Vision, Africare, GAIN, REACH) farmers and agro processors association, Development Partners (UNIDO, AfDB, DfID) and other relevant stakeholders. Synthesis of options: Internal team meetings have taken place to discuss and consolidate options. A first draft of Action Fiches has been proposed to the EU delegation (14/07) for Comment (15/07). This has been followed by the drafting of the Annexe 1 to the
  • 8. 8 Contribution Agreement – Description of the Action for each proposed EU intervention. Friday 18/07 – Debriefing at the EU Delegation. Presentation of the two Actions (AF and Annexes 1). Revision of the drafts based on comment from the EU Delegation. (21/07) - Official documents sent to the EU Delegation by HTSPE (Saturday 19/07) - Travel from Tanzania Phase 3: Synthesis and report writing (Home based 8 7 7 (04/08) - Comment from the EU Del on the AFs and Annexes 1 (14/08) - Final Report (Summary of the Assignment, Key findings and recommendations, AFs and Annexes 1, Minutes of the Meetings) TOTAL 31 30 30 2 Key findings and conclusions 2.1 General The Phase 1 work gave an overview of:  The agriculture sector in Tanzania and the main challenges existing in the field of agriculture development in relation to the proposed fields of intervention.  The existing policies, programmes and important projects as well as the on-going donor activities in the fields concerned.  The other focal sectors (Rural infrastructure, Food security and nutrition) as they relate to agriculture and the potential synergies.  The main potential private sector and civil society players in the region and their field of intervention.  The ways the EU can support the proposed identified interventions in the framework of the AAP2015/11th EDF (2014-2020). The Phase 2 proposed a ready to use Action Fiches (Infrastructure and Nutrition) including relevant annexes and the Annexe 1 to the Contribution Agreement with the relevant organisation – Description of the Action for both identified EU intervention. The two sets of document have been drafted in close coordination with the relevant organisations which should be in charge, and based on extensive programme of meetings and field visits in the targeted areas. The Phase 3 provided this Final report and final proposed Action Fiche and Annexes for both identified EU interventions. 2.2 Sustainable agriculture The identified EU interventions within the AAP2015/11th EDF “Enhancing access to market and value chain” and “Support to food security and nutrition” are part of the Focal Sector 3 – Sustainable Agriculture. Focus on development of productive infrastructure and food
  • 9. 9 security in the agriculture sector within selected Regions and targeted areas should be developed in synergies with the concept of green economy. Processing of agricultural products (including job creation, professional training, and innovation) as well as promotion and facilitation of trade in processed products should be given considerable attention. Application of climate change adaptation measures should be part of any Action related to sustainable agriculture. Employment and Social Protection: Focus on interventions that can contribute to employment generation and bringing the informal sector within a more real economy. The sector will target also the most disadvantaged population groups (women, youths) for social protection. In line with the Government of Tanzania ongoing policies and reforms, consolidating the nexus between sustainable agriculture, rural infrastructure, food security and nutrition will be expected to boost production, storage, handling, transformation, distribution and marketing of agricultural products and increase the income generation of smallholder farmers from subsistence to commercial oriented farming. Actions to be developed within the Sustainable Agriculture development sector should support climate change mitigating measures to ensure an environmentally sustainable growth of the sector. Farming practices should be improved in order to increase nutritional resilience and also to introduce new crops and technologies that reverse potential negative impacts on the environment and the climate. Adapted capacity building, extension work and transfer of technology in favour of agricultural producers, service providers, and relevant local authorities and farmers associations will contribute to the implementation of the National Climate Change Policy. The Mission has also identified the following key issues which have been taken into account in the drafting of the document  Market Infrastructure o Integrated approach for construction and rehabilitation of rural infrastructure: o The role of the Community Based Organisations: o Sourcing the road fund and its management issue  Food security and Nutrition o The lack of accurate and updated food security and nutrition data necessary for planning and monitoring o The necessity for WFP to invest in agriculture expertise and staff at regional and central levels
  • 10. 10 3 Annexe 1 – Enhancing access to market and value additions 3.1 Action Fiche ANNEX 2 of the Commission Decision on the Enhancing Access to Market and Value Chain Programme 1. Identification Title/Number Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition CRIS number 2014 /037-446 Total cost Total estimated cost: EUR 15,0000,000 (2.4% of IP) Total amount of EDF contribution: EUR 15,0000,000 11th European Development Fund (EDF) Aid method / Method of implementation Project approach –Joint management with International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) DAC-code 43040 Sector Trade Development 2. Rationale and Context 2.1. Summary of the action and its objective The overall objective of the Programme to contribute to improving livelihoods of people living in rural areas through generation of agricultural wealth and increase of smallholder farmers’ income. The purpose is to support the development of an enabling agriculture market environment in Tanzania (Mainland and Zanzibar). The Programme will support the delivery of two interconnected Components (rural infrastructures, capacity building), ensuring maximum impact on poverty reduction. It will foster the key principles of ownership and partnership development at the Local Government Administration and Non State Actors levels. The Programme is designed to support social inclusion and human development
  • 11. 11 through better access to market and promoting sustainable agriculture and natural resources management. 2.2. Context, policies and challenges Country context: The United Republic of Tanzania, comprising the Mainland and Zanzibar, is an influential member of the East African Community (EAC), which also includes Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi. In 2012 and into 2013, the Tanzanian economy expanded at an annualized rate of approximately 7%. The main drivers of Tanzania’s rapid economic growth continue to be a small number of fast growing capital intensive sectors, particularly communications, financial services, construction, manufacturing, mining and retail trade. The service sector recorded the highest rate of annual growth in 2012, at 8.0%. By contrast, labour intensive sectors, particularly the agricultural sector, in which approximately 80% of households are primarily engaged, recorded an average annual growth rate of only 4.2%. Poverty - Tanzania’s ranking in UNDP’s Human Development Index3 improved marginally from 0.370 in 2005 to 0.398 in 2010. Still, poverty remains high suggesting that, despite impressive macroeconomic achievements and sustained economic growth over the past decade, there has been very little impact on the incomes and well-being of the rural poor. Available evidence points to the weak redistributive aspect of growth, especially the weak linkages with rural areas where the majority of the population lives. Poverty remains predominantly rural (37.4% of the population) due largely to low agricultural growth caused by drought, low marketing power and poor agriculture infrastructure and equipment. These developments suggest that the MDG target of halving abject poverty by 2015 may not be achieved4. National development policy: The 2001 Agricultural Sector Development Strategy (ASDS) objective was to achieve a sustained agricultural growth rate of 5% per year primarily through the transformation from subsistence to commercial agriculture. The transformation was to be private sector led through an improved enabling environment for enhancing the productivity and profitability of agriculture. The implication is for policy and public expenditure to be a means of inducing private sector investment in the agricultural sector. The ASDS contributes to both the growth and poverty reduction objectives of the National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty and to the Tanzania Development Vision (TDV) 2025 which envisages raising the standard of living of Tanzanians to a typical medium-income country through ensuring food security, improving incomes and increasing export earnings. The medium term development goals are outlined in the National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty - MKUKUTA II/MKUZA II (2011-2015)5, which focus on broad clusters: i) growth and reduction of income poverty; ii) improvement of quality of life and social wellbeing; and iii) governance and accountability (MKUKUTA II) and i) growth and reduction of income poverty; ii) improvement of social services and wellbeing; and iii) good governance and national unity (MKUZA II). The strategies are fully linked with the Millennium Development Goals, results-based management, and count on the contributions of all sectors to growth and poverty reduction. The target is a real growth rate of 8% for 2015, setting the foundation for a higher growth of 10% from 2016 to 2025. To achieve these objectives the Government focuses on five key priority areas: infrastructure, agriculture, industry, human capital and tourism. 3 http://countryeconomy.com/hdi/tanzania 4 http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/country/home/tags/tanzania 5 http://www.tzdpg.or.tz/external/national -development-framework/national-development-framework.html
