PROJECT PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
Transcript of PROJECT PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
International Fund forAgricultural DevelopmentVia Paolo di Dono, 4400142 Rome, ItalyTel: +39 06 54591Fax: +39 06 5043463E-mail: [email protected]/evaluation
Enabling poor rural peopleto over come poverty
Enabling poor rural peopleto over come poverty
P R O J E C T P E R F O R M A N C E A S S E S S M E N T
February 2012
IFAD IFAD
Republic of Uganda
Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme
Republic of Uganda
Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme Project Performance Assessment
February 2012 Report No. 2540-UG Document of the International Fund for Agricultural Development
Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD
Photos: Front cover: Katojo Market. Markets built by the Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme have created employment for over 5,700 people engaged in different types of activities. Page vi: Land has been allocated to the enterprises and improved agricultural technologies have been adopted, through the project, leading to increased yields of important marketable crops, such as potatoes, pineapple, and bananas. Back cover: Private investors noticed the profitability of the programme’s milk coolers and acquired similar coolers (left); The establishment of savings and credit cooperatives (SACCOs) helped facilitate farmers’
engagement in productive agricultural enterprises. @IFAD/Oanh Nguyen
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IFAD concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The designations ―developed‖ and ―developing‖ countries are intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgement about the stage reached by a particular country or area in the development process.
All rights reserved. © 2012 by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
Contents
Currency equivalent ii
Abbreviations and acronyms ii
Preface iii
Executive summary iv
I. Background, methodology and process 1
II. The project 2
A. Project context 2 B. Project implementation 6
III. Review of findings by criterion 8
A. Project performance 8 B. Rural poverty impact 14 C. Other performance criteria 19 D. Performance of partners 22
IV. Overall project achievement 24
V. Conclusions and recommendations 25
A. Conclusions 25 B. Recommendations 26
ANNEXES
1. Rating comparison 28
2. Map of the project area 29
3. Basic project data 30
4. Terms of reference 31
5. Definition of the evaluation criteria used by the Independent Office
of Evaluation of IFAD 36
6. List of persons met 37
7. References and data sources 39
8. Physical progress of the programme 40
9. Linear logical project scheme 43
10. Statistics on SACCOs supported by AAMP and the Rural Finance
Support Programme 44
ii
Currency equivalent
Currency unit = Ugandan Shilling (UGX)
US$1.00 = UGX 2,375
(April 2011)
Abbreviations and acronyms
AAMP Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme
AfDB African Development Bank
CAIIP Community Agricultural Infrastructure Improvement Programme
COSOP country strategic opportunities paper
DLSP District Livelihood Support Programme
ERR economic rate of return
ESA East and Southern Africa Division (IFAD)
FRR financial rate of return
IOE Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD
IPC Inter-ministerial Policy Committee
MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries
M&E monitoring and evaluation
MOLG Ministry of Local Government
NAADS National Agricultural Advisory Services
NEMA National Environmental Management Authority
PCR project completion report
PCRV project completion report validation
PEAP Poverty Eradication Action Plan
PFT programme facilitation team
PMA Plan for the Modernization of Agriculture
PMD Programme Management Department (IFAD)
PPA project performance assessment
SACCO savings and credit cooperative
UCSCU Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union
UNOPS United Nations Office for Project Services
iii
Preface
This is the project performance assessment of the Area-Based Agricultural
Modernization Programme in the Republic of Uganda. The overall goal of the programme
was to increase the incomes and food security of poor rural households in the
programme areas and to modernize agriculture in the targeted districts. According to the
assessment, the programme’s support for and training of local farmer groups enabled
them to expand their production and become more commercially oriented at a time
when they were shifting from subsistence to market-based farming. The programme also
improved rural infrastructure, thus facilitating the commercialization of agriculture.
Better rural roads improved access to other services, such as input and produce markets
and financial services. There were concerns with the sustainability of some of these
activities, but these concerns are relatively minor compared with the programme’s
achievements. The assessment recommends to reinvigorate the infrastructure
management committees as well as ensure the financial sustainability of the savings and
credit cooperatives supported by safeguarding their nature as member-based and
savings-first institutions.
The assessment was prepared by Oanh Nguyen, lead evaluator, with contributions
from Turto Turtiainen (consultant, rural development specialist). Internal peer reviewers
from the Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD - Ashwani Muthoo, Deputy Director,
and Anne-Marie Lambert, Senior Evaluation Officer - provided comments on the draft
report. Lucy Ariano, Evaluation Assistant, and Anna Benassi, Administrative Assistant,
provided administrative support.
The Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD is grateful to the East and Southern
Africa Division and to the Government of the Republic of Uganda for their insightful
inputs, comments and support at various stages of the evaluation process.
Luciano Lavizzari
Director
Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD
iv
Executive summary
1. The Peer Review of IFAD’s Office of Evaluation and Evaluation Function conducted
by the Evaluation Cooperation Group in 2010 recommended that the Independent
Office of Evaluation of IFAD (IOE) transform its approach to project-level evaluation
by undertaking project completion report validations and, on a selective basis,
project performance assessments (PPAs). In this regard, the Area-Based
Agricultural Modernization Programme (AAMP) in the Republic of Uganda was
selected for a PPA in order to help build up evidence for the Uganda country
programme evaluation scheduled for 2011-2012.
2. The overall goal of AAMP was to improve the incomes and food security of poor
rural households in the programme area and modernize agriculture in the target
districts. Specific objectives were to: (i) increase the involvement of the private
sector in support of further commercialization of smallholder agriculture;
(ii) strengthen the capacity of economically active farmers to gain better access to
rural services (technical, financial and marketing); (iii) ensure the sustainable
development and improvement of rural infrastructure; and (iv) enhance public-
sector capacity to respond to production needs identified by interest groups and
rural communities. AAMP was implemented over a six-year period. The executing
agency was the Ministry of Local Government, which implemented the programme
in collaboration with district and subcounty governments.
3. AAMP was structured around four components: (i) agricultural commercialization
(US$4.1 million); (ii) rural infrastructure development (US$8.7 million);
(iii) community mobilization (US$1.2 million); and (iv) programme facilitation
(US$2.1 million). Under a parallel financing arrangement with the African
Development Bank, funds were spent on a separate component for the construction
of feeder roads in the programme area.
4. In general, the programme achieved the results expected because the planning and
execution capacity of the districts and subcounties improved, as did the farmers’
ability to obtain better access to services and financing facilities through the
savings and credit cooperatives (SACCOs). Training and support for local groups
enabled farmers to expand production at a time when they were shifting from
subsistence to market-oriented farming and their capacity to select enterprises
(subprojects) with higher returns increased. Farmers increasingly involved
themselves in group marketing to benefit more from their marketable surpluses.
The programme was implemented within the time frame originally projected, and
its funds were almost fully disbursed.
5. The programme also improved rural infrastructure, thus facilitating the
commercialization of agriculture. Better rural roads improved access to other
services, such as inputs markets and financial services. Women are now more
involved in economic activities and the impact on their empowerment is significant.
In addition, districts, subcounties and farmer groups have become involved in
sustaining activities initiated by the programme.
6. Although some of the targets set during the early stages of programme
implementation were not achieved, the vast majority were met or even exceeded.
There is still concern about the viability of some of the savings and credit
cooperatives (SACCOs) supported, the role and sustainability of the infrastructure
management committees, and the sustainability of the pass-on system (under
which the beneficiaries were expected to pass inputs they received free — such as
improved seed and animal progeny — to others in need), but these concerns are
relatively minor compared with the programme’s achievements. Some
shortcomings in design (such as the lack of targets for monitoring indicators and
inadequate planning and financing of the monitoring and evaluation system) were
corrected during implementation. Overall, AAMP’s achievements are rated
satisfactory.
v
7. The success of AAMP may be attributed to numerous factors, of which the most
important were: (i) flexibility in the design of programme interventions, allowing
for quick response to opportunities that arose during implementation;
(ii) mainstreaming of activities into government programmes and linkages with
decentralization policies, which helped build up capacity and enhance sustainability
of benefits after programme completion; and (iii) the involvement of local people in
selecting programmes interventions, taking real responsibility for the
implementation of these interventions and sustainability over the long term. The
high quality of programme management was also an important factor in the
success of the programme.
8. The PPA identified a number of broad recommendations related to important issues
for future IFAD operations in Uganda:
(i) Financing arrangements. Should it not be possible to place all external funds in
the same ―basket‖ for monitoring or other reasons, parallel financing,
organized under the same coordinating body, might be a relevant and efficient
financing solution.
(ii) SACCOs. Promoting local SACCOs is a promising approach to creating a
financial network to serve the financial needs of Uganda’s rural areas. The
financial sustainability and long-term survival of SACCOs will need to be
ensured, by safeguarding their nature as member-based and savings-first
institutions. Consequently, the Government and support organizations for
SACCOs should be careful when choosing the types of financial and technical
support they provide.
(iii) Infrastructure management committees. These committees should be
reinvigorated by means of training and endowing them with the authority and
self-esteem to act by themselves, thereby allowing them to be accountable for
the infrastructures they have chosen as priorities. Such follow-up would
require funding through district and subcounty budgets or, in the medium
term, with donor funds or as subcomponents of follow-on
projects/programmes.
(iv) Indicators and targets for monitoring. Even when there are uncertainties about
the types of subprojects to be chosen because of the community-driven
development approach, it is important to have targets for indicators, with the
caveat that such targets may be modified when clear local preferences
emerge.
1
I. Background, methodology and process
1. Background. The Peer Review of IFAD’s Office of Evaluation and Evaluation
Function conducted by the Evaluation Cooperation Group in 2010 recommended
that the Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD (IOE) transform its approach to
project-level evaluation by undertaking project completion report validations
(PCRVs) and, on a selective basis, project performance assessments (PPAs). PCRVs
essentially consist of independent desk reviews of project completion reports
(PCRs) and other available and relevant project documentation.1 PPAs are
undertaken on a selected2 number of projects that have previously undergone a
PCRV, and include focused field visits. PPAs are not expected to investigate all
activities financed under projects/programmes or to undertake in-depth impact
assessments, but rather to fill major information gaps, inconsistencies and
analytical weaknesses of PCRs and further validate the explanations, conclusions
and lessons presented in PCRs. Another purpose of PPAs is to shed light on
selected features of project/programme implementation history not adequately
analysed in PCRs, hence contributing to learning and accountability.
2. The Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme (AAMP) in the Republic of
Uganda has been selected for PPA in order to help build up an evidence base for
the Uganda country programme evaluation to be undertaken by IOE in 2011-2012.
3. Methodology. The PPA relied on the extensive desk review of available
documents3 undertaken for preparation of the PCRV. These included the PCR, the
impact assessment by the Government, appraisal reports, mid-term review and
supervision reports. During the field work, primary data were collected to verify
available information and reach an independent assessment of programme
performance and impact. Given the time and resources available, no quantitative
survey was undertaken. The information gathered was therefore mainly of a
qualitative nature and focused on a restricted set of topics identified during the
desk review.4 Data collection methods included individual interviews, focus group
discussions with members of the former programme facilitation team (PFT)5 and
direct observations during visits to programme sites.6
4. The PPA followed key methodological fundamentals stipulated in the IOE Evaluation
Manual.7 A six-point rating system8 is applied to all evaluation criteria, as described
in annex 5.
5. Process. The PCRV of AAMP was prepared by IOE in February-March 2011 and
shared with the East and Southern Africa Division (ESA) of IFAD for comment. The
PPA mission9 was undertaken from 10-20 April 2011 in close cooperation with the
Government and the IFAD country office. The mission included field visits to AAMP
sites, interactions with government authorities, members of the former PFT,
beneficiaries and other key informants. At the end of the mission, a wrap-up
meeting was held at the Ministry of Local Government (MOLG), the programme
implementing agency, to share preliminary findings.
1 The PCRV performs the following functions: (i) independent verification of the analytical quality of the PCR;
(ii) independent assessment of project performance and results through desk review (including ratings); (iii) extrapolation of key substantive findings and lessons learned for further synthesis and systematization exercises;
2 The selection criteria for PPA are: (i) major information gaps, inconsistencies, and analytical weaknesses in the PCR
found by IOE during the validation process; (ii) innovative project approaches; (iii) need to build up an evidence base for future higher-plane evaluations; (iv) geographical balance; and (v) any disconnect between the ratings contained in the PCR and those generated by IOE during the validation process. 3 See annex 7.
