This document provides an update on the Root and Tuber Crops (RTB) program. It summarizes that RTB has received excellent ratings in annual reporting, gender reporting, and external reviews. It notes funding received from DFID and BMGF and pre-proposal reviews. It discusses improvements to management staffing, research synergies, communications, and the cassava seed value chain project. Feedback on the pre-proposal from ISPC is presented which recommends the full proposal. The upcoming full proposal process and timelines are outlined.

1. RTB Update
IITA
Ibadan
27 January 2016

2. Six reasons why RTB is best CRP!
1. Only CRP to receive “excellent” in Annual Reporting
to CO in 2014 and 2015!
2. Commendation by CO for reporting on gender and
used our format as model for other CRPs
3. CRP with highest number of A grades in ISPC
review of pre-proposals
4. Outstanding external review (best of all six read so
far by Yvonne Pinto of ISC)
5. Based on performance review DFID granted RTB 3.5
million pounds of W2 funding
6. Just agreed BMGF funding for RTB led project on
cassava seed systems for $11.6m

3. 1. Governance & Management
Center &
Gender
Focal Points

4. RTB 1.0 to RTB 2.0
RTB 1.0
RTB 2.0

5. • Gender research coordinator, full time - Bhawana
• Communications officer – Holly
• M&E Officer - Claudio
• Science officer – Michael:
– Product delivery plans
– Formulation and review of progress discovery/breeding related
products, milestones and activities.
– Strategic advice to Program Director on range of science issues
PMU staffing update

6. 2. Adding value synergistic research: breeding
• Sequencing and phenotyping
data
• Support genomic analyses (GWAS, GS)
for complex traits (eg. potato tuberization
and early bulking, fertility and fruit quality
in banana)
• Common Vision RTB data
management and bio-informatics
• Promote linkages CassavaBase,
SweetpotatoBase, MusaBase etc with
Integrated Breeding Platform and multiple
crop/center tools
August 2015, Bioversity Montpellier
January 2015, Ithaca

7. 2. Adding value synergistic research: breeding
Integrating End User Preferences in RTB Breeding –
Workshop Kampala (Feb 2015)
Critical gaps: working across disciplines to fill gaps in
knowledge and technical support to bring greater “end-user
awareness” to public sector

8. • Biological and socio-economic
surveys pests and diseases along
altitudinal gradients
• Modelling to understand
degeneration of planting material and
design cost effective interventions
• Improvement of energy efficiency in
cassava processing & adding value
to RTB waste products
2. Adding value: seed, pests and
diseases and post harvest
•Collaboration with ILRI and
CRP Livestock & Fish and
CRP Humidtropics

9. 3. Communications
● RTB communication channels in 2015
• Blogs and News
– RTB research, publications, successes
– Partners contribute and share
• Flyers – RTB second phase
84% increase in
Facebook
followers from
2014
43% increase in
Twitter followers
from 2014
1000+ Newsletter
subscribers
25,000+ visitors to
RTB website so far
this year. Up from
14,000 in 2014

10. 4. BMGF: Cassava seed Value Chain & project
components
Breeder
Seed
Foundation
seed
Commer
cial seed
growers
Farmers /
Seed
Users
Seed Quality &
Protocols
Seed & Information
Consumer Demand & Money
M&E

11. 4. BMGF: Cassava seed Value Chain next steps
• Project planning meeting this week!
• Interview for project coordinator
• Project start up and M&E workshop: 18-19th April

12. Global integrating programs
5. Pre-proposals Second Phase
Dryland Cereals and Legumes systems
G
e
n
e
b
a
n
k
S
+
+
Fish agri-food systems
Forest and Agroforestry systems
Livestock agri-food systems
Maize agrifood systems
Rice agri-food systems
Roots, tubers and bananas systems
Wheat agri-food systems
N
U
T
R
I
T
I
O
N
&
H
E
A
L
T
H
P
I
M
W
L
E
C
L
I
M
A
T
E
C
H
A
N
G
E
Gender
Capacity
Development
Big data/ ICT
Genetic
Resources
Policy
Expressions
of Interest
(10)
Agri-food systems programs
Genetic gain
G
e
n
e
b
a
n
k
s

13. FP1:
Discovery
FP2:
Varieties/
seed
FP3:
resilient
crops
FP4:
nutritious/
added value
FP5:
Livelihood
systems
FP6:
Impact
@ scale
Clair Inge James Graham Piet
(Philippe)
Dietmar
Global
Challenges
Oscar
Partnership
& CapDev
Simone
Gender Netsayi &
Bhawana
ToC/IDO Claudio
5. Pre-proposal and ISPC review
Intense internal review: CIP BoT, ISC and MC!
Builds on business cases for clusters and flagships