  • 12. 12 In the context of the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program (CAADP), Tanzania adopted in 2011 an Agriculture and Food Security Investment Plan (TAFSIP) (2011-2021)6 to achieve the CAADP target of 6% annual growth in agricultural GDP. TAFSIP aims to be the financing mechanism and framework for implementing the Agricultural Sector Development Strategy through the Agricultural Sector Development Programme. In fact it is well anchored to, and aligned with, other agricultural strategies. In the context of the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition7, G8 members committed agricultural financial and technical support within the priorities of the CAADP/TAFSIP. This support has been designed to increase responsible private sector investment in agriculture in line with Tanzania’s overarching ‘Kilimo Kwanza’ (“Agriculture First”) vision8. Within the CAADP/TAFSIP, the Southern Agriculture Growth Corridor initiative (SAGCOT) was launched in 20119 as a "public-private partnership" (PPP). The partnership brings together commercial and public sector actors, as well as local and international organisations working with agricultural value chains to develop “clusters” of profitable farming and processing businesses, allowing small, medium and large farmers to share the benefits of scales and access to infrastructure. In line with SAGCOT, the Big Results Now (BRN)10 is Tanzania’s latest initiative to transform the country into a middle-income economy focusing on six priority sectors including agriculture. Growth in agriculture GDP is to be driven by a combination of small scale farming models and large scale commercial farming. Increased smallholder income is to be achieved through smallholder aggregation with a strong emphasis on infrastructure development, notably warehouses and small scale irrigation schemes. According to the Agricultural Sector Review 2006 by the Tanzanian Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Co-operatives, existing taxation (e.g. high corporate tax, import duties on agro-processing equipment) discourages the production of food crops in general and for the market in particular. The National Agricultural Policy 2013 (NAP 2013) aims at addressing challenges that continue to hinder the development of the agricultural sector. A more conducive policy environment is required for effective participation of all actors in the sector in order to tap existing capabilities and potentialities so as to revitalise the development of the sector. There is a policy shift towards increased investment in agriculture and greater involvement of the private sector in the production and provision of support services to the farming community. The existing legal and regulatory framework does not provide the necessary provisions to ensure the development of a modern, efficient and competitive sector and under NAP 2013 agricultural related laws, legislations and regulations will be review, harmonization and formulated. Tanzania is party to various regional integration and trade affiliations such as the East African Common Market which became operational in July 2010 and will position Tanzania to participate in a market with a population of 126 million, providing opportunities for tariff free market access and less stringent sanitary and phytosanitary requirements. Agri Infrastructure Sector context - policies and challenges: All agriculture related national policies emphasize the importance of rural infrastructure development, particularly the need for passable feeder roads, adequate rural energy, efficient communication and post-harvest and marketing infrastructure, all of which are essential for agriculture growth. More particularly the MKUKUTA II is targeting (i) increased rehabilitation of rural feeder roads connecting agricultural areas to trunk roads by 50% by 2015; and (ii) scaled up 6 http://www.gafspfund.org/sites/gafspfund.org/files/Documents/TAFSIP_FINAL_FOR_PRINTING_AND_CIRCULATION.pdf 7 http://feedthefuture.gov/lp/new-alliance-food-security-and-nutrition 8 http://www.policyforum-tz.org/files/ReducingpovertythroughKilimoKwanza.pdf 9 http://www.sagcot.com/ 10 http://www.africa-platform.org/resources/tanzanias -big-results-now-initiative
  • 13. 13 storage and agro-processing facilities to enhance value chains. Similarly, Kilimo Kwanza identifies improved infrastructure as one of its pillars, including market centres, storage and agri-processing facilities and increased access to input and produce markets. The AfDB11 report 2010 and the WB12 Tanzania Country Economic Memorandum 2012 – Concept Note identify the most critical constraints for inclusive economic rural growth as: 1) land tenure, access rights and management, 2) poor infrastructure, 3) financing the agriculture sector and access to credit. The report notably highlights that agriculture remains the dominant sector in the country's economy. It is also recognised that agricultural programmes have failed to have any notable effect on smallholders due to the fact that Development Partners’ initiatives remained project based, highly geographically focussed and relatively disconnected. Increased institutional support for agriculture, particularly through strengthening the Local Government Administration, is necessary and the institutional framework of agricultural development must be strengthened alongside rural infrastructure, market access, and rural credit. Improving income generation opportunities through the agricultural sector mainly lies in addressing the sector needs and constraints such as the competitiveness, production and marketing costs. The problems to be tackled can be summarised under the following issues: i) restricted market access for local producers and businesses; ii) scarce availability of financial services; iii) limited service delivery capacity at district, and local government levels; iv) and lack of entrepreneurial and business skills for local producers and businesses. These main issues are being considered as the basis for the Action and are in line with the NIP 2014-2020 which identifies linking farmers to processing and markets as part of the Focal Sector Sustainable Agriculture. Furthermore they are in line with the EU Agenda for Change13 and particularly the focus on inclusive and sustainable growth, as the Action will impact on sustainable agriculture and enhance the business environment through promoting small and medium enterprises and cooperatives. 2.3. Lessons learnt Reducing aid fragmentation: To contribute to the ongoing effort to reduce fragmentation of the sector, EU funded interventions need to foster synergies and collaboration with other agencies and, where possible, build on existing successful programmes. EU support to the ongoing Marketing Infrastructure Value Addition and Rural Finance Programme (MIVARF) is considered as an opportunity to contribute to an integrated country-wide programme that combines hard and soft investments. Rural infrastructure sector development is recognised as having a clear impact on food security and economic growth; this has been highlighted in the evaluation of the EU Food Facility initiative. However rural infrastructure management and maintenance through public funding is a recurrent issue that needs to be addressed through technical and institutional capacity building support for Local Government Administration and Village communities. Focus on Local Government Administration and Community Based Organisations: The Agriculture Sector Development Programme (ASDP) Impact Assessment Report for the infrastructure component highlights that, because of the wide geographical coverage, investments have been thinly spread, and the approach has not been conducive to expanding agricultural production and value added in the sector. The report recommends that in future support should be more strategically targeted towards Local Government Authorities (LGAs) with high agricultural potential, including at least one crop with good marketing potential, and aligned with other development opportunities 11 http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Publications/WORKING%20105%20%20PDF%20d.pdf 12http://www.worldbank.org/en/region/afr/ 13 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/documents/agenda_for_change_en.pdf
  • 14. 14 identified for these areas. Limited capacity of stakeholders/Focus at Local Government Administration and community level: The DFID funded African Community Access Programme14 (2008-2014) and other rural infrastructure projects have found that in Tanzania Local Government Administrations face significant capacity constraints in the planning, implementation and maintenance of public works. Shortages of staff, frequent staff turnover and limited availability of transport are particular issues. Capacity building for engineering and procurement staff and contributing to transport costs will go some way towards alleviating this problem. Infrastructure maintenance budgets, particularly for feeder roads, are inadequate and projects such as the African Community Access Programme have found that well trained and equipped Community Based Organizations can be effective for rural access maintenance. Strengthening community ownership and responsibility: Most rural infrastructure development projects (USAID, DANIDA, AfDB) have found that community consultation and mobilization prior to any infrastructure development is essential to strengthening community ownership and long term sustainability of works. 2.4. Complementary actions The EU is supporting in partnership with other institutions the rehabilitation of road infrastructure and the development of energy infrastructure in key SAGCOT "clusters. The 10th EDF Rural Roads Programme implemented in Iringa, Rovuma, and Morogoro region is creating opportunities to build synergies towards increased connectivity of feeder roads, rural roads and main trunk roads enhancing access to inputs/outputs markets. The Action complements efforts achieved under the EU Accompanying Measures for Sugar, which has contributed to the development of small scale infrastructure (feeder roads) for out-growers schemes. The EU Food Facility initiative has clearly demonstrated the positive impact of rural infrastructure development on food security. Related to the 11th EDF, the Action has the potential to complement the planned EU Support on Food Security and Nutrition programme (AAP 2015). Member States such as UK (DFID) and Ireland (IrishAid) are participating actively in the rural infrastructure sector development through the SAGCOT, BRN and ASDP funding. DFID is providing £25M for the programme ‘Improving Rural Access in Tanzania’ (2013-2017) delivered through the Tanzania Roads Fund Board and Local Government Authorities. The use of labour based road construction methods is encouraged. IFAD through the Marketing Infrastructure Value Addition and Rural Finance (MIVARF) support is a key player in promoting warehouse receipt schemes, market linkages and processing through support to capacity building and development of appropriate infrastructures, as well as improving rural financial inclusion through capacity building of existing financial institutions that provide services in the rural area. This programme is co- funded with AfDB. USAID is providing support for planning, feasibility assessment, detailed design, procurement support and construction supervision activities for two irrigation schemes, Dakawa and Mgongola, including improved market access through rehabilitation and maintenance of rural feeder roads. In addition, through Feed the Future, USAID is supporting rice, maize and horticulture value chains in a number of regions. JICA is providing support to ASDP particularly through technical and financial cooperation for some 120 small scale irrigation schemes and capacity building for rice industry development. 2.5. Donor coordination The agriculture sector is coordinated through the Stakeholders Agriculture Consultative Group Meetings which are held on a quarterly basis. The group is composed by Development Partners (DPs), line ministries, NSA and academia's representatives. Development Partners 14 http://afcap.org/SitePages/Home.aspx