4 The desk review identified the following topics to be focused on by the PPA: efficiency, natural resources and the
environment; operations and profitability of the savings and credit cooperatives (SACCOs); innovation and scaling up; and programme management. 5 It is important to note that AAMP was completed in 2008. At present, therefore, members of the former PFT are
working on other assignments. 6 See annex 6 for a list of persons met during the field visits.
7 www.ifad.org/evaluation/process_methodology/index.htm.
8 6 – highly satisfactory; 5 – satisfactory; 4 – moderately satisfactory; 3 – moderately unsatisfactory; 2 – unsatisfactory;
1 - highly unsatisfactory. 9 The PPA mission consisted of Oanh Nguyen, IOE lead evaluator, and Turto Turtiainen, IOE consultant.
2
6. The draft PPA report was exposed to the IOE internal peer review process for
quality assurance and subsequently shared with ESA and the Government for
comments before being finalized and published.
Key points
The Peer Review of IFAD’s Office of Evaluation and Evaluation Function
recommended that IOE transform its approach to project-level evaluation by
undertaking PCRVs and, on a selective basis, PPAs.
AAMP was selected for PPA to build up an evidence base for the Uganda country
programme evaluation to be undertaken by IOE in 2011-2012.
The PPA relied on an extensive desk review carried out for preparation of the
PCRV. Field visits were made in April 2011. The PPA followed key
methodological fundamentals stipulated in the IOE Evaluation Manual.
II. The project
A. Project context
7. Country background. After a period of prolonged but intermittent civil conflict
(1970-1986), Uganda has emerged as one of the most consistent economic
performers in Africa. However, despite its impressive economic progress, Uganda
remains a poor country with a GDP per capita of US$392 (2007).10 The
Government’s strategy for poverty alleviation and rural development has been
transformed over the last decade through the Poverty Eradication Action Plan
(PEAP) and the Plan for the Modernization of Agriculture (PMA). PEAP provided a
national planning framework to guide both sector and district plans and the budget
process, was accepted by the donor community as the country’s equivalent of a
poverty reduction strategy paper, and revised every three years. PEAP 1 covered
the period 1997-2000, PEAP 2 covered 2001-2004 and PEAP 3 covered 2005-2008
but was extended for one year to allow for the completion of its successor, the
National Development Plan 2010-2015, which continues to classify agriculture as a
primary growth sector and major source of income generation.
8. The PMA constituted an advanced rural sectorwide approach, providing a policy
framework that sought to eradicate poverty through agricultural transformation. It
focused on seven main areas for public expenditure interventions: (i) agricultural
research and technology development; (ii) delivery of agricultural advisory
services; (iii) agricultural education; (iv) rural financial services; (v) marketing and
agroprocessing; (vi) sustainable natural resources use and management; and
(vii) supportive physical infrastructure. The Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry
and Fisheries (MAAIF) also developed a five-year agricultural sector plan, the
Development Strategy and Investment Plan 2010-2015, which outlined priorities
for agricultural development and formed the basis for Uganda’s signature of the
Compact for Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme, the
framework for donor assistance.
9. These strategies have all been implemented under the overall context of Uganda’s
decentralization process. An effective system of participatory local government was
articulated in the 1995 Constitution and spelt out in a series of policy
pronouncements and in the Local Government Act of 1997. The central government
provided financial support to the districts, subcounties and parishes through
subventions under the Local Government Development Fund, capacity-building
grants, the PMA, and through donor-supported interventions. Public services were
provided through the districts, counties, subcounties, parishes and villages within
an increasingly participatory framework.
10
The Economist Intelligence Unit, Uganda Country Profile.
3
10. Rationale. AAMP was designed to test development approaches matching the
objectives of the PMA, all major aspects of which were reflected in the programme
(extension services, infrastructural improvements, marketing, rural finance and
capacity-building). AAMP’s rationale derived from several factors: (i) while growth
played a fundamental role in reducing rural poverty, districts lacked funds for
agricultural activities; (ii) the Government was supporting private-sector initiatives
and encouraging farmers to take full advantage of economic opportunities: the
scope therefore existed for an investment programme that aimed at further
commercializing smallholder farming and assisting rural communities to become
full market participants and be no longer cash-poor; (iii) key national programmes
required support from actions within districts; therefore, area-based interventions
represented a mechanism that would provide useful experience for the eventual
development of broader programmes in areas where national approaches were still
being developed; and (iv) the programme would build roads linking farms and
communities to major towns and markets, opening up other income-generating
occupations for rural communities, and providing goods and services.
11. Objectives. The overall goal of AAMP was to improve the incomes and food
security of poor rural households in the programme area, and modernize
agriculture in the targeted districts. Specific objectives11 were to: (i) increase the
involvement of the private sector in support of further commercialization of
smallholder agriculture; (ii) strengthen the capacity of economically active farmers
to gain better access to rural services (technical, financial and marketing);
(iii) ensure the sustainable development and improvement of rural infrastructure;
and (iv) enhance public-sector capacity to respond to production needs identified
by interest groups and rural communities. AAMP was implemented over a period of
six years. The executing agency was MOLG, which implemented the programme in
collaboration with district and subcounty governments.
12. Area and target groups. At design, AAMP was targeted to cover 30-40 per cent
of rural households in 10 districts12 in south-western Uganda. During
implementation, following the division of Kabarole into four districts,13 the number
of recorded districts supported at programme completion amounted to 13,14 but
the programme area remained the same. These districts were subdivided
administratively into 196 rural subcounties and 13 urban councils. The total
population of the districts, based on extrapolations from the 1991 census, was
about 5.3 million spread over 1.05 million households (about 25 per cent of the
national population), of which over 4.7 million persons and 947,000 households (90
per cent) were rural. Rural households averaged five persons, with agriculture as
the dominant occupation.
11
Both the appraisal report and the President’s Report written in 2000 used the term “expected outputs”, but these would probably be considered specific objectives in reports written later. In fact, the mid-term review used the term “expected results” and the PCR referred to them as “objectives”. 12
The original 10 implementing districts were: Bundibugyo, Bushenyi, Kabale, Kabarole, Kasese, Kisoro, Mbarara, Ntungamo, Rukungiri, and Sembabule. 13
Kabarole, Kemwenge, Kanungu, Kyenjojo. 14
In October 2005, Mbarara was divided into four districts: Mbarara, Isingiro, Kiruhura and Ibanda. In fact, therefore, the number of programme-supported districts was 16 in all, but this division of Mbarara was not recorded in the PCR.
4
Table 1 Project information
Country: Republic of Uganda
Title: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme
Approval date: 08 December 1999
Effectiveness date: 20 May 2002
Closing date: 31 December 2008
Total cost: US$30.0 million
IFAD loan : US$13.2 million
Lending terms: Highly concessional
Contribution of Government: US$1.5 million
Contribution of beneficiary: US$1.4 million
Parallel financing from the African Development Bank (AfDB): US$13.9 million
Cooperating institution: United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS)
13. AAMP covered two major target groups: (i) economically active smallholders in the
rural areas wishing to participate in commercial agriculture; and (ii) existing or
potential small-scale entrepreneurs and business associations providing services to
rural households. Among the target group, women played a major role in crop and
livestock production, processing and small enterprise operation. The programme
did not target pre-specified activities to particular areas and/or groups of potential
beneficiaries. Rather, within certain guidelines, the districts decided how to use the
majority of resources available to them, according to the specified eligibility criteria
and demands of poor rural people.
14. Components and cost. AAMP was structured around four components:
(i) agricultural commercialization, including two subcomponents, namely, an
agricultural commercialization fund established by the programme and from which
the districts could draw down funds to finance eligible activities, and rural financial
services training. This component had a cost of US$4.1 million; (ii) rural
infrastructure development: US$8.7 million; (iii) community mobilization: US$1.2
million; and (iv) programme facilitation: US$2.1 million. The parallel financing
arrangement with AfDB materialized, and the funds were used for a separate
component for the construction of feeder roads.
15. Implementation arrangements. AAMP was supervised at the central level by the
Inter-ministerial Policy Committee (IPC), with management and coordination
undertaken by a PFT based in Mbarara. The programme facilitator based in
Kampala acted as the link between the PFT and MOLG as the executing agency, and
also served as secretary to the IPC. The programme support officers were
responsible for the supervision of district-level implementation. UNOPS was the
cooperating institution.
16. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system. The foundation of AAMP’s M&E
system and impact assessment was the logical framework prepared by the
appraisal team, a series of performance indicators and AAMP’s operational manual.
According to the original plans, PFT was to include a government-seconded M&E
officer and an AAMP-financed short-term consultant to design a ―simple and
effective monitoring system‖. An evaluation of AAMP’s performance and impact was
carried out by an independent agency at both mid-term and the end of the
programme.
17. The approach to M&E was participatory. The general principles of this approach
were as follows: (i) end-user associations and interest groups, supported by
service providers, monitored (and reported on) their activities and investment
performance; (ii) local councils monitored activities, inputs and outputs in their
5
respective areas; (iii) relevant institutions monitored their support, involvement
and capacity-building activities; and (iii) MOLG monitored the overall operations for
planning and coordination purposes (i.e. compliance with the set minimum
conditions and the performance of the districts and subcounties).
18. Changes during implementation. The first change during implementation (as
captured in the first loan amendment in 2004) was the increase in the number of
districts in the programme area, from 10 to 13, due to the division of Kabarole into
four districts after AAMP started up (see paragraph 12). When Mbarara was divided
into four districts in October 2005, the total number of programme-supported
districts was in fact 16, but this second division was not captured in any loan
amendment. It is important to note that the geographical area remained the same.
19. The second change during implementation (as captured in the second loan
amendment in 2006) was the reallocation of programme funds, with a reduction in
the agricultural commercialization fund and rural infrastructure fund, and an
increase in budget for community mobilization and programme facilitation. The
increase of 39.4 per cent in the community mobilization component resulted
primarily from the larger number of farmer groups mobilized than anticipated at
appraisal. The increase (84.8 per cent) in the funds originally planned for
programme facilitation was the result of the change in the programme’s
administrative/coordination structure, under which more PSOs,15 subcounty
coordinators and paraprofessionals16 were deployed than foreseen at appraisal, and
the creation of an M&E unit (as recommended by the first supervision mission in
200317). The 2006 loan amendment noted a number of reasons for this change,
including the increased number of districts supported and the fact that, in the
parallel cofinancing by AfDB for the rehabilitation of feeder roads, no provision had
been made for incremental operating costs associated with the monitoring and
inspecting of activities, which had to be financed from the IFAD loan.
20. Another change was that, at design, the programme was to provide, under
―enterprise development support‖ (part of the agricultural commercialization fund),
matching grants for technical support to selected interest groups to obtain support
from the private sector.18 As recommended by the first supervision mission of June
2003 (and confirmed by following missions), these grants were directed to the
financing of eligible group ―enterprises‖ (subprojects) and to establishing a
―revolving fund,‖ also known as the ―pass-on system.‖ The pass-on system was to
supply inputs, such as improved seed and animal breeding stock, which the
beneficiary groups were required to pay back on the basis of a specific repayment
plan. The repaid inputs were then to be passed on to new eligible groups.
21. Another change from the original design related to the subcomponent for rural
financial services training. The original plan was to provide training in rural financial
services for the purpose of: (i) upgrading the management and business skills of
staff of the microfinance intermediaries, including lending groups and associations;
and (ii) informing community leaders and district and subcounty staff as to the role
and potential of the microfinance intermediaries. The start-up of activities for rural
finance was delayed as programme implementers were awaiting the preparation of
a new government policy document, the Rural Financial Services Strategy, which
was finalized in August 2006 and stipulated that SACCOs, recently introduced in
Uganda,19 would be the vehicle through which the Government would support the
15
Appointment of PSOs to all 13 districts instead of three regional PSOs as originally planned. 16
Paraprofessionals were local people specially trained for extension services. Their services were not anticipated at the time of appraisal. 17
The supervision mission of 2003 noted that a short-term consultant had been recruited to design the details of the M&E system (and for computerizing it), but that the programme’s M&E officer was working on only a part-time basis from Kampala. The mission recommended that the M&E activity be strengthened by appointing a full-time person for the M&E officer’s post based in Mbarara and with adequate funding (very few funds were provided in the programme cost tables). 18
The “matching” part by the group was to be 20 per cent. 19
SACCOs represent a cooperative credit and savings concept successfully introduced in Kenya in 1969. They were originally known as Union Credit and Savings Sections, then Union Banking Sections and, in the 1990s, were given the acronym SACCOs (savings and credit cooperatives). The term was then assumed in other East African countries.