14. Program structure & ISPC rating
A A A A
C
C

15. 5. Pre-proposal ISPC: feedback

16. 5. Pre-proposal ISPC: feedback
Satisfactory with adjustment, recommends
inviting full proposal
• Clear comparative advantage
• Well conceptualised, strong and stable management
• Pre-proposal generally very high standard
• Role of other CRPs and partners explained succinctly
with great clarity
• Theory of change and impact pathway for RTB clear,
focused, logical and plausible
• Greatest concern FP5 (livelihood systems) and FP6
(impact at scale)

17. 6. IEA review of RTB: headlines
5 person team led by Jill Lenne – extensive visits
• Notable progress in past 4 years
• Strongly warrants continuing
• Well directed, achieving reasonable # of milestones
• Adding value across crops and centers mainly through
complementary funded projects
• Science sound
• NARs appreciative
• Good progress gender strategy
• Good program governance and management

18. IEA review of RTB: for improvement
• using outcomes of priority assessment for more
strategic allocation of budget across crops
• collaboration among breeders (cassava and banana)
• strengthening CRP expertise in seed systems
• improved integration of crop improvement and
management technologies
• enhanced focus of post-harvest research on the
crop-specific aspects of value chain improvements

19. 7. Full proposal: Rome meeting
• Budget down to $900m from $1400 submission
• Reduced from 69 to 58 Flagships
• 3 D rated flagships eliminated
• 16 C rated flagships consolidated
• Need more clarity Window 1 and Window 2 funds
• Should be seen as leading the research and less as propping up
the system
• Management and supervision costs more efficient and
comparable
• range from approx. $1m to $4.5m

20. RTB: best and now the biggest!
CRP
2017
Projected
W1 + W2
US$
millions
2017
% of
$207
million
W1+W2
2017
Projected
Bilateral
& W3
US$
millions
2017
% of
Bilateral &
W3
2017
Projected
Total under
$900m
indicative
budget
US$ millions
% of Total
$900
million
base
budget
AFS
CRPs
DCLAS 11.4 5.5 93.7 13.6 105.1 11.7
Fish 8.5 4.1 17.6 2.5 26.1 2.9
FTA 10.7 5.2 62.6 9.1 73.3 8.2
Livestock 20.2 9.8 23.1 3.3 43.3 4.8
Maize 12.6 6.1 55.1 8.0 67.7 7.5
Rice 14.4 6.9 71.9 10.4 86.3 9.6
RTB 22.3 10.7 91.9 13.3 114.2 12.7
Wheat 14.7 7.1 28.5 4.1 43.2 4.8
GI
CRPs
A4NH 19.8 9.6 71.2 10.3 91.0 10.1
CCAFS 20.9 10.1 36.0 5.2 56.9 6.3
PIM 18.8 9.1 74.0 10.7 92.8 10.3
WLE 9.4 4.5 49.3 7.1 58.7 6.5
Platforms
Genebank
s 21.5 10.4 8.5 1.2 30.0 3.3
Gen. Gain 2.0 1.0 8.0 1.2 10.0 1.1
TOTAL 207.2 100.0 691.3 100.0 898.5 100.0

21. Merge FP5 and FP6: rationale
• Common conceptual framework: innovation system
perspective
• Multi-indicator, actors and scales and help design,
test and target innovations
• Both strong gender content, linkages with FP1-4 and
emphasis on enhancing impact
• Space for agronomists, nutritionists, sociologists
and economists across centers to think and engage

22. Changes in restrategized FP5
• Place based clusters dropped
• Systems dimension linked to site integration
– Vietnam ++ country: cassava with conservation
ag. with and scaling via linkages processors
• More opportunistic – what do we have already?
• Improved focus IPGs in cross cutting work
• Stronger reciprocal linkages FP1-FP4
• Linkages “livelihood/impact at scale” FPs in other
AFS CRPs

23. RTB New Program Structure

24. 8. Full proposal: next steps
• Set up core writing team and extended team
– Writing process underway
– Cluster descriptions due Jan 20th
• Key period Feb 1-23rd
• First draft due Feb 29th
• Submission March 31st

25. 9. Wrap up
1. Dynamic Independent Steering Committee:
2. Planning shift RTB 1.0 to 2.0
3. Strengthened scientific collaboration: “RTB team”
4. Enhanced gender research
5. Dynamized RTB communication channels
6. Strong Pre-Proposal – well set to move forward
7. Outstanding external review
8. Working on full proposal NOW!