  • 15. 15 meet on a monthly basis within the Agriculture Working Group15 to share information and agree on common positions for policy dialogue with the government on implementation of the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS), priorities and plans. The annual Agriculture Sector Review (ASR/PER) is expected to be carried out during last quarter 2014 and first quarter 2015; in parallel the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS) is being reviewed and updated for the next coming years 2014-2020. Coordination mechanisms in place are also being reviewed and streamlined to strengthen a sector approach role and the leader ship of Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives, including recently launched initiative such as BRN. 3. Detailed Description 3.1. Objectives The overall objective of the Action is to generate wealth and to increase income and livelihood of the rural population. The purpose of the Action is to increase access for smallholder farmers to the input/output market through the development of rural infrastructures (feeder roads, storage and agri-processing facilities, collection centres, market facilities) and increased capacities of Local Government Administration and Community Based Organisations. 3.2. Expected results and main activities The Action is expected to contribute to smallholder farmers' food security and income increase through better access to markets, storage facilities and value addition for their commodities. Infrastructure investments are expected to have a direct positive impact on quality, postharvest losses, transport cost, and access to better prices. Strategy - The Action will build on activities developed through the MIVARF Programme (2011/2018 - 125M Euro). MIVARF’s target group is low-income women and men in all the rural districts/LGAs of the Mainland and Zanzibar who have a potential to improve their productivity and incomes, as well as the food security of their households. It covers 72 districts in 29 regions of Tanzania Mainland and Zanzibar with three components: (1) Marketing infrastructure; (2) Rural finance; and (3) Programme coordination. Criteria used to prioritizing districts and wards include: (a) high incidence of poverty, food insecurity and degree of vulnerability; (b) existence of smallholder farmers, small entrepreneurs and artisans; (c) effective involvement of women and female headed households and other vulnerable groups; (d) active participation of the private sector/NGOs/CBOs to enhance public private partnership (PPP), commitment to community-driven development and livelihood-based and gender-sensitive poverty reduction; and (e) entrepreneurship and market potential. Districts compete for inclusion in the Programme. All districts submit proposals (based on District Development Plans, which draw on village and ward plans), to the regional offices where they are evaluated on the basis of the eligibility criteria and prioritised. Successful proposals are forwarded to MIVARF, where they are reviewed by the PCT to ensure that they meet eligibility criteria. MIVARF interventions take market demand as a starting point, focusing on existing agribusiness and products with a high national or regional demand, and helping smallholder groups match supply to the buyers’ requirements through facilitating market information and improved policy environment. Participants in MIVARF are also assisted to link up with existing larger enterprises under contract farming and out- grower arrangements. 15 http://www.tzdpg.or.tz/index.php?id=952
  • 16. 16 At present MIVARF limits funding of feeder roads to 30-35km per district for full rehabilitation of roads to gravel standard, including all necessary structures. There is no ceiling on costs, but MIVARF works on the basis of an average cost of USD 30,000-35000 per km, depending on site conditions. For other types of infrastructure, each district is limited to construction of one warehouse and one market, and rehabilitation of up to two warehouses. Most proposals request only roads and warehouses. The budget limit is USD 200,000 for a 1,000 ton capacity warehouse and up to USD 400,000 for market facilities. There is also provision for renovation and reequipping post-harvest training centres in some regions at a cost of USD 40,000-50,000. For capacity building of producers and processors and market linkages in each district by a Service Provider, the budget is USD 80,000/year for 3 years. The rural finance components are more challenging as financing is based on Institutional Business Development Plans prepared by various micro finance institutions participating in Programme implementation. Infrastructure related investments are directly paid from donors to contractors or by the coordination unit depending on contract amount. Districts receive limited funds, disbursed on a quarterly basis, for supervision of marketing infrastructure and other Programme components. The entry point for Programme intervention is the Region, which has a MoU with the Programme. A MoU between the Region and the district provides a basis for all activities being implemented at district level. Districts are monitored on their adherence to what has been agreed in the MoU and evaluated in terms of what support they provide to Programme activities. As no funds are provided directly to districts for implementation of activities, evaluation is straightforward. For cost effectiveness, MIVARF promotes a wide choice of service providers from both the public and private sectors to work with the Programme. It is building the capacity of the private sector to compete for service provision contracts in order to reduce dependence on public funding. Under the programme MIVARF, private sector participation and commercial incentives are seen as keys to sustainability of interventions. Activities are implemented mainly by farmer groups (CBOs), warehouse managers, collaborating commercial banks and SACCOS, and private sector partner agencies recruited through a competitive bidding process by the Districts with support from the Programme Coordination Team The proposed EU intervention will focus on MIVARF’s Component 1 which has the specific objective to enhance rural incomes and food security through improved market access, and increased skills of small-scale producers and processors. The EU Contribution will scale up the MIVARF Programme impacts though investment in rural infrastructure (feeder roads, post-harvest facilities, collection centres) and capacity building for Local Government Administrations and Community Based Organisations. As added value, the EU intervention will be integrated into the ongoing MIVARF implementation procedures, focusing on areas where value chain and access to finance activities re being implemented but short of financial resources for infrastructure. Following existing MIVARF procedures, the EU intervention will use government institutional arrangements and planning systems in order to enhance sustainability and strengthen alignment with government priorities. Drawing on District Development Plans, which incorporate District Agricultural Development Plans, LGAs in selected regions will propose packages of interventions for areas that: (i) have a high incidence of poverty and food insecurity, but which have at least one major crop that produces (or has the potential to produce) a surplus for marketing; and (ii) have smallholder farmers and small entrepreneurs willing to be facilitated to increase their livelihood incomes. LGA staff, with support from MIVARF, will procure contractors for construction, and will ensure that Community Based Organisation, including women’s groups, are actively involved in the design, implementation, operation and maintenance of the assets, ensuring their long term sustainability. Service Providers will provide support in each participating district,