6
development of rural financial services. Consequently, AAMP was directed to
concentrate on helping establish SACCOs in the programme areas.
B. Project implementation
22. Details of the physical progress of AAMP are given in annex 8 of this report. The
following paragraphs provide only a brief discussion of the main activities and
results achieved.
23. Agricultural commercialization. There were three main types of outputs under
this component: (i) technical support to farming enterprises – a range of activities
were undertaken, including establishment of on-farm trials and demonstrations,
training of farmers in modern farming technologies and training in the logical
framework approach; (ii) business development and market linkages, with
enterprise development support in the form of a revolving fund, formation and
training of marketing associations and support to value addition initiatives; and
(iii) rural financial services support, basically including capacity-building for
selected SACCOs.
24. A total of 470 on-farm demonstration plots and 1,020 on-farm trials were
established (94 per cent of the targets). Trials were used to test crop varieties
released by the National Agricultural Research Organization and compare them
with local varieties. Successful varieties were then included in on-farm
demonstrations. The demonstrations led to a high rate of adoption by various
enterprises.20
25. Under the decentralized arrangement, the training of farmers was the responsibility
of the subcounty field extension workers. Accordingly, a total of 209 subcounty
extension workers (97 per cent of targets) were trained as part of capacity-building
for subcounty extension service delivery. All programme-supported groups received
several types of training, including technical training pertaining to the chosen
enterprises as well as instruction in enterprise development, group dynamics and
leadership, business planning and record-keeping. A total of 1,020 farmer groups
were also trained in the logical framework approach, which helped farmers to
identify their problems, find appropriate solutions and to systematically monitor the
benefits accruing. Exchange visits were also organized to develop awareness and
skills, and to promote knowledge sharing among farmers and extension workers.
26. Enterprise development support was the driving force behind the programme’s
agricultural commercialization efforts. By completion, AAMP had supported 2,788
groups to set up agricultural enterprises, and there were 66,196 beneficiaries of
the revolving fund of which 55.3 per cent were women. These groups included 886
groups supported with ―pass-ons‖ recovered from the original groups. Support
under the revolving fund took the form of packages standardized according to the
types of enterprises involved.21
27. Marketing initiatives promoted by the programme were based on marketing
associations. Workshops were organized, and market information was collected and
disseminated through radio programmes and on subcounty notice boards.
Marketing associations also took advantage of the wide coverage of mobile
telephone networks to establish links with supermarkets in Kampala. In
collaboration with the Uganda Integrated Programme, AAMP also carried out a
study on value addition facilities with potential in the region. A number of
enterprises were identified, including the drying of fruit, milling of grain, hulling of
rice, processing of honey and dairy produce, and production of Irish potatoes,
meat, fruit and vegetables.
20
For example, upland rice in Kabarole, Kanungu and Rukungiri Districts, improved banana management in Ntungamo District, Irish potato growing in Kabale, Kisoro and Mbarara Districts, pineapple growing in Sembabule and Kyenjojo Districts, and adoption of improved goat husbandry in all programme districts. 21
For example, rice farming groups received seed and a spray pump; bee-keeping groups received modern hives as well as tending and harvesting equipment; fish farmers received fish fending materials, etc.
7
28. As mentioned above, AAMP implemented the rural financial services support
activities through SACCOs. By programme completion, 35 SACCOs had received
support in the form of training22 and equipment23 to enhance their operational
capacity (109 per cent of the target). The districts and subcounty commercial
officials helped them to prepare business plans, monitoring reports, annual reports,
accounts and annual audits. The Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union
(UCSCU), financed by another IFAD-supported intervention,24 undertook to
supervise and guide the SACCOs under AAMP through monthly visits.
29. Rural infrastructure development. Infrastructure investments eligible under the
IFAD loan included the improvement of existing community roads, covered
markets, cattle dips, valley dams and storage facilities. The choice of infrastructure
schemes was left to the communities themselves, within the menu set out above.
The parallel financing from AfDB was for the construction of feeder roads. At
completion, the targets set for milk cooler capacity, feeder roads and market
structures were exceeded by 8 per cent, 60 per cent and 87.5 per cent,
respectively. However, some targets were not met. Only 27 per cent of the target
set for cattle dips was achieved because of managerial problems encountered at
the district level; therefore AAMP did not move forward to finance these dips, given
the lack of sustainability. Eighty-three per cent of the target set for valley dams
was achieved, although the target was optimistic and required hydrological design
work that was far beyond the capacity of MOLG. With regard to community roads,
only 51 per cent of the target was achieved but the problem had to do with
programme design rather than its implementation. The road gravelling costs were
not included in the cost estimate and this has emerged as a principal lesson
learned.
30. Community mobilization. Under this component, support was intended to be
delivered in terms of skills development, community mobilization and institutional
support. The first was to concentrate on the training of community development
staff in mobilizing and working with groups; the second concerned start-up
workshops, identification of groups, needs assessment and promotional activities;
and the third aimed at improving the outreach of districts through the provision of
vehicles. By the end of the programme, the number of start-up workshops
organized (both at the district and subcounty levels) had met the targets, and
community development officers had been trained and vehicles provided.
31. Project facilitation. AAMP was implemented through existing local government
structures at the district and subcounty levels. Key technical staff at these levels
received specialized training and their capacity was strengthened. Initially, M&E
was carried out by a part-time MOLG official based in Kampala – an arrangement
found to be unsatisfactory by the supervision mission of 2003, which recommended
a full-time appointment that was eventually made in June 2004. It was not until
after the appointment of the full-time officer that a functional M&E system was
established, capable of collecting data at the grass-roots level, feeding it into the
district and national reporting system, and establishing standardized reporting
formats. There was also a substantial increase in programme staff during
implementation (see paragraph 19).
22
Training of committee members and new staff. 23
A safe, stationery and other small items. 24
Rural Financial Services Programme.
8
Key points
The Government’s strategy for poverty alleviation and rural development was
outlined in the PEAP and PMA.
AAMP was designed to test development approaches that matched the
objectives of PMA, all major aspects of which are reflected in the programme.
The overall goal of AAMP was to increase the incomes and food security of poor
rural households in the programme area and modernize agriculture in the
districts.
AAMP was structured around four components: (i) agricultural
commercialization; (ii) rural infrastructure development; (iii) community
mobilization; and (iv) programme facilitation.
Although some early targets were not met, by the end of the programme the
vast majority of the targets for each component had been attained or even
exceeded.
III. Review of findings by criterion
A. Project performance
Relevance 32. Generally speaking, it may be said that the programme objectives were relevant in
terms of their alignment with government policies for agriculture and rural
development, the country strategic opportunities paper (COSOP) for Uganda, and
the needs of the rural poor. AAMP was designed to promote increased smallholder
participation in the market economy and improve their opportunities for income
generation through a number of initiatives related to rural infrastructure
development and measures to stimulate the provision of private-sector services to
smallholders. This is very much in line with the PEAP and PMA, which called for
increased commercialization of agricultural production, and with the Local
Government Act of 1997 that emphasized the principles of decentralization and
gave considerable responsibility for administration, service provision and
investments to elected local councils.
33. AAMP approaches were also in line with the COSOP of 1998, particularly regarding
(i) support to demand-driven community and interest-group projects;
(ii) connecting farmers to markets and agroprocessors; (iii) promotion and
adaptation of known technologies to local conditions as well as focus on cash and
tradable food crops; and (iv) livestock production within smallholder farming
systems.
34. In the formulation of AAMP, lessons were also drawn from past IFAD
projects/programmes, in particular the South-west Region Agricultural
Rehabilitation Project, of which AAMP is a follow-on intervention. Main lessons were
that: (i) efficient implementation and management should be decentralized to the
programme area; (ii) IFAD’s target groups have a strong interest in generating
cash income and savings from agriculture; (iii) with a few exceptions, input supply
no longer requires support from the Government; (iv) local infrastructure
development must respond to community interests and commitment, with a clear
understanding reached regarding the provision of adequate resources for road
maintenance before roads are rehabilitated; and (v) with limited positive
experience gained from agricultural extension activities, there is now a need to
develop extension approaches and methods suitable to the country’s changed
economic and institutional framework.
35. The PCR noted the relevance of AAMP with respect to its intended development
purpose and alignment to the needs of the rural poor. At the time of appraisal, 2.5
million of the country’s smallholder families produced 94 per cent of total
agricultural production, constituted 80 per cent of the employed population and
9
supplied virtually all the country’s food. About 80 per cent of households in the
programme area depended on agriculture and a substantial proportion of them
were poor. Therefore, modernizing smallholder agriculture was expected to
increase awareness about alternatives for income generation for targeted
households and contribute to poverty reduction. The programme outputs were also
relevant. With built-in flexibility, the agricultural enterprises and programme-
supported activities were region-specific and, within regions, modelled around the
livelihood and economic activities of the local population because the beneficiaries
were actively involved in the selection of enterprises or interventions for support.
36. At closing, the relevance of AAMP was still high on the basis of human development
and poverty indices. Although the overall rate of people living below the official
poverty line in Uganda declined from 56 per cent in 1992 to 31 per cent in 2005
(and 40 per cent in rural areas),25 in 2009 the human development index for
Uganda was 0.422, placing it at 143rd among 169 countries measured by the
United Nations Development Programme, and the proportion of people living on
less than US$1.25 a day was 51 per cent.26
37. The parallel financing arrangement with AfDB for feeder road improvement was
also relevant because, with this, IFAD loan funds could be focused on community
roads to link farms and communities to towns and markets, often via the feeder
roads.
38. The targeting approach of AAMP was explicit in stating that economically active
smallholder farmers and existing small-scale entrepreneurs and business
associations were the principal target group, as this reflected the nature of the
activities to be supported. The President’s Report rightly recognized that ―the
beneficiaries are generally economically active smallholders who suffer less from
food poverty than from cash/income poverty‖. This is true of all the country: as
stated on the IFAD website report on Uganda, smallholder farmers are poor
because of weak or non-existent market links, the absence of technology to boost
production and lack of access to financial services to establish small enterprises.
39. AAMP was designed to include most of the essential elements of agricultural
income generation. However, it differed from the so-called ―multiple component
approach‖, which generally has numerous components, subcomponents and
activities sometimes aimed at supporting agencies only loosely linked with
project/programme goals.27 These types of multiple component interventions rarely
involve communities in a serious manner and, unlike AAMP, have seldom
mainstreamed activities into governmental programmes.
40. In order to facilitate the assessment of programme design, the PPA evaluation
team prepared a linear logical project scheme for AAMP to understand the logic
leading to its design (see annex 9). This scheme demonstrates that the various
inputs are well linked with the expected intermediate results, which again
supported the expected final results. AAMP also took account of the necessary
prerequisites for reaching results, that is, decentralized implementation structures
and arrangements, and adequate facilitation/coordination arrangements. The
scheme further shows that the design is capable of creating improved prospects for
continued rural development in programme areas.
41. The President’s Report on AAMP included a logical framework with performance
indicators, means of verification and assumptions/risks, but without any targets.28
The rationale for defining indicators for monitoring, but not targets, is a matter of
25
IFAD website report on Uganda www.ruralpovertyportal.org/web/guest/country/home/tags/uganda. 26
United Nations Development Programme international human development indicators: http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/UGA.html. These figures are for all Uganda and do not represent only the more peaceful, southern part of the country. 27
Often the reason for including such components or subcomponents was that they were too small to be considered as independent projects. 28
The President’s Report noted that, since the districts would plan activities to be financed by the agricultural commercialization and rural infrastructure funds, targets had not been set. The monitoring indicators would compare programme performance each year with the targets set in the annual work programme and budget prepared by the districts and consolidated by the PFT.
10
debate. The appraisal mission argued that no targets for indicators could be set
because the programme was beneficiary-driven, that is, the local populations in the
districts and subcounties would determine the types of ―enterprises‖ (subprojects)
they wished to establish. The first supervision mission pointed out that it would be
very difficult to monitor and manage programme operations and finally evaluate
success without targets, and proceeded with a recommendation to establish targets
for the different activities to assist in monitoring performance and evaluating
programme impacts (a baseline survey was under way at that time). Targets for
most of the physical indicators were established following that mission; the
remaining targets were established by later supervision missions and the mid-term
review. The PPA mission agreed that it was difficult to set fixed targets for some
activities such as the agricultural commercialization fund, whereas it would have
been possible to agree at least on tentative targets for some other indicators listed
in the logframe. Furthermore, as the economic zones and the agricultural potential
of the programme areas were known at appraisal, the PPA team was inclined to
agree with the first supervision mission that tentative targets could have been set
at appraisal for most indicators, or perhaps for all, with the caveat that such
targets could be modified when clear local preferences emerged.
42. As mentioned in the previous section, the design of AAMP was modified during
implementation to address changes in the context and shortcomings identified
(establishing targets for indicators, setting up a functional M&E unit, reallocating
programme funds). Overall, the coordination and management arrangements were
appropriate for AAMP implementation and fitted well with the Government’s
development and decentralization approach, which aimed to integrate donor
activities with those seen as government responsibilities.
43. Given all the above, the PPA rating for relevance is 5 (satisfactory), similar to that
assigned to this criterion by IFAD’s Programme Management Department (PMD).
Effectiveness 44. The overall objective of AAMP was to modernize agriculture in the districts
supported. In this regard, among others, four proxy variables for modernizing
agriculture, identified as PMA objectives, are improved productivity, increased
share of marketed production, participation in the market and gainful employment
through the secondary benefits of agricultural modernization. The impact
assessment study undertaken at AAMP completion noted that yields of important
marketable crops had increased, including bananas (50 per cent), rice (50–180 per
cent), and pineapple and Irish potatoes (double or even triple, depending on the
districts). Marketable surpluses, calculated as a proportion of total production,
increased on average by 12-20 per cent. The impact assessment also noted that
only about 40 per cent of farmers sold their produce in the markets before AAMP
but that this figure rose to about 60 per cent after the programme. The PCR
recognized that the 42 markets built by AAMP have created employment for over
5,700 people engaged in different types of activities, as did the installation of milk
coolers. From the above, it may be concluded that, in general, AAMP’s overall
objectives were achieved in a satisfactory manner.
45. The following paragraphs discuss achievements related to each specific AAMP
objective. It is important to note that, as indicated in chapter II section B, the
expected results of AAMP’s interventions were close to the targets and sometimes
exceeded them, therefore supporting the above overall positive assessment of the
programme’s performance. Details on the activities, indicators and comparisons
with the targets may be found in annex 8.
46. Specific objective 1: Increased involvement of the private sector in
support of further commercialization of smallholder agriculture. The impact
assessment noted that there had been increased private-sector participation in the
value chain of supported (and non-supported) enterprises, from input dealers
supplying the farmers with seed, fertilizer and pesticides to transporters bringing
farm produce to markets. The number of traders of farm produce increased, as did
the number and frequency of buyers reaching remote productive areas. The PCR
11
noted that the average number of traders accessing markets had increased by 71.7
per cent on a busy market day and 34.5 per cent on a non-busy one. Linkages
were also established with private supermarkets and processors. Examples include
the Kabale District Irish potato farmers who have linkages with Shoprite
supermarkets in Kampala; Kabarole District upland rice farmers who linked up with
the Rwenzori Rice Factory in Fort Portal Town; and Ntungamo District dairy farmers
who established market linkages with Birunga dairy processors based in Kisoro.
47. The private sector has also been stimulated to install processing facilities in some
districts. For example, the installation of milk coolers in Ntungamo, Sembabule and
Ibanda Dstricts has led to increased milk production as a response to increased
milk prices. The increase in milk delivered at the collecting centres has in turn
stimulated the installation of additional coolers by private milk dealers in order to
handle the increased production (in Kiyanja, the capacity of the AAMP milk cooler
was 3,000 litres and the private sector followed by installing 12,000-litre capacity
milk coolers). The farmer associations have also entered into partnerships with
private milk dealers who, in addition to buying the milk were also responsible for
the facility’s operation and maintenance. Another example is the installation of a
modern rice mill in Kabarole District and several small-scale rice hullers in the
Districts of Kanungu and Rukungiri as a result of increased rice production.
48. Specific objective 2: Improved capacity among economically active
farmers to gain better access to rural services (technical, marketing and
financial). The mobilization, screening and selection of farmer groups was a major
AAMP activity. Farmers formed groups and participated in the revolving fund
scheme (78 per cent of the targets were achieved) and in on-farm demonstrations
and on-farm trials (94 per cent). The programme’s training and support to groups
has enabled farmers to increase the scale of operations, expand production and
become more commercially oriented. Farmers have shifted from subsistence to
market-oriented farming and their capacity to select ―enterprises‖ (subprojects)
that give higher returns has improved. More land has been allocated to the
enterprises and improved agricultural technologies have been adopted, leading to
increased yields of important marketable crops.
49. Following the expansion of production, farmers were increasingly involved in group
marketing to generate cash earnings from their marketable surpluses. The
collective/bulk selling marketing arrangements gave farmers higher returns. The
establishment of SACCOs helped facilitate farmers’ engagement in productive
agricultural enterprises as a substantial portion of loans went into agricultural
enterprises. Farmer groups and associations were now linked to financial services,
especially with regard to potato-, rice- and banana-growing, and in milk-producing
areas. However, this started late29 and even though the programme supported
more than the planned number of SACCOs, the number of beneficiaries – about
29,000 – was low in relation to the farming population in the programme districts
(less than 10 per cent of the families in the programme areas were helped).
Moreover, as the average repayment rate of loans was a bare 75 per cent, it is
likely that there were several SACCOs with even lower repayment rates and thus
early candidates for failure.30 Another challenge is that, as the SACCOs are not yet
in position to raise sufficient funds to train their members and staff, they depend
on technical assistance in this respect. However, it was noted in the PCR that with
the completion of AAMP, most SACCOs have been taken up by the IFAD-financed
Rural Financial Services Programme to enable them to continue providing services
to the farmers. The section on sustainability will further discuss the performance
and potential of these SACCOs, based on updated data as of present, i.e. 2.5 years
after AAMP completion.
29
The PCR explained that the delay was due to having to wait for policy guidance from the central government concerning the Rural Financial Services Strategy (approved in August 2006), specifically regarding the microfinance policy framework. 30
The dangers arising from using SACCOs as conduits of outside funds to farmers. The politicization of microfinance, especially after the 2006 presidential elections, made the overall political environment under which SACCOs operated very challenging.
12
50. Specific objective 3: Sustainable development and improvement of rural
infrastructure. Various infrastructure schemes (roads, markets, storage facilities,
etc.) have been constructed and/or rehabilitated by the programme, thus
facilitating the marketing of agricultural produce and other rural economic
activities. As mentioned in chapter II section B, some schemes exceeded the
targets while others, for various reasons, did not even meet them. Overall, the new
roads improved access to the subcounty hinterland and hence much of the
marketable produce of farms located in these areas could now be picked up by
vans or trucks directly from the farms instead of being wasted because of
difficulties in getting it to market. Better rural roads have improved access to other
services, such as improved seed, veterinary and extension advisory services, and
financial services. They have also led to a reduction in the time needed for
collecting water, to the start of matatu services in areas where there are roads, and
to subsequent increases in school attendance.
51. Post-harvest handling structures have also been constructed. For example, in
Kabale, good Irish potato seed was selected, cleaned and stored for sale in well-
constructed structures. Milk cooler facilities were set up in five districts. AAMP also
constructed new covered markets, which are much cleaner and more convenient to
the stallholders and customers than the old open markets. Attendance at markets
has increased by 110.5 per cent on a busy day and 53.5 per cent on a non-busy
day.31 The combination of decreased transportation costs and the cutting out of
middlemen resulted in a rapid increase in farm-gate prices.
52. In order to ensure the sustainability of these infrastructure schemes, management
committees have been formed to operate and maintain them. Training has been
provided to the committees on technical and management issues. During
programme implementation, the committees were active in their roles, but once
programme financing was no longer available many of them became dormant. This
is further discussed under the section on sustainability.
53. Specific objective 4: Increased public-sector capacity to perform its role in
responding to production needs identified by interest groups and rural
communities. Building up the capacity of the public sector was one aspect of
AAMP, the aim of which was to enable staff to work with beneficiary groups using
analytical approaches and to fulfill a brokerage role with the private sector. Support
for capacity-building included technical in-service training for District Production
Department staff and subcounty extension workers, agri-business training for
community development staff, and funding the operations of the district technology
adaptation specialists. The provision of transport enhanced the mobility of
community development staff and helped them make and maintain contact with
AAMP groups and management committees.
54. Another activity that was not part of the design but was implemented due to
demand from beneficiaries, was the identification and training of community
agricultural paraprofessionals in each of the 73 subcounties to create local capacity
for the provision of basic agricultural extension services. The training was
specifically tailored to the key enterprises supported by AAMP in the respective
subcounties. The paraprofessionals worked under the supervision of local
government extension staff for purposes of quality control. This system was driven
by the demand and voluntarism of the farmers, who provided transport and
lunches for the paraprofessionals during training sessions.
55. Overall, following the decentralization policies and support provided by AAMP,
public-sector response to production needs in the rural communities has improved.
Districts and subcounties are also involved in sustaining the activities initiated by
the programme. The key issue is how to maintain these improvements in public-
sector capacity.
31
PCR, December 2008.
13
56. Given the above analysis, the PPA concurred with the rating of 5 (satisfactory)
assigned by PMD to the effectiveness of AAMP.
Efficiency 57. Although the programme was approved by IFAD’s Executive Board in December
1999, the loan was signed more than two years later (February 2002) because the
Government had first to obtain parliamentary approval. The programme became
effective three months later (May 2002). The use of programme funds was
relatively slow in the early years because it took time to complete the design and
procurement process for rural roads. Programme funds were almost fully utilized
and, in reference to the extent to which the programme objectives were achieved,
this is a good indicator of resource-use efficiency. It should be noted that the
devaluation of the United States dollar (USD) relative to the Special Drawing Right
(SDR) has meant that total programme costs in USD terms exceeded the appraisal
estimates, without however exceeding the loan amount in SDR (the currency of the
loan).
58. Programme finances were also well accounted for during the entire programme
period, amd all audits were timely and unqualified, with very few comments or
corrections by auditors. The programme was completed according to the original
six-year plan, and the total programme management cost (around 12 per cent)
was in line with the average in the ESA region. As noted above, an upward revision
of the programme facilitation costs was approved in the 2006 loan amendment.
The management costs included also the monitoring costs for the AfDB feeder
roads subcomponent.
59. Effective programme management greatly enhanced the efficiency of AAMP. The
manpower required was underestimated at design but, once that problem was
resolved, programme management was excellent and was able to meet its original
deadline. The management procedures included almost textbook-like practices:
maintaining regular relations with interest agencies and groups; using a
participation-based approach to annual planning; staffing the PFT with competent
personnel (most were from government agencies, while financial staff were from
the private sector); providing adequate leadership through monthly management
meetings that took place in the districts once every quarter; requiring thorough
periodic monitoring reports; exercising adequate control over achievements;
adjusting to the new requirements as the programme proceeded; and providing
feedback to, and motivation for, staff. The M&E system, after the modifications and
additional financing provided during implementation, performed well and was
capable of providing the data necessary for local/national decision-makers and for
IFAD to follow the programme’s progress.
60. The appraisal report had avoided presenting estimates of the financial rate of
return (FRR) and economic rate of return (ERR) despite having made calculations
to assess them, but it concluded that the programme investments were likely to
create an ERR of more than 12 per cent.32 Similarly, the PPA mission did not
attempt to recalculate the FRR or ERR for the programme investments in detail,
partly because (i) the mission’s visit did not allow time for collecting new data on
the different types of subprojects; and (ii) the programme offices had closed in
2008.