  • 17. 17 empowering small-scale farmers, traders and processors through assisting the formation of cohesive groups, providing them with organisational, entrepreneurial and technical skills, and facilitating access to markets and financial services. The expected results are twofold: i) Results 1 - Smallholder access to input and output market is improved through rural infrastructure (feeder roads, post-harvest facilities, collection centres and market facilities); ii) Result 2 – Smallholders, Local Government Administrations and village communities have the capacity for efficient infrastructure maintenance and market linkages Selection of target areas: currently 29 regions are planned to benefit from soft activities (capacity building and access to finance) while only 23(18 mainland and 5 in Zanzibar) out of the 2916 will benefit of hard activities (infrastructure investments) due to financial availability constraints. Based on the selection criteria previously mentioned and availability of EU resources, EU support will focus on two neighbouring regions: Mtwara and Lindi. Mtwara and Lindi regions are: a) adjacent to one another; b) they are considerably poorer than the other regions (20% poor/ 28.5% borderline food consumption in Mtwara and 5.3% poor/ 28.5% borderline food consumption in Lindi); c) there is potential for developing value chains for cashew nuts, sesame and rice; d) the Aga Khan Foundation (with DFID funding and EC funding) is already supporting smallholder cultivation, value chain post-harvest operations and marketing in a range of crops such as horticulture, sesame and rice; and e) MIVARF has, or is planning, activities in three districts in each of the region, whereas only two districts will be covered in Kagera, Kigoma, Mara and Tabora. EU intervention will be an integrated package of infrastructure combined with community development, supported by Local Government Administration. The Action will focus on two integrated Components: Component 1 - Rural Infrastructure improvement Act. 1.1. Rehabilitation of feeder roads connecting local communities to markets and essential social services facilities. It is expected to rehabilitate 350 km of feeder road, if possible, using Labour Based Technology. Where an adequate local workforce is available labour based, rather than machine based, rehabilitation is recommended in order to provide wage earning opportunities for people in poor areas. Added benefits are that local people and Community Based Organisations (CBOs) will be involved in the rehabilitation, acquiring skill for routine and periodic maintenance of the road and building ownership on the assets. Act. 1.2. Rehabilitation or construction of storage and agri-processing facilities, collection centres and market facilities at village community level and/or district centre level. It is expected that 20 facilities, identified as priorities in District Development Plans, will be rehabilitated or constructed. At each site, a Community Based Organisation will be involved in the design preparation ensuring possible management and ownership of assets. Component 2 – Capacity building for rural communities and Local Government Administration Act. 2.1. Support a management system for the sustainable maintenance of the rehabilitated feeder roads developed through training and engagement of Community Based Organisations living along the rehabilitated feeder roads and Local Government Administration. It is expected that the District council will sign a memorandum of understanding ensuring 16 Kagera,Kigoma, Mara, Tabora, Mtwara , Lindi are not covered by infrastructure component
  • 18. 18 continuing funding through the District Road Fund budget for the Community Based Organisation contracted for the routine maintenance and minor repairs. Act. 2.2. Support a management system for the sustainable maintenance and management of the storage and processing facilities, collection centres and market facilities, developed through Local Government Administration and Community Based Organisations mobilisation process. Farmers will be expected to pay membership fees to the CBOs that will cover the operation and maintenance of the facilities. Linkages between facilities and microfinance sector (warehouse receipts) will be facilitated. The Warehouse receipt Act no.10 of 2005 supports the participation of smallholder producers in agricultural commodities trade, access to bank credit and the reduction of post-harvest losses. The Act provides the legal foundation for farmers and traders to obtain credit from lenders through the use of Warehouse Receipts when they deposit their produce in a licensed warehouse. Support will be provided to facilitate the implementation of warehouse receipts systems to make the system more accessible and usable by farmers. This will include workshops at regional and district level to create awareness amongst government staff, farmers, SACCOS, commercial banks and other actors on the benefits of WRS. Act. 2.3. Support the ongoing training programme for smallholder farmers and processors to facilitate access to information and knowledge on market, new technologies and agricultural best practices. The aim will be to work with groups of rural men, women and youths with a common interest through existing CBOs. Training topics will include group management skills, post-harvest technology and value addition, marketing skills and accessing market information, accessing and using credit, improved agricultural techniques and best practice, natural resource management and climate change adaptation measures. If, and when necessary, youth and women will be provided with foundation courses or literacy training in order to participate effectively in the training programme. The Act 2.3 will organise awareness campaigns on issues such as HIV/AIDS, climate change adaptation and environmental management. Act. 2.4. Local Government Administration training to support governance initiatives, such as District Development Plan preparation, development, and monitoring with the aim to reinforce the link between Local Government Administration and local communities in terms of rural infrastructure management and value chain development funding. The LGA planning process is intended to be a bottom up procedure with inputs from communities, village committees and ward committees feeding into the District Agricultural Development Plans and District Development Plans. At present the procedure is often poorly implemented due to lack of resources and data, and delays in the system. The EU intervention will work with LGAs and communities to identify community priorities and ensure that District plans take them into account. Prime Minister Office staff at central and local levels will be involved in training and in monitoring and guiding activities. Specific training will be provided to upgrade the technical skill of, amongst others, engineers, procurement staff and environment officers at district and regional level. Support to Programme management: The Programme Coordinating Unit based in Arusha is adequately staffed for the current workload apart from the engineering and procurement staff who are overextended as there are too few staff to provide LGAs and communities with the level of support needed. Support through the EU intervention to the Programme Coordinating Unit will be reinforced with additional technical engineering and procurement capacities to be based in the target areas to ensure the efficient and on time delivery of Action results.
  • 19. 19 The Action will contribute to key policies and plans of the government: i) the Kilimo Kwanza (Agriculture First), notably the fourth pillar: financing incentives for private-sector investment, industrialization, and infrastructure development; ii) the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) efforts and national investment plan focusing on food security and infrastructure and trade related development; and iii) the recently launched Big Results Now (BRN) initiative, to boost results in the agriculture sector, notably promoting trade, and private sector investment through investment in rural infrastructure and smallholder aggregation. 3.3. Risks and assumptions Risks Mitigation measures The rural infrastructure rehabilitation works do not result in significant impact in market access for small and isolated farmers and farmers’ groups (medium). The prioritization process for the infrastructure investments will be designed (see section 3.2) to ensure the highest possible returns in terms of facilitating physical access to market for smallholders’ farmers. Rural infrastructure shall combine feeder roads, storage processing and collection facilities. Limited capacity and skills at district level may lead to delays and poor quality work (high) Adequate support and capacity building will be provided through training of district engineers and procurement staff, and, where necessary, use of contractors for preparation of detailed design and supervision of works. The District annual budget from the Road Fund may be inadequate for all routine and periodic maintenance needs of upgraded /rehabilitated roads, which would jeopardize their sustainability. (high) Community Contracting will be encouraged for routine road maintenance and minor repairs. Local Government Authorities will contract Community Based Organizations from villages near the roads. The Community Based Organizations will be trained in road maintenance, provided with basic equipment and paid a set rate for the work, which will cost less than employing private contractors. Periodic maintenance will remain the responsibility of the District Gender issue are not taken into account during the implementation phase (medium) To ensure that women and other vulnerable groups are not side-lined, the Action will make certain that all community activities include a high percentage of people from these groups and that they are included in wage earning opportunities. The EU intervention will ensure that the views and concerns of women and other vulnerable groups are addressed in community meetings and proposals. They will be provided with training in leadership, improved agricultural techniques and businesses skills, and assisted to link to credit facilities and markets. Possibilities for new high value niche products that women producers might control better will be explored. MIVARF has a target of at least 40% of beneficiaries of group activities to be women and FHHs and this will apply to the EU intervention also. Special consideration will be given to their needs by, for example, adjusting the timing of activities to fit in with child care and other duties. Assumptions: i) Government continues its support for a policy, regulatory, and institutional framework that enable agricultural value chains to become stronger; ii) Project ensures close coordination of activities between stakeholders through regular monitoring and effective management of the project steering committee; iii) Discontinuity in institutions’ representatives does not hinder the implementation of the Project in the framework of the agreed governance system; iv) There is a high level of coordination between government institutions and with Development Partners; v) The Government of Tanzania continues its commitment to the fight against corruption, improving transparency and strengthening accountability through the media and civil society.