61. Economic and financial analyses presented in the PCR showed that positive net
benefits had been realized from programme-supported interventions. The
estimated ERR for the last three years of the programme was 42 per cent and the
PCR projected it to be 48 per cent over the next five years (2009-2013). The PCR
presentation of the ERR is very informative and allows readers to gain a good
understanding of the costs/benefits of the enterprises. The relatively high rate was
attributed to the fact that most households adopted better agricultural
32
In addition, the appraisal report estimated that, if the per capita income increased by one percentage point, the ERR would be 18 per cent, and if the annual production per hectare increased by UGX 100,000 (US$69), the ERR would be 46 per cent.
14
technologies, which resulted in higher yields; concurrently, a better rural road
network improved farmers’ access to markets, which ensured greater opportunities
to sell their produce.
62. However, while the assumptions are moderate and partly based on actual
observations by the M&E unit, the methodologies used in computing the ERR do
not follow textbook or internationally approved practices, and thus undermine the
validity of the results (see PCR section on efficiency and annex VI of the PCR).33
What the PCR did was closer to a financial analysis than an economic one (even
then using computation methods that gave faulty results). However, there are
strong indications that the programme’s FRR and ERR are positive because of signs
of growth in productivity, marketable outputs, use of infrastructure, etc., even
though it is impossible to project accurately (on the basis of the PCR data and
computations) what the ERR should actually be.
63. The results calculated by the PPA on the profitability of the subprojects were even
better than those presented in the PCR. The net present values were very positive
for all five subprojects used as examples in the PCR – milk coolers, and smallholder
plantations for bananas, potatoes, upland rice and goat-breeding. For all these
subprojects, the farmers received subsidies in the form of training, visits to model
farmers, advice by farm extension workers paid by AAMP, and good quality seed or
goats/goat progenies. The PPA team prepared financial analyses for a period of
seven years (using AAMP’s production and cost data, partly updated) to determine
the rates of return in the event farmers had to pay all these expenses without
assistance. The FRRs were high in all of these test cases, varying from 27 to 210
per cent.34
64. As to the economic returns of all programme investments, for the reasons
mentioned in paragraph 60, the PPA mission could not re-work the computations
on ERR made by the appraisal mission. However, as the FRR returns for subprojects
were high, as the Government’s impact study had shown that 98 percent of
farmers reported higher incomes than before the programme and as the official
statistics indicated a 15 percent increase in household incomes, the PPA mission
was satisfied that the ERR for AAMP was adequate.35
65. The wide variety of beneficiaries – from district and subcounty officers receiving
training to farmer groups benefiting from enterprise grants and travellers on roads
– makes it difficult to compute meaningful unit costs per beneficiary or other
denominators, particularly because of the varied types of farmer enterprises and
different road construction conditions. However, as noted in the section on rural
poverty impact, by the end of the programme the number of beneficiaries
exceeded those indicated at appraisal.
66. The programme succeeded in completing all civil works on time, and no extension
of the closing date was needed despite some delays related to procurement for
rural roads. For these reasons and in view of the results calculated by the PPA
regarding the profitability of the subprojects and substantial increases in farmers’
incomes through programme investments, AAMP’s efficiency is rated as 5
(satisfactory).
B. Rural poverty impact
67. The overall goal of the programme was to increase the incomes and food security
of poor rural households in the programme area, and thus reduce poverty in the 13
districts. The programme aimed at improving the livelihoods of 312,500 households
33
For instance, the ERR has been presented on an annual basis for seven years, starting from the year when production data were actually collected. The computations gave the ERR for annual crops, for which the annual costs were higher than revenues, and did so on an annual basis, that is, for each investment year separately. For bananas, no investment costs or recurrent costs were included but the computations were calculated from the time the banana trees reached full maturity. The ERR for the road component and milk coolers included no maintenance costs. 34
Details of the financial rates of return are available in the PPA mission’s working paper. 35
Despite the constraints mentioned above, the PPA mission prepared tentative computations of ERR using data from the Government’s PCR, price data collected during the mission and best estimates (and no shadow pricing), and obtained positive ERRs for 15 to 20-year projection periods.
15
but, by programme completion, the number of households reached was
approximately 400,000. These households benefited from investments in the
commercialization of agriculture, including access to financial services,
rehabilitation of rural roads, and construction of other infrastructures. The main
impacts of programme investments are presented in the following paragraphs.
68. Household incomes and assets. The PCR noted that overall, according to official
government statistics, a 12.5 per cent reduction in poverty levels and a 15 per cent
increase in real household incomes were registered over the lifetime of the
programme.36 During the impact assessment study, about 98 per cent and 66 per
cent of the farmers interviewed reported that their incomes from farming and non-
farming activities respectively had increased. However, the changes experienced by
beneficiaries cannot be entirely attributed to AAMP since they have been exposed
to interventions by other organizations and to various changes in social, economic
and environmental factors.
69. The creation of employment from AAMP activities can be one proxy for assessing
its impact on household incomes. According to the PCR, the 42 markets built by
AAMP have created employment for over 5,700 people engaged in different types
of activities, ranging from owners of small businesses in the markets such as
eating places and telephone booths, to casual workers loading trucks and people
employed for cleaning and security. The milk coolers have also helped to create
employment and hence income for the farmers who produce milk for sale, for the
workers hired to transport milk from farms to the coolers and from the coolers to
the processing plants, and for workers employed at the coolers. Household income
is also generated from opportunities to sell production surpluses on the market or
at higher farm gate prices.
70. As for household assets, the PCR reported that increased livestock ownership was
the most obvious effect of the programme. For instance, the largest investment in
livestock under AAMP was the financing of a UGX 500 million (about US$250,000)
scheme for goat stock improvement, which benefited 15,771 persons, 60 per cent
of whom were women. This increase in productive assets helped households to
generate income that was mainly used for school fees, reinvestments in farming
and purchases of food for the households. There is also evidence of an increase in
the average number of non-productive assets such as mattresses and blankets in
households directly benefiting from the programme. In addition, the quality of
housing has improved: dwellings roofed with corrugated iron sheets rather than
grass increased from 69.1 per cent in 2001 to 83.1 per cent in 2008. Financial
assets also grew. The more than 17,000 members of the programme-supported
SACCOs had saved a total of UGX 1.42 billion (about US$700,000) by mid-2008.
Given these positive changes, the programme’s impact on household income and
assets is rated as 5 (satisfactory).
71. Human and social capital and empowerment. All AAMP activities involved
some building of human capital. These activities included training conducted by
extension advisers who met with more than 2,700 farmer groups and established
subcounty trials and model on-farm demonstration plots in an effort to increase
productivity and make farmers more business oriented. The demonstrations were
very important learning stations for farmers, inasmuch as they acquired the
knowledge and skills needed to adopt the new technologies. The demonstrations
were also largely responsible for the high rate of adoption of various crops.
Extensive training was also provided to district and subcounty officers to enable
them to more efficiently carry out their functions. All programme-supported groups
received several types of training as part of the enterprise development support.
This included technical training relative to the chosen enterprises as well as in
enterprise development, group dynamics, leadership and business planning, and
record-keeping.
36
The PCR noted that these figures are based on the Government of Uganda Statistical Abstract of 2008.
16
72. It was noted that, apart from training, AAMP-supported road building activities
brought health services closer in terms of the time needed to reach them, and
taught road users’ associations the value and skills of road maintenance. It also led
to a reduction in the time needed for collecting water, and the matatus had a good
impact on school attendance. Sanitary facilities built at the market places taught
people the value of hygiene, as did the HIV/AIDS campaigns. The quantities of
these and other training efforts are included in annex 8. A significant proportion of
loans from SACCOs was used for school fees, allowing more children to enter and
stay in school. The impact study also reported better capacity of SACCO members
to pay for medical care.
73. With regard to social capital and empowerment, the programme set up a number
of associations and groups including, for example, SACCOs, marketing
associations, infrastructure management committees and group enterprises.
Working in groups allowed members to acquire knowledge and skills, and the
groups’ chosen investment priorities were an important means of empowering local
people in terms of their own development. Overall, the impact on human and social
capital and empowerment is rated as 5 (satisfactory).
74. Food security and agricultural productivity. According to the impact
assessment, 90 per cent of the households interviewed reported that food
availability had improved considerably during programme implementation.
However, as in the case of household incomes, it should be noted that this cannot
be entirely attributed to the project. Forty-six per cent of the farmers interviewed
reported that they spent part of the additional income to purchase food for their
households. The statistics on marketed surpluses also show the increased use of
farm production for home consumption: the increases in production exceeded the
increases in the percentage of marketed produce. Improved food security was
specifically reported among rural farmer groups engaged in banana production,
upland rice growing and potato production. As livestock ownership has increased,
households now have better access to animal protein in the form of milk and meat.
75. Both the farmers’ views described in the impact assessment and the data collected
by the M&E unit of AAMP indicate substantial increases in agricultural productivity.
Yield levels improved for both crop (bananas, rice, Irish potatoes and pineapples)
and livestock (goats, bulls) enterprises. The increase in yield levels led to increased
marketable surpluses of various crops, as may be seen below:
Table 2 Change in marketable surplus resulting from AAMP support
Enterprise Marketable surplus (as % of total production)
Before AAMP After AAMP
Banana 44 64
Beans 59 76
Pineapple 67 75
Rice 80 88
Irish potato 45 57
Maize 43 67
Source: Impact Assessment Study (2008)
76. The farmers’ shift from subsistence farming to commercial farming occurred at the
same time. The impact assessment study noted that households engaging in only
subsistence farming fell from 49.8 per cent in 2001 to 25.6 per cent in 2008, and
those involved in the sale of crops increased from 27.8 per cent in 2001 to 40.8 per
cent in the same year. The proportion of households selling animals rose from 4.0
per cent in 2001 to 11.7 per cent in 2008. It is interesting to note that an impact
on agricultural productivity was also observed among non-programme
beneficiaries, and in a number of ways. Non-programme beneficiaries have been
17
seen to learn and adopt the best practices from the programme beneficiaries by,
for example, adopting improved varieties and breeds, planting in lines and spraying
against pest and disease. The programme’s impact on food security and
agricultural productivity is therefore rated as 5 (satisfactory).
77. Natural resources and the environment. The PPA mission noted that, in
general, AAMP did not give rise to any major environmental concerns and that the
National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) had overseen the
environmental soundness of AAMP investments. Throughout implementation,
environmental impact statements were prepared, and potential negative effects
and mitigation measures were identified and implemented. As an example,
wherever possible, the programme built on existing structures, improving roads
within their existing alignment and finding alternative uses for depleted gravel pits.
78. Regarding infrastructure, the mitigating measures required at the time of financing
appear to have been adequate. For example, satisfactory latrines have been built
at market places, and market associations look after the cleanliness of the stalls
and their surroundings.37
79. New feeder and community roads have improved access to areas previously
difficult to reach by large truck,38 and the amount of timber harvested and wood
materials for charcoal burning has grown in some areas (not all AAMP districts have
substantial natural forestry resources). While this activity has brought new income
to more remote areas, the depletion of forests will need to be checked and kept
within stipulated national and district guidelines. In principle, the regulatory
arrangements are adequate: the National Forestry Authority grants licenses for
timber harvesting, and district authorities issue permits to transporters. However,
the district environmental officers, whose number is sufficient for environmental
monitoring and mitigation at the district level, are inadequate to cover the large
programme area and handle the increasing number of interventions involved.
80. The PCR acknowledged that a number of environmental concerns remain because
of increased use of agricultural chemicals and their potential percolation to the
water table. In the view of the PPA mission, agricultural chemicals are still not
widely used in Uganda but the application of herbicide and fertilizer in upland rice
fields and potato plantations is likely to become more common. This is because
farmers are motivated to increase production and the labour requirements for
weeding are more costly than for the application of herbicides. Also, herbicides and
fungicides are needed to protect against insects and plant diseases. One factor that
has impeded increased use of fertilizer is its relatively high cost, which leads
farmers to rely more on manure and composted organic materials.
81. At the time of the PCR, global climate change was not seen as a significant
problem. However, NEMA, district and subcounty officials interviewed by the PPA
team have since acknowledged the effects of climate change in Uganda. Besides
unexpected droughts, substantial changes in rain and seasonal patterns have made
it difficult for farmers (and their advisers) to decide on the most suitable times for
planting crops.
82. Overall, the programme’s impact on natural resources management and the
environment is rated as 4 (moderately satisfactory), higher than the original rating
of 3 (moderately unsatisfactory) assigned by both PMD and the PCRV. This is due
to the PPA mission’s observation of no major shortcomings in implementing the
mitigation measures of the environmental assessments prepared for infrastructure
schemes, as well as the good supervision of environmental issues carried out by
the district environmental officers and NEMA.
37
As a smaller note, the PPA team observed that although the refuse collection areas at the markets could have been tidier, these areas did not create an environmental hazard because all refuse was organic and was periodically transferred to processing centres 38
The Government’s PCR and the impact assessment did not further discuss the environmental impact of the roads
18
83. Institutions and policies. While the PCR does not claim that it changed any
government policies, the programme generally supported the policies for poverty
reduction, agricultural commercialization, decentralization of public administration
and services, and changes in the approach to rural finance. With regard to
strengthening decentralization, the programme was implemented through existing
local government structures at the district and subcounty levels. Key technical staff
at these levels received specialized training with programme funds. Specifically,
capacity-building was strengthened in three key areas: (i) development planning;
(ii) financial management and internal audit; and (iii) civil works and community-
based services.
84. As far as financial institutions are concerned, 35 SACCOs had been established by
completion in the AAMP districts (compared with the target of 32). The PCR and
impact assessment highlighted the various benefits that SACCOs provide. The PPA
team concurs with these findings, which have been discussed in other sections of
the report. In addition, a further benefit of SACCOs – sometimes overlooked – is
that the poorest members of the population can also join a SACCO and benefit
from its services, provided they can invest in one share (equivalent to US$4-9,
depending on the bye-laws of the SACCO concerned). However, as mentioned
under the section on effectiveness, at programme completion, the number of
beneficiaries (around 29,000 households) was low in relation to the farming
population in the programme districts, and could not have affected income
generation and poverty reduction to any great extent. But based on observations
from the PPA team 2.5 years after project completion, progress has been promising
in this respect. This will be further discussed in the section on sustainability.
85. The other main institutions established with AAMP support are the infrastructure
management committees, formed for all types of infrastructures constructed or
improved by the programme (including markets, whose use is increasing), and
farmer groups which were the basis for delivering support to enterprises
(subprojects established by farmer groups) rather than to individual farmers.
86. The PFT of AAMP has been the principal motivator behind a policy change relative
to community access roads in Uganda, although the PCR did not specifically
articulate this point. The learning gained from AAMP implementation has led to a
change in the standards for community access roads, which previously were simply
compacted and graded, and lasted less than 2-3 years owing to heavy rainfall
throughout the country (1,500-2,000 mm). As a result of such learning,
community access roads now have two layers of gravel with compacted soil in
between the layers and then grading, thus improving them to all-weather
standards, reducing maintenance costs and ensuring sustainability. IFAD’s two
other loans to Uganda, for the District Livelihoods Support Programme (DLSP) and
for the Community Agricultural Infrastructure Improvement Programme (CAIIP),
have provided additional funding to implement this learning in the construction of
new community access roads.
87. AAMP had a major influence on MAAIF’s new paper: ―Development Strategy and
Investment Plan‖. AAMP’s impact was also evident in the AfDB’s new agricultural
strategy,39 which, according to the AfDB staff interviewed, was partly based on
AAMP’s experience and placed major emphasis on rural roads, agricultural
infrastructure investments and renewable natural resources management. Given all
the above, the programme’s impact on institutions and policies is rated as 5
(satisfactory). This is higher than the rating of 4 (moderately satisfactory) given by
PMD for impact on institutions and services, on the basis of AAMP’s successful
promotion of the decentralization policy, its capacity-building activities that
contribute to good performance of both the implementation agencies and the large
number of interest groups, marketing associations, infrastructure management
committees and SACCOs that it helped to set up.
39
AfDB: Agricultural Sector Strategy 2010-2014, January 2010
19
88. In sum, based on data in the impact assessment and PCR, as well as information
collected during the field visit, the PPA rates the overall rural poverty impact of
AAMP as 5 (satisfactory), given the benefits that have accrued to the target groups
in terms of markets, income and assets, human and social capital and
empowerment, institutions as well as food security and agricultural productivity.
C. Other performance criteria
89. Sustainability. The PCR considers the issue of sustainability from several
standpoints: political, social, community ownership, institutional, economic and
financial. In political terms, the Government has placed the commercialization of
agriculture at the forefront of its strategies for prosperity and for poverty
eradication, and is unlikely to change them in that respect. The programme’s
group-based approach is believed to have created social capital, as have the pass-
on scheme and the paraprofessionals who are village-based model farmers trained
by the programme.
90. Most programme activities, ranging from building infrastructure to agricultural
enterprises, were identified by the communities themselves by means of a
participatory process, thus helping ensure a sense of ownership among local
populations. Improved skills among local governments and the Government’s
promotion of private-sector input suppliers and cooperatives, along with public-
sector support of other up- and downstream activities of the value chains, are
expected to improve institutional sustainability. As an exit strategy to ensure
continuity of service delivery to farmer groups, all AAMP-supported groups are
being taken over by the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS). As for the
financial sustainability of the programme’s subprojects, the PCR emphasizes how
important new market places and community and feeder roads are to obtaining
higher prices for farm produce. There is also evidence of learning for better
sustainability regarding the community access roads (see paragraph 86).
91. The PCR recognized the challenges of maintaining the roads and other
infrastructure financed by the programme. Maintenance of programme-financed
infrastructure depends on the commitment and competence of voluntary
management committees. In this regard, the PCR noted that these committees are
faced with a lack of recognition within the decentralization framework, which
severely limits their mandates. On a related aspect, with changes in government
policy (i.e. the move to privatizing the management of markets, milk coolers and
collection of market dues), the committees have less of a role and now focus
mainly on informing local government authorities when a tenderer does not
perform up to expectations, and act as a link between the vendors/farmers,
tenderers and the local governments.
92. Road maintenance by local governments is subject to the availability of funds. The
impact assessment study noted that some subcounties (e.g. Kitagata in Bushenyi
District) were in the process of formulating bye-laws for maintaining the
community roads established using Burungi bwansi, whichR means participation of
local people. However, as recognized in the PCR, overall, road maintenance was still
a challenge because there were inadequate funds for this purpose following the
abolition of graduated tax. In this regard, a dedicated road fund has now been
established, jointly funded by the central government, the Poverty Action Fund,
districts and subcounties, locally-collected revenues and development partners.
93. The revolving fund or pass-on system under which the beneficiaries were expected
to pay back inputs (e.g. seed and progeny of donated animals) for distribution to
new beneficiaries, seemed promising and the project authorities expected the
system to become a genuine revolving fund, continuing far beyond the programme
period. However, in practice, only 866 groups of the 2,788 supported were willing
and able to return the benefits they had received. The beneficiaries’ interest in
continuing the system beyond the first or second round of ―repayment‖ seemed to
have waned, first among the animal owners and gradually also among others. The
reasons are not quite clear, but it is possible that a more formalized system,
20
including more uniform methods for keeping records and attaining commitments,
would be required for long-term sustainability of this aspect of the programme.
94. In order to be viable and to facilitate employment of high quality staff, the SACCOs
must have sufficient savings and loans (and later, other financial services); but in
order to attain that level, they must also have relatively high memberships. The
UCSCU, the national unions of SACCOs, has estimated that at least 350 members
are needed before a SACCO can employ its first staff member, but this estimate is
based on the income level of the general population. The membership of rural
SACCOs should, in fact, be substantially higher, probably at least double, and for
two reasons: (i) the level of poverty among farm families suggests that more
members are necessary to support a staff member; and (ii) as operations increase,
the staff must also increase – in both number and level of education – and its
support thus becomes more expensive.
95. At the beginning of 2011, that is, 2.5 years after the completion of AAMP, the total
number of members in AAMP-supported SACCOs had grown significantly (from
around 17,000 when AAMP completed to 25,000). Even though some AAMP-
supported SACCOs still had memberships of less than 500, the present average
membership of these SACCOs is 750. Much larger membership numbers are
possible because, in most subcounties, there are no other financial institutions
other than the SACCOs.40
96. The 2011 statistics collected by UCSCU show that most SACCOs have portfolios
with manageable overdue loan rates and methods to enforce repayment (e.g.
taking delinquents to court). However, there are concerns regarding SACCOs with
low repayment rates and thus lower profitability. The problem of overdue loans is
accentuated by the fact that external funds have found their way into the lending
programmes of some SACCOs; this phenomenon is probably a major reason for the
low repayment rates and profitability, as observed by the last IFAD/UNOPS
supervision mission in 2008.41 SACCOs are member-based institutions whose
integrity is based on safeguarding members’ savings. Experience in Uganda and
many other countries has too often shown that using cooperatives as conduits for
funds endangers their integrity, because the members often see external funds as
grants that need not be repaid.42 Caution in this respect does not mean, however,
that small start-up funds could not be provided to new SACCOs, but more
extensive use of them for transmitting donor or governmental funds (often for
political reasons) should be avoided.
97. Given the above, sustainability is rated as 4 (moderately satisfactory).
98. Innovation and scaling up. The PCR and supervision reports described several
innovative features of the programme, such as the bottom-up participatory
approach, flexible selection of ―enterprises‖ (subprojects), on-farm demonstrations
and trials, revolving funds (or pass-on system), community-based
paraprofessionals,43 group-based learning and infrastructure management
committees. In the view of the PPA team, some of these approaches are to be
considered more as best practices than as innovations. For instance, the on-farm
demonstrations were common in previous training and visit projects. Similarly,
group learning and the bottom-up selection process were in use before AAMP.
40
The two SACCOs visited by the PPA had memberships of 621 and 488, respectively. The smaller and newer one was located in a very modest rented room that could hardly be called a financial institution. However, encouragingly, both were able to show a small annual profit, carry out simple book-keeping, maintain records and safeguard members’ savings. And both had been audited. 41
The 2008 supervision report correctly stated: “External funds will not help a weak SACCO to become strong. In fact, wholesale lenders risk doing more harm than good when they lend to SACCOs with weak management, ineffective governance, or poorly performing portfolios. External credit changes the orientation of weak SACCOs from savings-led to being simple mechanisms for disbursing external funds, resulting in deterioration of their loan portfolio… Strong SACCOs tend to retain their savings orientation when receiving external loans.” 42
The most recent example, and a very large-scale one, is the crisis in the Indian microcredit industry. 43
AAMP identified and trained two men and two women from each of the 73 subcounties under the programme to create local, inexpensive capacity of model farmers and agricultural advisers.
21
These did not pose any particular risk for programme implementation because they
had been tried earlier, even in Uganda.
99. On the other hand, several of the approaches were indeed innovations and new (at
least in Uganda) at the time of programme design, and thus represented more
risky endeavours. They included such ideas as the flexible selection of
―enterprises‖, the revolving fund, community-based paraprofessionals and
infrastructure management committees. Because some of these practices were not
mentioned in the appraisal report and many were ready for replication and scaling
up in other programmes, they showed a high level of initiative on the part of the
Government, the programme leadership, and the supervision and financing
agencies.
100. With regard to scaling up, some innovations have been already scaled up all over
the country. These include the zoning approach (in which subprojects are promoted
according to the potential of the agroecological zones) and the revolving funds.
Both ideas are being replicated by NAADS. As mentioned above, the learning
concerning the community access roads has been replicated in DLSP and CAIIP, as
was the setting up of infrastructure management committees in those
interventions. The repercussions of AAMP’s success are even greater: as mentioned
in the section on impact on institutions and policies, AfDB has used the model as a
basis for modifying its agricultural sector strategy, and it plans to finance projects
in other countries based on approaches used by AAMP. These projects include
community and feeder roads as well as production and processing infrastructures.