  • 20. 20 3.4. Cross-cutting Issues The gender division of labour in the agricultural sector assigns the larger part of agricultural work to women who traditionally lack access to land and other production and marketing inputs. Women often lose control over agricultural produce when marketing is formalised or value addition takes place to yield higher and more regular incomes. There is the risk, therefore, that improved marketing and value addition that withdraws food crops from family consumption might increase household incomes without substantially increasing family food security and improving nutrition. The socio-economic empowerment of women and other disadvantaged groups will be enhanced through improving their access to markets, appropriate financial services, training and income earning opportunities such as work on roads. MIVARF already has an established minimum quota of 40% for women membership of participating groups, committee positions, and training opportunities. This will be applied to EU funded activities also. Principles of good governance have been taken into account with the view of promoting an enabling economic environment that can be implemented by local institutions and private sector. Through activity 2.4, the EU intervention is directly aimed at enhancing good governance at Local Government Administration level by improving capacity and strengthening accountability of the public sector and involvement of Non State Actors in action planning. Activity 1.1 aims at rehabilitating feeder road networks and not extending them, therefore the impact on the environment should be minimal. Nevertheless, the Programme will conduct environmental impact assessment, including preparation of the associated environmental and social management plans (ESMPs), during the road design process. Through the Activity 2.3 the EU intervention is expected to enhance positive environmental outcomes by the promotion and adoption of improved and sustainable farming practices through an integrated (value chain) approach. HIV/AIDS infection is a key element of the poverty situation in Tanzania. Although there has been a decline in HIV prevalence in the 15-49 years age group from 7.2% in 2004 to 5.5% in 2008, the decline has been slower for females than for males. An estimated 1.8 million people in Tanzania are living with HIV/AIDS. The impact of HIV is likely to be more severe in the rural areas considering the lower access of rural people to potable water, sanitation and health facilities. Through Activity 2.3, campaigns will be carried out to increase awareness of HIV/AIDS in rural areas where access is improved through road rehabilitation. The Action shall ensure that HIV/AIDS sufferers are not discriminated against and are able to participate in all activities. Nutrition: Feeder roads providing better access to markets, health care, education and other social services will enable women to access information (activity 2.3) that will help them provide better nutrition to their children. 3.5. Stakeholders The beneficiaries for the Action are: i) smallholder farmers; ii) farmer groups and women’s groups, small and medium sized agribusinesses associations and Community Based Organisations, which will enhance economies of scale for further infrastructure investment and maintenance; iii) LGAs that will benefit from capacity building and some additional resources. Key stakeholders are Districts Local Government Administrations that are facing significant capacity constraints in planning and execution of public works. The challenges in procurement, financial management and supervision are recognised and the EU intervention shall enhance ongoing efforts in planning and implementation of socio-economic development programmes at District level. At central level important stakeholders are PMO and line ministries involved in the Programme Steering Committee. Other stakeholders are actors involved in the agricultural value chain including input suppliers, producer and market groups, crop processers, traders and financial service providers.
  • 21. 21 4. Implementation issues 4.1. Financing agreement In order to implement this action, it is foreseen to conclude a financing agreement with the partner country, referred to in Article 17 of Annex IV to the Cotonou Agreement. 4.2. Indicative operational implementation period The Operational implementation period of this Action, during which the activities described in sections 3.2 and 4.3 will be carried out starts from the entry into force of the Financing Agreement and will have duration of 48 months subject to modifications to be agreed by the responsible authorising officer in the relevant agreements. Closure phase of a duration of 24 months starts from the expiry date of the operational implementation phase. Contracts are intended to be signed within the first 12 months following the signature of the Financing Agreement. The European Parliament and the relevant Committee shall be informed of the extension of the operational implementation period within one month of that extension being granted. 4.3. Implementation components and module Indirect Management with an International Organisation. Component 1 and Component 2 with the Objective of “increasing access for smallholder farmers to market links and value chain addition” may be implemented through indirect management by the International Agricultural Development Fund (IFAD) in accordance with Article 58(1)(c) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012. As justification, IFAD is currently implementing the MIVARF Programme, co-financed with AfDB, and the Government (125M€). MIVARF is a country- wide17 integrated Programme combining hard and soft investments, notably construction or rehabilitation of feeder roads, markets and storage facilities, as well as capacity building for Local Government Authorities and CBOs toward access to finance and improved management of rural infrastructures to facilitate the establishment of sustainable market linkages and support to market information system. The IFAD would under this present Action further support the improvement of livelihood of smallholder farmers in selected target areas through the rehabilitation and development of rural infrastructure (feeder roads, storage and processing facilities, collection centres, and market facility) ensuring a better access to the market and strengthening the technical and institutional capacity of smallholder farmers’ organisations and Local Government Administrations. The Contracting Authority is the Ministry of Finance/National Authorizing Officer (NAO) of the EDF. The overall responsibility for the implementation of the Programme lies with the NAO, who may request the Commission to implement service contracts under Article 19.c.4 of Annex IV to the revised Cotonou Agreement. The Prime Minister Office is the implementing agency, under the existing Programme Coordinating Unit. The MIVARF Programme Steering Committee, chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Office, is responsible for providing policy guidance to the Programme, approving work plans, reviewing activities, procurement and finance, and ensuring that all agencies represented on the Committee understand and fulfil their obligations. 4.4. Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement and grants N.A. 17 Tanzania, Mainland and Zanzibar
  • 22. 22 4.5. Indicative budget The budget available to implement the action is detailed here below. The MIVARF budget from IFAD is USD 77.6M for activities in the 72 districts of 29 Regions. This covers producer empowerment USD19.7M, grassroots MFI support USD23.0M and rural financial systems development USD34.9M. In addition, USD9.0M will be met through the contributions of GoT, the districts/LGAs, beneficiaries and others. 4.6. Performance monitoring Monitoring will be performed by IFAD in collaboration with the Programme Coordinating Unit. Monitoring covers baseline survey18, monitoring plan and reporting. For monitoring purposes the Action’s logframe matrix includes indicators disaggregated by sex. Adequate resources will be made available to ensure that sex-disaggregated data can be collected for monitoring/evaluation. The EC may carry out Results Oriented Monitoring (ROM) via independent consultants. Where possible, any monitoring visits should be timed to be a joint mission with IFAD/AfDB joint review missions which take place twice yearly in February/March and August/September. 4.7. Evaluation and audit Provision is made for a mid-term and final evaluation to be carried out by external consultants. Government administration auditors will undertake yearly internal audits of programme disbursements, applying international internal audit procedures and controls including pre and post-payment audits. 4.8. Communication and visibility Communication and visibility of the EU is a legal obligation for all external actions funded by the EU. This action shall contain communication and visibility measures which shall be 18 Very little baseline data is available at present. The IFAD Joint Implementation Review of MIVARF, March 2014, was critical of the type of information collected to date and recommended that Service Providers revise their surveys to focus on the farmer groups and value chain actors that will participate in the Programme. Component/Module ,000EUR Third party Indirect management with IFAD 14.000 0 Component 1 – Improvement of rural infrastructures 10.000 0 Component 2 - Capacity building for rural communities on value chain development 3.700 0 Evaluation and Audit 200 0 Communication and visibility 100 n.a. Management by EC/NAO n.a. Evaluation and audit 200 Contingencies 800 n.a. Totals 15.000 0
  • 23. 23 based on a specific Communication and Visibility Plan of the Action, to be elaborated before the start of implementation and supported with the budget indicated in section 4.5 above. The measures shall be implemented either (a) by the Commission, and/or (b) by entrusted entity (IFAD). Appropriate contractual obligations shall be included in, respectively, financing agreements and delegation agreements. The Communication and Visibility Manual for European Union External Action shall be used to establish the Communication and Visibility Plan of the Action and the appropriate contractual obligations.