101. Other developments and activities were perhaps hoped for but not explicitly
mentioned at the time of appraisal. Some infrastructure investments, such as
agricultural markets, produce stores and milk cooling facilities, when placed in
appropriate locations (for instance, at a crossroads), soon attracted other
businesses, shops and private investors and formed a basis for economic mini-
centres. Private investors noticed the profitability of AAMP milk coolers and
acquired similar coolers, competing for milk sellers with the farmers’ associations
and ensuring competitive prices for farmers. Another phenomenon, hoped for at
appraisal, was that other economic groups found ways of copying subprojects
financed by AAMP. This included groups that were unable to obtain AAMP financing
of their enterprises as well as groups in subcounties not covered by AAMP.
102. To sum up, given the nature of many of the innovations and the achievements in
terms of scaling up, overall, innovation and scaling up is rated as 5 (satisfactory).
103. Gender equality and women’s empowerment. The appraisal report stated that
―women’s groups will be made aware of the opportunities available for increased
income generation, other economic opportunities as well as for enhanced food
security and nutrition.‖ However, it did not contain any special promotional
activities for women and set no targets in this respect, both of which were
corrected during implementation. According to the PCR, with AAMP-promoted
gender sensitization, women were much more involved and benefited substantially
from its activities, almost achieving the very ambitious objectives set at mid term.
104. Overall, the programme had a significant positive impact on women. The following
paragraphs provide a more detailed assessment of AAMP’s achievement against the
three corporate gender objectives contained in the IFAD’s Gender Plan of Action
2003. These are to (i) expand women’s access to and control over fundamental
assets – capital, land, knowledge and technologies; (ii) strengthen women’s
agencies – their decision-making role in community affairs and representation in
local institutions; and (iii) improve women’s well-being and ease their workloads by
facilitating access to basic rural services and infrastructure.
105. With regard to the first corporate gender objective, women and youth constituted a
considerable proportion of the members of targeted economic interest groups. That
being the case, women had a strong influence on AAMP-supported activities. For
example, 55 per cent of the group membership was made up of women, the
majority of whom were engaged in growing Irish potatoes and bananas, and
22
rearing goats. In the case of goat production, 60 per cent of the beneficiaries were
women. As much as 47 per cent of the services under the programme and 40 per
cent of the SACCO loans were extended to women, against the target of 50 per
cent in both cases. Over 75 per cent of the vegetable and fruit stall operators in
markets rehabilitated or constructed under the programme are women. Fifty per
cent of the paraprofessionals selected were women. The women reportedly
benefited from AAMP training that reduced their dependence on their husbands for
basic needs, and increased their responsibilities in their homes and communities.
Furthermore, men were positive regarding the increased economic empowerment
of women because, unlike before, they were sharing household and community
responsibilities. According to the impact assessment study, women members of
SACCOs testified that access to financial services had enabled them to manage
money and have greater control over resources and access to knowledge, which led
to them having a greater voice in family matters accompanied by growth in self-
esteem and self-confidence. In this way, the programme was responsive to
balancing the traditional gender roles within the target communities in line with
Millennium Development Goal No. 3.44
106. With regard to the second corporate gender objective, the satisfactory degree to
which women were empowered and played more a decision-making role is
demonstrated by the fact that they were represented in leadership positions in all
subprojects, maintenance committees and SACCOs. The impact assessment noted
that a number of AAMP-supported groups were dominated by women, some of
whom were executive members of their respective group committees. For example,
executive positions in the Bivamuntuyo pineapple growing group in Sembabule
District were dominated by women.
107. Concerning the third corporate gender objective, AAMP-supported activities have
contributed to improving women’s well-being and easing their workloads. Enhanced
rural infrastructure helped reduce the time spent on travel for domestic tasks (i.e.
collecting water and firewood, trips to the grinding mill to produce flour for
domestic consumption and to local markets, etc.). The impact assessment also
noted that in mountainous areas, such as Nyakitunda in Isingiro District, the
stretcher ambulance had been replaced by motorcycles to transport pregnant
women and the sick, as a result of improved operability of the roads.
108. In view of the programme’s overall positive impact on women, gender equality and
women’s empowerment is assessed as 5 (satisfactory), higher than the rating of 4
(moderately satisfactory) assigned by PMD.
D. Performance of partners
109. IFAD. The Fund’s innovative programme design was praised by the PCR inasmuch
as it was found to be within the framework of the Government’s strategy of poverty
eradication and the PMA. The design process was participatory, and aimed at
promoting ownership by the Government. IFAD also sought to incorporate lessons
from AAMP’s predecessor, the Southwest Region Agricultural Rehabilitation Project,
and provided support needed to implement the programme, particularly delivering
the agreed funds in a timely manner and showing flexibility when some aspects of
programme design needed to be modified and funds reallocated. Together with the
Government, IFAD took prompt action to ensure the timely implementation of the
recommendations of supervision and implementation support missions.
110. IFAD has also been active in forging effective partnerships and maintaining
coordination among key partners to ensure the achievement of programme
objectives, including the replication and scaling up of pro-poor innovations.
Practical arrangements and procedures of AAMP, its pass-on system and
community mobilization approaches are being replicated by other government
programmes such as NAADS and CAIIP. In addition, IFAD established a country
office in Kampala in 2006, which participated in some supervision missions during
44
PCR Section 3.4 on gender considerations, supported by observations and interviews recorded in the impact assessments.
23
AAMP’s last two years of implementation. The establishment of the country
programme management team in 2008 enhanced knowledge-sharing and
networking among all IFAD-funded projects/programmes in the country.
111. On the other hand, IFAD bears responsibility for some of the original design
shortcomings, such as (i) inadequate planning and financing of the M&E system
(one short-term consultant for planning the system and a part-time employee were
not enough to ensure that M&E could be carried out in a programme covering 13
districts, 73 subcounties and some 3,000 subprojects); and (ii) underestimation of
the number of extension agents needed to implement the programme. Omitting
the cost of gravel from the design of community roads was another shortcoming.45
112. Every effort was made to address these shortcomings, however, following the
recommendations of supervision missions and the Government’s requests for
modifications. And, as mentioned earlier, improvements were facilitated by IFAD’s
flexibility. Considering IFAD’s overall performance during programme
implementation, the rating given is 5 (satisfactory).
113. Government. The PCR noted that the IPC provided effective policy guidance as
well as a platform for sharing experience and exchanging ideas among the
ministries involved. District and subcounty officials particularly appreciated the
interactions with IPC during field missions, which also served as a source of
information to high-level policy organs about programme implementation. The
Permanent Secretary of MOLG provided guidance and overall support to the
programme team throughout implementation and served as a useful link to other
government programmes. The location of the PFT within MOLG also enhanced the
dissemination of knowledge and key experiences about the programme.
114. The last project status report noted that the PFT, composed of a team situated in
Kampala and a field office in Mbarara thereby accounting for a staff of about 15
professionals plus support staff, was extremely efficient and knowledgeable.
Although the programme had very wide coverage, it was implemented through
government systems for decentralization while the PFT took initiatives for initiating
and coordinating many activities. It also set up an excellent computerized financial
control system (see the comments on project accounting, auditing and
management under the section on efficiency).
115. Through its actions, including financial contributions, policy support and effective
approval of recommendations and follow-up, the Government confirmed its high-
level of ownership of the programme. Government and beneficiary contributions
were mainly in the form of settlement of duties and taxes on procured items, and
cash and in-kind contributions for rural infrastructure and subprojects. In line with
the original design, local governments and benefiting communities were required to
put up 20 per cent of the value of infrastructure investments; although this
percentage was later changed to 10 per cent, it was difficult for some district
authorities to meet these requirements. As of the last supervision mission in June
2008, contributions from Ugandan sources were 79 per cent of the agreed
amounts. Overall, the Government’s performance is rated as 5 (satisfactory).
116. Cooperating institution. At the start of the programme, UNOPS was designated
as the cooperating institution in charge of loan administration and supervision. The
PCR noted that UNOPS conducted all six planned supervision missions in a timely
and effective manner and that the missions visited all AAMP-supported districts
during their stays in the country. The recommendations led to improved
programme performance and were appreciated by the beneficiaries, IPC and
programme staff. The PCR specifically commended UNOPS for encouraging training
in the logical framework approach both in the districts and among subprojects,
establishment of the M&E section, conversion of matching grants into a revolving
45
It should be noted that, at the time, the standards of community access roads in Uganda (as established by the Ministry of Works and Transport) were such that gravel would be used only on a few very bad spots. However, lessons have been learned, policies have changed and community access roads are now being built to better standards.
24
fund, and timely disbursement of programme funds (all withdrawal applications
were honoured in time).
117. The team leader and most of the specialists remained the same for all supervision
missions, thus providing stability for the missions’ work and recommendations. A
review of some supervision reports showed that they were informative and
thorough, ranging from 55 to 70 pages, and containing detailed and practical
recommendations and follow-up lists for each programme activity. As for the rating
of programme activities, the mission’s recommendations were appropriate based
on the situation prevailing at the time of the visits: the 2003 mission pointed out
minor-to-moderate problems in nearly all categories, whereas the 2008 mission
was satisfied with the outcomes and outputs in general, noting only minor
shortcomings in M&E and physical outputs. Overall, UNOPS performance is given a
rating of 5 (satisfactory) on the basis of its systematic approach, good quality of
the supervision mission reports, and continuity of UNOPS staff in administrative
and supervisory tasks.
118. Cofinancier. AfDB provided funds for feeder road development in the programme
area under a parallel financing arrangement, which helped to expand the rural road
network thereby linking farms to markets. This parallel programme was scheduled
to close a year later than AAMP. The target to improve 700.6 km of feeder roads
was exceeded by 60 per cent. The PCR evaluates AfDB’s performance in AAMP as
satisfactory, which the PPA mission concurs with.
Key points
The relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of the programme are rated as satisfactory on the basis of its alignment to government and IFAD strategies as well as the needs of the rural poor, the level of achievements of its objectives within the time span and budget, and high profitability of the enterprises it supported.
The rural poverty impact is also rated as satisfactory given the benefits that have accrued to the target groups in terms of income and assets, food security and agricultural productivity, human and social capital and empowerment, as well as institutions, policies and markets.
Sustainability is rated as moderately satisfactory. The level of ownership by the local population and the financial sustainability of the programme’s subprojects are high, but there are still challenges with regard to sustainability of the infrastructure management
committees and the pass-on system. Some programme innovations (the zoning approach, revolving funds and learning with regard to the community access roads) have been scaled up all over the country, justifying a satisfactory rating for this criterion. On the basis of the overall positive impact of the programme on women, gender equality and women’s empowerment is assessed as satisfactory.
The performance of IFAD, the Government, UNOPS and AfDB are all rated as
satisfactory. IFAD was praised for its innovative design and flexibility in supporting the implementation of the programme when modifications were needed. The Government played an active role and showed a high level of programme ownership. UNOPS supervision was good, with a systematic approach and continuity of staff in the
administrative and supervisory tasks.
IV. Overall project achievement
119. Overall, despite differences from the targets set during programme implementation
(none were set at appraisal), the PPA’s rating of AAMP’s overall achievement is
―satisfactory‖. Annex 1 gives a summary of the ratings, including a comparison of
ratings as per PCR and PPA. The PMD ratings have been upgraded in three
instances: (i) impact on institutions and policies; (ii) impact on natural resources
and the environment; and (iii) gender equality and women’s empowerment. The
rationale for such upgrading has been explained in the corresponding sections.
25
V. Conclusions and recommendations
A. Conclusions
120. The overall goal of AAMP was to increase the incomes and food security of poor
rural households in the programme areas and to modernize agriculture in the
targeted districts. At the end of the programme, the farmers’ incomes and food
security had increased. The planning and execution capacity of the districts and
subcounties had also improved, as had the farmers’ ability to gain more access to
services and financing facilities. The programme’s support for and training of local
farmer groups enabled them to expand their production and become more
commercially oriented at a time when they were shifting from subsistence to
market-oriented farming, and their capacity to select enterprises (subprojects) with
higher returns had increased. The farmers increasingly involved themselves in
group marketing in order to benefit more from marketable surpluses.
121. The programme also improved rural infrastructure, thus facilitating the
commercialization of agriculture. Better rural roads improved access to other
services, such as input and produce markets and financial services. Women are
now more involved in economic activities, and the impact of their empowerment is
significant. In addition, districts, subcounties and farmer groups have become
involved in sustaining activities initiated by the programme.