  • 24. 24 Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition CRIS number 2014 /037-446 Logical Framework Matrix Project description Objectively verifiable indicators of achievement Sources and means of verification Assumptions Overall objective To generate wealth and to increase income and livelihood of the rural population Human Development Index UNDP Human Development Index Report Programme purpose To increase access for smallholder farmers to the input/output market through the development of rural infrastructures (feeder roads, storage and agri-processing facilities, collection centres, market facilities) and increased capacities of Local Government Administration and Community Based Organisations % increase in agricultural production in selected targeted areas % increase in agricultural produce marketed Intervention Baseline survey and Programme Progress Reports National statistics Government retains stance on rural economic development policies. Continued government investment in rural infrastructure Continued general economic growth Expected results R1 - Smallholder access to input and output market is improved through construction/rehabilitation of rural infrastructure At least 30 CBOs participate in design and social consensus-building workshops. At least 350 km of feeder roads improved through local contractors. At least 20 storage and agri- processing facilities, collection Programme reports District and Region reports and statistics Traffic counts before rehabilitation and at intervals after rehabilitation Capacity of District councils not impaired by high staff turnover Adequate support from relevant ministries and local government authorities
  • 25. 25 centres and market facilities improved/constructed 50% Increase in the numbers of vehicles & people using feeder roads and reduced travel costs 25% Increased value of marketed produce Market surveys R2 - Smallholders, Community Based Organisations and Local Government Administrations have the capacity for efficient infrastructure maintenance and market linkages. During the intervention, increased number of women associations participating in the capacity building training programmes At least 350 km of feeder roads are maintained in good conditions by CBOs through contract with Districts Constructed and upgraded storage and agri-processing facilities, collection centres and market facilities operated and maintained effectively During the intervention, increased numbers of men and women/ farmer groups using improved technologies During the intervention, increased numbers of men and women/ farmer groups having improved marketing skills, and using market information skills At least 20 SACCOs are providing adequate financial support to rural Programme reports Service provider and INGO reports Training reports District and Region reports and statistics Participatory assessments
  • 26. 26 communities At year 4 of the intervention, % of women benefiting from the SACCOs Activities Means Indicative costs Assumptions Component 1 - Rural Infrastructure improvement Act. 1.1. Contract civil work for rehabilitation of feeder roads connecting local communities to markets and essential social services facilities Act. 1.2. Contract civil work for construction / rehabilitation of storage and agri-processing facilities, collection centres and market facilities at village community level and/or district centre level Districts identify feeder roads for rehabilitation following MIVSARF criteria. MIVARF committees ensure criteria are followed. CBOs formed along selected roads to ensure their involvement in works. District staff procure contractors and supervise works. Capacity building for District engineers and procurement staff provided Programme and INGO Districts identify storage facilities etc. for construction/upgrading following MIVARF criteria. MIVARF committees ensure criteria are followed. Capacity building by INGO and Service Providers starts for CBOs which will operate and maintain infrastructure. District staff procure contractors and supervise works. Component 1. Budget - Rural infrastructure improvement: 10.0M€ Act.1.1. Road rehabilitation 8.75 M€. Act 1.2. Storage and agri-processing facilities, etc. 1.4 M€. District staff will supervise contracts and report on progress. Information on progress will be provided by regular Programme site visits and reports, and reports from Service provider and
  • 27. 27 INGO. CBOs concerned with operation and maintenance of infrastructure will be asked to report on activities and problems. Component 2 – Capacity building for rural communities and Local Government Administration 2.1. Support the management system for the sustainable maintenance of the rehabilitated feeder roads developed, through training and engagement of LGA and village community based organisations living along the rehabilitated feeder roads 2.2. Support the management system for the sustainable maintenance and management of the storage and processing facilities, collection centres and market facilities. 2.3. Provide training to smallholder farmers and processors to improve the business enabling environment and to facilitate access to information and knowledge on market and new technologies and agricultural best Rehabilitated feeder roads are maintained by CBOs through contract with Districts. CBOs are trained by MIVARF and District engineers with assistance of INGO. CBOs are provided with sets of tools. District engineers monitor and supervise works. Capacity building for CBOs for operation and maintenance of facilities provided by INGO and Service Providers. Training of farmers provided by INGO and Service Providers overseen by MIVARF. Component 2. Budget - Capacity building for rural communities on value chain development: 3.8M€ Act. 2.1. Feeder road maintenance 0.59M€ Act. 2.2. Operation and maintenance of storage facilities etc. 0.12M€ Act. 2.3. Training for farmers, agricultural processors etc. 0.15M€ Act. 2.4. LGA training 0.96M€ Districts have adequate funds for periodic maintenance (e.g. regravelling) and major repairs of feeder roads, and can fund routine maintenance in the long term.
  • 28. 28 practices. 2.4. Provide training to LGA to a) support governance initiatives, such as planning, policy development, strengthening of monitoring with the aim to reinforce the link between LGA and local communities in terms of rural infrastructure management and value chain development funding. b) upgrade the technical skill of engineers, procurement and other technical staff. Training to support planning, policy development, monitoring etc. provided by INGO together with MIVARF staff. Upgrading of skills of technical staff provided by MIVARF engineers and procurement specialist. Information on progress will be provided by regular Programme site visits and reports, and reports from Service provider and INGO. Participatory assessments by MIVARF will ensure farmers and community groups are able to express their views on activities Support to Programme management 3.1. Provided additional technical full time/part time staff (engineering, procurement, supervision) to support the PCU and ensure the efficient and on time delivery of Results. One engineer and one procurement specialist will be added to MIVARF’s PCU. An INGO will be contracted to oversee and strengthen the capacity of MIVARF Service Providers working with farmers and CBOs.  Act. 3.1.: 1.05M€  Programme reports
  • 29. 29 3.2 Gender Screening Checklist Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition CRIS number 2014 /037-446 Gender Equality Screening Checklist (GESCf) Has a full-scale gender analysis been done during the formulation stage? Comments: The Gender Equality assessment has been made through discussions with key partners of the proposed Action (IFAD Office Arusha, field visits community based organizations (Kongwa District) and reports (Statement from 59th Session of the commission on the status of women-Feb 2012, http://tz.one.un.org/index.php/core- commitments/gender ) analysis Yes  No x Have gender equality issues relevant to the project been identified? Comments: The gender division of labour in the agricultural sector assigns the larger part of agricultural work to women who traditionally lack access to land and other production and marketing inputs. Women often lose control over agricultural produce when marketing is formalised or value addition takes place to yield higher and more regular incomes. There is the risk, therefore, that improved marketing and value addition that withdraws food crops from family consumption might increase household incomes without substantially increasing family food security. Yes x No  Are the gender equality issues identified supported by reference to the partner government’s/EC’s policy commitments to gender equality? Comments: The 1977 Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania (Articles 12 and 13) guarantees equality between men and women and supports their full participation in social, economic and political life. Gender equality and women’s empowerment also forms a major component of the National Poverty Reduction Strategies (MKUKUTA II in Mainland and MKUZA II in Zanzibar) under the goals on governance, education and health. However, the country ranks 125th out of 155 countries on the Gender-related Development Index for 2009. The 2008 Gender Empowerment Measure puts Tanzania at 48th place out of the 108 countries measured. And while Tanzania is on track to reach the MDG target on gender, high drop-out rates for girls, and gender parity in secondary and tertiary education remain a concern. As well, maternal mortality remains high and the burden of HIV is still heavy, with higher infection rates in women than men. Yes x No  Are the statistics used for project formulation disaggregated by sex? Comments: Most of the statistical data are not disaggregated by sex. However, a monitoring system will be put in place that will provide data disaggregated by sex based o a baseline survey to be conducted at the start of the Action. Yes  No x Has qualitative information on gender equality issues been used in the project formulation stage? Comments: Qualitative information has been issued based on the desk study phase and more during the field visits and discussions with rural communities and local government administration staff. Yes x No  Has the logframe been engendered? Comments: A specific focus on gender will be included under the Component 1&2 of the Yes x No 
  • 30. 30 Action. Specific indicators on gender are incorporated in the Programme Logical Framework Matrix. Do the management systems established by the project respect the principles of gender equality and equal opportunities? Comments: The current management system of the Programme implemented and coordinated by IFAD in which the Action will participate is respecting the main principles of gender equality and equal opportunities for the Programme management. Yes x No  Have all factors potentially affecting the sustainability of gender equality actions been thoroughly addressed? Comments: The Component 2 of the Action has the aim to empower women and youth in the maintenance and management of the rural infrastructure through Community Based Organization strengthening. The Programme will ensure that women and youth are part of the decision making process. If, and when necessary, youth and women will be provided with foundation courses or literacy training in order to participate effectively in the training programme Yes x No 
  • 31. 31 3.3 TC/CD Checklist Title/Number Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition CRIS number 2014 /037-446 Total cost Total estimated cost: EUR 15,0000,000 (2.4% of IP) Total amount of EDF contribution: EUR 15,0000,000 11th European Development Fund (EDF) Aid method / Method of implementation Project approach – Joint management with International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) DAC-code 43040 Sector Trade Development Country Tanzania Programme Enhancing Access to Market and Value Addition Total Amount of the Programme 15 million Euro TC/CD support component (if a separate component) No specific component If yes, amount of the TC/CD support component Short description of the TC/CD component (if not included in the Action Fiche) Purpose(s) of the TC/CD support More than one option possible (see section 2.2 and 4.1 of the Guidelines) 1. Capacity development: comprehensive approach that addresses a w ide set of constraints in one or more organisations and w hich is linked to clear performance targets. □ Main objective □ Secondary objective □ Not an objective 2. Providing policy and/or expert advice (normally of short term duration). □ Main objective □ Secondary objective □ Not an objective 3. Support to implementation of projects/programmes. It may include activities as planning, management, supervision or direct gap filling. The support focuses directly on □ Main objective □ Secondary
  • 32. 32 "getting things done". objective □ Not an objective 4. Preparation/facilitation of EU cooperation (or broader donor cooperation). Includes feasibility and preparatory studies, facilitation of dialogue betw een EU and partners, facilitation of programme development etc. □ Main objective □ Secondary objective □ Not an objective Please add comments about the purpose of the TC/CD support if relevant (see pages 10-12 of the Guidelines): 1. Fit to the context and existing capacity See section 3.2 of the Guidelines 1.1 Are there critical constraints in the context w hich could make CD support ineffective and impede achieving the purpose of the support? If yes, how w ill they be addressed? Context constraints can include weak governance arrangements in the sector, limited incentives for civil servants to perform, or limited effective priority of the area in national politics, etc. See page 22-23 of the Guidelines. Conversely, are there opportunities in the context w hich could make CD support more effective ? No there are no critical constraints that could make CD support ineffective. The EU intervention will be implemented through the ongoing IFAD/AfDP funded MIVARF Programme, which already has considerable experience of CD. The EU intervention will enable the recruitment of additional staff and an INGO to provide the technical support needed to cover the CD requirements for LGA staff, Service Providers, CBOs and other stakeholders. 1.2 Has the existing capacity of the concerned partner(s) organisation(s) been assessed? Is it confirmed that the objectives and the scope of the CD support match the existing capacity to lead, manage and absorb the support? See page 23-24 of the Guidelines. The capacity of concerned partners, including MIVARF, LGAs and Service Providers, has been assessed and CD recommendations are appropriate. 1.3 How have similar programmes and types of CD support w orked in the current context? Please indicate w hich, if any, and w hy they have been successful. See page 22 of the Guidelines. MIVARF started in 2011 and has successfully undertaken a range of capacity building activities.
  • 33. 33 2. Adequate demand, commitment and ownership from the country partners See section 3.1 of the Guidelines 2.1 How have key stakeholders demonstrated demand for CD support, beyond reacting to proposals from the EU or consultants? See page 20-21 of the Guidelines. The CD requirements have been identified and formulated jointly with MIVARF staff and concerned governmental partners, including LGAs. 2.2 How have the country partners lead or participated in the design of CD support, beyond formal consultation and endorsement of proposals and other requirements? See page 16 of the Guidelines. NAO and PMO representatives support the CD recommendations in the proposal. 3. Clear link to results and expected outcomes See section 4.2 of the Guidelines 3.1 Are results and/or outcomes defined beyond w hat the CD support w ill deliver? Please give examples of key targeted results at the level of enhanced capacity of organisation(s), if relevant outputs that the organisation(s) produce or at the level of outcomes. See page 30-36 in the Guidelines, including figure 4 and 5. MIVARF is undertaking baseline study that will identify supplementary CD needs. 3.2 Have the country partners' inputs, w hich are required to sustain the results of the programme, been identified and specified? Resources can include staff, managers, involvement of senior staff and leaders, facilities and logistics. See pages 15-17 in the Guidelines. Yes, at Regional and District level. 3.3 What innovative forms of CD support have been considered, e.g. regional sources, staff exchanges or netw orking? See Box 25 on page 38 of the Guidelines. Not considered – but MIVARF organizes visits for stakeholders to sites where activities are particularly successful.
  • 34. 34 4. Harmonized support See section 3.4 of the Guidelines 4.1 Has CD support from other donors in the sector been screened to ensure complementarity w ith that proposed by the EU? Have other main donors been consulted on the proposed CD support and have they endorsed the proposal? See page 26 of the Guidelines. DFID activities have been screened and assessed through their various operations in the road and infrastructure sector. 4.2 Which synergies and harmonisation options have been explored w ith country partners and other donors? If no harmonisation is possible at this stage, w hich steps w ill be taken to ensure that the CD support from the EU w ill be harmonised w ith other donors’ interventions in the future? See page 26 of the Guidelines. Synergies and harmonisation options have been assessed and supplementary actions have been worked out such as support to LGAs for ensuring efficient monitoring and management of the infrastructure. 5. Appropriate programme implementation arrangements See Chapter 5 of the Guidelines 5.1 Briefly describe the Project Implementation Arrangement. Will country partners lead and manage the programme? Is primary accountability of the programme appointed to domestic stakeholders? See page 47-50 of the Guidelines. IFAD is already working closely (jointly) with LGAs. All CD activities will be channeled through governmental services. 5.2 Will civil servants w orking in the programme receive topping- up (salary supplements, special allow ances etc.) funded by the EU? Are they linked to clear performance targets? If these incentives are not follow ing government regulations, w hich steps w ill be taken to align them, diminish any negative distortion and/or abandon the use of donor-funded topping- up? See page 14 and pages 43-51 in the Guidelines. There will be no topping-up. The only support will come in the form of assistance towards LGA costs for implementing and supervising activities at district level – transport costs etc. 5.3. Given the nature of the programme and of the expected results, explain its level of integration in the broader structure The programme is carried out with full implementation of national and regional
  • 35. 35 or its level of autonomy. See page 46-47 in the Guidelines. structures. 5.4 Are the EU’s and/or other donors’ role in the governance of the programme limited to oversight functions? See page 47-50 of the Guidelines The implementing partner MIVARF/PCU will be bound to the responsibilities etc. as is laid down in the agreement that will be signed with the EU. 4 Annexe 2 - Support to food security and nutrition 4.1 Action Fiche ANNEX 2 of the Commission Decision on the “Support to Food Security and Nutrition Programme” 5. Identification Title/Number Support to Food Security and Nutrition CRIS number 2014 / 037-445 Total cost Total estimated cost: EUR 10,0000,000 (1.6% of IP) Total amount of EDF contribution: EUR 10,0000,000 11th European Development Fund (EDF) Aid method / Method of implementation Project approach – Indirect management with World Food Programme (WFP) DAC-code 52010 Sector Food Security 6. Rationale and Context 6.1. Summary of the action and its objective The overall objective is to improve food and nutrition security, and ultimately reduce the high stunting rate in Tanzania. The specific objective is to promote diversification of food production, awareness and access to nutritious food and enhance women empowerment in the Dodoma and Singida Regions. The Programme will support the delivery of three interconnected Components (i) Knowledge and Information, ii) Social transfer for targeted groups and iii) strengthening and capacity building of key stakeholders. The programme will work through district health facilities, Non-Government Organisations and Community Based Organisations. Key partners of the Programme are government Regional and District agencies, more particularly nutrition officers and Non-Government Organisations and Community Based Organisation active in the sector.
  • 36. 36 6.2. Context, policies and challenges Country context: In 2012 and 2013, the Tanzanian economy expanded at an annualized rate of approximately 7%. The main drivers of Tanzania’s rapid economic growth continue to be a small number of fast growing capital intensive sectors, particularly the communication and financial services, construction, manufacturing, mining and retail trade sectors. The service sector recorded the highest rate of annual growth in 2012, at 8.0%. By contrast, labour intensive sectors, particularly the agricultural sector, in which approximately 80% of households are primarily engaged, recorded an average annual growth rate of only 4.2%. Poverty - Tanzania’s ranking in UNDP’s Human Development Index19 improved marginally from 0.370 in 2005 to 0.398 in 201020 (159/187). Still, poverty remains high21 suggesting that, despite impressive macroeconomic achievements and sustained economic growth over the past decade, there has been very little impact on the incomes and well-being of the rural poor. Available evidence points to the weak redistributive aspect of growth, especially the weak linkages with rural areas where the majority of the population lives. Poverty remains predominantly rural as high as 37.4% of the population due largely to low agricultural growth caused by drought, low rainfall and lack of and/or poor agriculture equipment and productivity, low marketing power. These developments suggest that the MDG target of halving abject poverty by 2015 may not be achieved. Nutrition - Tanzania has made progress in many health indicators over the past decade, but not in nutritional status. According to the 2010 Demographic and Health Survey (DHS 2010)22 stunting rate was 42% of the under- five children, and was only 2% lower than five years before. According to the DHS 2010, stunting rates in rural area were 44.5%23 and 31.5% in urban areas .The highest level of stunting was found in Dodoma District with a level of 56.0%. The burden of stunting in Tanzania ranks third in Sub-Saharan Africa, after Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Tanzania is not on track to achieve the MDG 1 target to reduce underweight by one- half by the year 2015. The nutrition situation of adolescent girls and women in Tanzania is also alarming. About 30% of women are deficient in iron, vitamin A and iodine, 20% of women are anaemic and 10% of women are undernourished. Malnourished adolescent girls and women are more likely to give birth to low birth weight infants, who malnourished in childhood and later life will transfer under nutrition to the next generation. The high levels of stunting in the country, affecting over three million under-five children, constitute a silent emergency. Food security - The food security situation in Tanzania is directly linked to the availability and access to food, the food diversity situation and the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) situation. In many districts the food insecurity situation is either chronic or temporary depending on the availability of food but also the access to sufficient and diversified diet. The high stunting rates nationwide are not only caused by general food insecurity but also due to a poor WASH situation and poor behaviour attitudes of mothers. Improving the food and nutrition security situation is a combination of improving feeding practices, improving behaviour practices, improved and diversified food production, improved WASH situation. National Food security and Nutrition development policy: The signing up to the ‘Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN)’ movement24 in June 2011 and the recent Presidential "Call to Action in Nutrition" on May 16th 2013, highlights commitment from the highest levels of 19 http://countryeconomy.com/hdi/tanzania 20 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index 21 http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/country/home/tags/tanzania 22 http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR243/FR243[24June2011].pdf 23 Figures from DHS survey 2010. Stunting and wasting rates are expresses in -2SD and stand for global rates. 24 http://scalingupnutrition.org/
  • 37. 37 government to focus on nutrition as a national priority. Tanzania is a member of the SUN Movement Lead Group25. Within the SUN movement initiative, the government has established a High-Level Steering Committee for Nutrition, which is convened by the Prime Minister’s office and involves representatives from nine key ministries, development partners, UN agencies, civil society, faith-based organisations, academia and business. With the support and participation of this Committee, the government finalised its National Nutrition Strategy26 and is now working to complete a corresponding financial implementation plan. The government is placing strong emphasis on decentralisation to ensure that nutrition is on the agenda at district and ward levels. Advocacy on nutrition issues with Regional Commissioners has been undertaken to ensure they are sensitised on the need to take action on nutrition. In addition, nutrition officers are being recruited and nutrition budget training is being provided at the district level. With support from the UN nutrition coordination mechanism (REACH)27, the government is undertaking a mapping exercise to increase understanding on how to best align all actors who have a role to play in scaling up nutrition, and ensure they can work together as efficiently as possible. The Permanent Secretary to the Prime Minister’s Office who is also SUN Government Focal Point chaired the High Level Steering Committee on Nutrition (HLSCN) as a multi-stakeholder platform. The SUN Government Focal Point is responsible for coordination, advocacy, and resource mobilization for scaling up nutrition. The HLSCN operates within and leverages existing government systems and dialogue mechanisms for developing cooperation, such as the Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania (JAST) and the Food Security Thematic Group within the agriculture sector, which promote national ownership and enhance effectiveness. A Council Steering Committee on Nutrition has also been established at district level chaired by the Executive Director and has full inclusion of all stakeholders, including representatives of relevant departments, UN agencies, civil society and private sector. Currently, collaborative advocacy efforts between the civil society-led Partnership for Nutrition in Tanzania (PANITA)28 and the government are underway to raise awareness on the importance of nutrition and solicit action. Launched in August 2011, PANITA includes over 230 civil society organization (CSO) members working on nutrition- specific interventions across Tanzania with nine zonal coordinators. The National Nutrition Public Expenditure Review of 2014 made a detailed review showing that only 0.22% of government expenditure was allocated to nutrition in FY 2012/13 and therefore few activities have been carried out to implement the National Nutrition Strategy (2011-2015). The 2013 EC Communication “Enhancing Maternal and Child Nutrition in External Assistance”29 builds on the Agenda for Change 2011. The EU adopted a multi-sector approach, combining sustainable agriculture, rural development, food and nutrition security, public health, water and sanitation, social protection and education. This policy document on nutrition highlights the need for a better coordination between humanitarian and development aid in order to increase the resilience of affected populations. The Communication is based on three strategic priorities: i) Enhance mobilisation and political commitment for nutrition; ii) Scale up actions at country level; iii) Knowledge for nutrition (strengthening the expertise and the knowledgebase). 25 http://scalingupnutrition.org/sun-countries/tanzania 26 https://extranet.who.int/nutrition/gina/sites/default/files/TZA%202011%20National%20Nutrition%20Strategy.pdf 27 http://www.reachpartnership.org/reach-countries/tanzania 28http://scalingupnutrition.org/news/the-partnership-for-nutrition-in-tanzania-panita-supports-the-ministry-of-healths-world- breastfeeding-week-celebration#.U8YRiaTlrIU 29 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/documents/enhancing_maternal-child_nutrition_in_external_assistance_en.pdf
  • 38. 38 Food security and nutrition Sector context: policies and challenges: Government food security and nutrition related policies emphasise the importance of better nutrition intervention, coordination, data surveillance and monitoring systems. Better nutrition education activities, WASH situation improvement, increased food production and diversification, improved feeding practices and development of income generating activities for vulnerable households are considered as keys to tackle the nutrition issues. Stunting is a nationwide critical issue and its aetiology30 should be assessed in a systematic way. It is recognised that stunting is directly related to growth delays, indicating the development history of the child. It is necessary to analyse the problem and causes at regional and district levels. Assessment should focus on food intake, feeding practices, infant morbidity rates, WASH situations and knowledge/attitude/practices (KAP) of mothers. HDDS (Household Dietary Diversity Score) and HFIAS (Household Food Insecurity Access Scale) should also be analysed. Dodoma and Singida Regions nutrition status: Based on DHS 2010 report, the national average stunting rate is 42% and the average wasting rate is 4.8%. Dodoma Region has the highest stunting rate (56%) but a low wasting rate (5.2%). The neighbouring Singida Region stunting rate is lower (39.0%) and wasting rate is higher (9.2%). Updated data for both Regions are currently not available. Irish Aid has taken the lead to produce a national update every 2,5 years nationwide. Currently, in the Dodoma Region, the USAID/AFRICARE Mwanzo Bora programme focuses mainly on behaviour change at the community level, while in Singida Region World Vision Canada works on community and at health facility level on behaviour change, capacity building and prevention and rehabilitation. The impact of their interventions is assumed to be positive on the reduction of stunting rates but also improving the wasting or acute malnutrition prevalence. Their monitoring systems have not yet produced concrete data. World Food Programme (WFP) works in Dodoma and Singida Regions directly with the District health services households treating moderate acute malnutrition amongst children under 5 and pregnant lactating women, food provision of Special Nutritious Foods (SNF) to pregnant and lactating women and children under 2 to prevent stunting and capacity building to health workers and working on behaviour change with mothers coming to the District health facilities. Currently, global updated information on impact is not available. Issues to be tackled: Save the Children International reports31 and more particularly the 2014 Communication32 identified key recommendations i) Improved household access to diverse and nutrient rich foods through own production and purchase from the local market working with women’s and CBOs on awareness raising on stunting and malnutrition and the right choice of diet to prevent them, looking into gender roles and division of labour in order to ensure that women’s involvement into agriculture does not hinder maternal and infant and young child feeding practices; ii) Improved maternal, infant and young child feeding practices through traditional community trainings, community group meetings and popular mobilisation events which are conducted by civil society organisations; iii) Enhanced reach and quality of health and nutrition services delivered through the health system through the identification of needs to prevent or treat key diseases that contribute to chronic malnutrition; and iv) Improved multi-sectoral response to nutrition at sub-national levels (Health, Agriculture, WASH, Education, Community Development, Livelihoods), facilitating the establishment of district level nutrition steering councils. 30 Aetiology: study of causes and origins of diseases. 31 http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/docs/social-protection-Tanzania-briefing.pdf 32 Save the Children recommendations on reducing malnutrition in Tanzania 2014