122. The parallel financing arrangement with AfDB was a relevant and effective choice
because it allowed IFAD loan funds to be focused on community roads to link farms
and communities to major towns and markets, often via the feeder roads, which
were the focus of AfDB’s financing (see paragraph 37).
123. Rural financial services support was implemented through SACCOs. Although the
programme supported more SACCOs than originally foreseen, the number of
beneficiaries was limited. There is still some concern about the viability of a
number of SACCOs with low repayment rates and thus lower profitability (see
paragraphs 49, 84 and 96).
124. The maintenance of programme-supported infrastructure presents a challenge.
Although the infrastructure management or maintenance committees were active
during implementation, once programme financing was no longer available many of
them became dormant (in the case of roads, where subcounties have taken over
maintenance) or more limited in terms of their role (in the case of the milk cooler
associations, where the milk processing dairies or bidders now take care of
maintenance and other functions) (see paragraphs 52, 91-92).
125. While a number of early targets were not met (only 27 per cent of the target for
cattle dips was achieved and 48 per cent of that for community roads), the vast
majority were attained or even surpassed. The few concerns expressed earlier are
relatively minor in relation to the programme’s achievements. Some shortcomings
at design (such as the lack of targets for monitoring the performance of indicators,
inadequate planning and financing for the M&E system, etc.) were corrected during
implementation (see paragraphs 41-42).
126. The success of AAMP may be attributed to a number of favourable factors, the
most important of which are as follows:
127. Flexibility in the design of programme interventions. Flexibility allowed for
quick response to opportunities that arose during implementation. For instance,
AAMP staff numbers were substantially increased soon after programme start-up
and the original idea of allowing communities to select their own priority
investments was replaced by the concept of tailoring programme interventions to
accommodate the climate and cultural systems in respective districts.
128. Mainstreaming of programme activities and linking with decentralization
policies. It was important for government programmes to work through existing
administrative structures to build up capacity and enhance the sustainability of
benefits after programme completion.
26
129. Involvement of local people in their own development. If they are to take
real responsibility for interventions and for their sustainability over the long term,
target communities must be involved in selecting programme interventions and in
planning their implementation.
130. Another important element was the quality of programme management. The
PFT was competent and its management methods and procedures were effective
and motivational. And as it turned out, AAMP was an effective training ground for
good management practices, and its key persons were well placed in the
government structure after completion of the programme.
B. Recommendations
131. This section gives a number of broad recommendations on important issues for
future IFAD operations in Uganda.
132. Financing arrangements. AAMP provided a lesson concerning the cofinancing
arrangements (see paragraph 122). Both community roads (financed by IFAD) and
feeder roads (financed by AfDB) were crucial for farmers’ produce to reach
markets, and although these components were complementary they were
sufficiently distinct to allow implementation and disbursement recording through
the parallel financing arrangement. Thus, if it is not possible to place all external
funds in the same ―basket‖ for monitoring or other reasons, parallel financing,
organized under the same coordinating body, may be a relevant and efficient
financing solution.
133. SACCOs are a promising approach to creating a financial network to serve
Uganda’s rural areas. However, their financial sustainability and long-term survival
will need to be ensured (see paragraph 123) and, for that purpose, their nature as
member-based and savings-first institutions should be safeguarded. This calls for a
degree of caution when trying to increase their outreach, especially when
expanding their lending operations by inserting external funds into the system. The
SACCOs’ membership and clientele will need to increase to a level that allows them
to operate economically and become important financiers in the areas where few
other financial institutions usually exist. But this expansion should happen in a
controlled manner, ensuing that no harm is done to the institutions’ viability and
taking care not to inject excessive amounts of external funds into the lending
portfolio.
134. Much depends on how the Government or donors decide to promote these financial
cooperatives. External interventions in the form of financial or technical assistance
for organizational development generally include a subsidy element. Subsidies in
any form tend to distort market conditions and competition. However, because
market forces do not always support equitable development, particularly in poor
rural areas, external support is sometimes needed to get things going.
135. The Government and support organizations for SACCOs (UCSCU, Microfinance
Support Centre and others) should be careful when selecting the types of financial
and technical support they will provide. Support with long-term benefits in terms of
outreach and sustainability of financial cooperatives will not necessarily be
addressed directly to the cooperatives themselves but to the development of an
enabling environment that will facilitate their growth, performance and integrity.
Targeted subsidies, also called financial support, may be warranted if they are
transparent, of a specified quantity, explicitly entered into government budgets,
fiscally sustainable and economically justified. Furthermore, the interventions
should not subsidize the ultimate clients but should be aimed at building up the
human and operational capacity of SACCOs or supporting institutions (e.g.
supervisory authorities), as in the case of training and other business development
services. Appropriate financial support may even include partial payment of
expenditures (a safe, office furniture and stationery) and operating costs (such as
27
supporting supervision and audit costs) over the medium term if this is necessary
to achieve outreach objectives related to poverty reduction.46
136. Activating infrastructure management committees. Infrastructure
management or maintenance committees will need to be activated (see paragraph
124) to ensure sustainability of the infrastructure supported. In order to enhance
local people’s sense of responsibility – in the spirit of the paradigm that they are
largely responsible for their own development – these committees should be
reinvigorated by continuous training, allowing them to be accountable for the
infrastructures they have chosen as priorities and endowing them with the
authority (and self-esteem) to act on their own. Such follow-up would require
funding through district and subcounty budgets or (in the medium term) through
donor funds or as subcomponents of follow-on projects/programmes.
137. Defining indicators and targets for monitoring (see paragraph 125). The
AAMP appraisal mission argued that no targets for indicators could be set because
the programme was to be beneficiary-driven – that is, local populations in the
districts and subcounties were to determine the types of enterprises (subprojects)
they wished to establish. However, the first supervision mission established targets
for different activities under the programme although a number of them were
subsequently modified. The AAMP appraisal mission was right to note the
uncertainties involved, but given that appraisal missions are staffed by competent
experts who are specialists in the types of activities planned under AAMP, are
familiar with conditions in different agroeconomic zones, and are aware of the most
suitable agricultural activities for those zones, appraisal missions are probably in
better position to suggest tentative targets for most indicators, or perhaps for all,
with the caveat that such targets can be modified when clear local preferences
emerge.
46
For more on the appropriate role of government and donors in promoting financial cooperatives and expanding outreach, see IFAD: Decision Tools in Rural Finance, 2002; IFAD: Rural Finance Policy, 2004. And World Bank: Providing Financial Services in Rural Areas; A Fresh Look at Financial Cooperatives, 2007.
Annex 1
28
Rating comparisona
Criterion PMD ratingb PPA rating
Net rating disconnect PPA-PMD
Project performance
Relevance
Relevance
5
Design
5 5 0
Effectiveness 5 5 0
Efficiency 5 5 0
Project performancec 5 5 0
Rural poverty impact
(a) Household income and assets Physical assets
5 Financial assets
5 5 0
(b) Human and social capital and empowerment
Human assets
5
Social capital and empowerment
5 5 0
(c) Food security and agricultural productivity
Food security
5
Agricultural productivity
5 5 0
(d) Natural resources and the environment and climate change 3 4 +1
(e) Institutions and policies
Institutions and services
4
Markets
5 5 +0.5
Overall rural poverty impactd 5 5 0
Other performance criteria
Sustainability 4 4 0
Innovation and scaling up 5 5 0
Gender equality and women’s empowerment 4 5 +1
Overall project achievemente 5 5 0
Performance of partners
(a) IFAD 5 5 0
(b) Government 5 5 0
(c) Cooperating institution 5 5 0
Average net disconnect +0.15
a Rating scale: 1 = highly unsatisfactory; 2 = unsatisfactory; 3 = moderately unsatisfactory; 4 = moderately satisfactory; 5 = satisfactory; 6 = highly satisfactory.
b The PCR does not contain ratings. These are assigned by PMD.
c Arithmetic average of ratings for relevance, effectiveness and efficiency.
d This is not an average of ratings of individual impact domains.
e This is not an average of ratings of individual evaluation criteria. Ratings of partners’ performance are not included in the
overall project achievement assessment.
Annex 3
30
Basic project data
Approval (US$ m)
Actual (US$ m)
Region East and Southern Africa Total project costs 30.0 30.4
Country Uganda IFAD loan and % of total 13.2 44.0% 13.6 44.7%
Loan number 516-UG Borrower 1.5 5.0% 1.5 4.9%
Type of project (sub-sector) Rural development
Cofinancier 1: AfDB under parallel financing arrangement 13.9 46.3% 13.9 45.7%
Lending termsa Highly concessional Cofinancier 2
Date of approval 08 Dec 1999 Cofinancier 3
Date of loan signature 15 Feb 2002 Cofinancier 4
Date of effectiveness 20 May 2002 From beneficiaries 1.4 4.7% 1.4 4.6%
Loan amendments
Two amendments (10 March 2004;
9 February 2006) From other sources:
Loan closure extensions 0
Number of beneficiaries (if appropriate, specify if direct or indirect)
312 500 households
399 363 households (direct and
indirect)
Country programme managers
Marian Bradley (current CPM), Joseph Yayock,
Fumiko Nakai, Miriam Okong’o Cooperating institution UNOPS
Regional director(s)
Ides de Willebois (current),
Gary Howe, Joseph Yayock (interim) Loan closing date 31 Dec 2008 31 Dec 2008
Project completion report reviewer Oanh Nguyen Mid-term review 30 June 2005
Project completion report quality control panel
Andrew Brubaker Fabrizio Felloni
IFAD loan disbursement at project completion (%) 95.8%
a There are four types of lending terms: (i) special loans on highly concessional terms, free of interest but
bearing a service charge of three fourths of one per cent (0.75%) per annum and having a maturity period of 40 years, including a grace period of 10 years; (ii) loans on hardened terms bearing a service charge of three fourths of one per cent (0.75%) per annum and having a maturity period of 20 years, including a grace period of 10 years; (iii) loans on intermediate terms with a rate of interest per annum equivalent to 50% of the variable reference interest rate, and a maturity period of 20 years, including a grace period of 5 years; (iv) loans on ordinary terms with a rate of interest per annum equivalent to one hundred per cent (100%) of the variable reference interest rate, and a maturity period of 15 to eighteen 18 years, including a grace period of 3 years.
Source: President’s Report, PCR, Project and Programme Management System, Loans and Grants System
(January 2011)
Annex 4
31
Terms of reference
I. Background
1. The 2010 Peer Review of IFAD’s Office of Evaluation and Evaluation Function
conducted by the Evaluation Cooperation Group recommended the Office of
Evaluation to change its approach to project evaluations by conducting Project
Completion Report Validation (PCRV) and a limited number of Project Performance
Assessments (PPA). The PPA is a more concise form of project-level evaluation
which supersedes the traditional IOE project evaluation. In general, PPAs will be
based on the findings from PCRV, further desk review and interviews at
headquarters, and a field visit to the concerned country.
2. The PPAs are to be conducted on a sample of projects that have already been
exposed to a project completion report validation. The projects will be selected
taking into consideration the following criteria: (i) synergies with forthcoming or
ongoing high-level evaluations (CPEs or CLEs); (ii) major information gaps in the
project completion report; (iii) novel project approaches; and (iv) geographic
balance.
3. The Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme (AAMP), Uganda, has been
selected for PPA, which would contribute to the Uganda CPE which is being
conducted by IOE in 2011-2012.
4. Project description. AAMP was approved by IFAD Executive Board in December
2009, came into effectiveness in May 2002 and closed in December 2008. The
project has a total cost of US$30.4 million, jointly funded by an IFAD loan of
US$13.6 million (44.7% of the total cost), AfDB under parallel financing
arrangement of US$13.9 million (45.7%), counterpart funding of the Government
of Uganda US$1.5 million (4.9%), and contributions from beneficiaries US$1.4
million (4.6%). At design, it was targeted to cover 30-40% of rural households in
10 districts1 in south-western Uganda. However, according to the project
completion report (PCR), the programme targeted 35% of rural households in 13
districts.2 The increase in the number of districts from 10 to 13 was due to the
division of Kabarole into 3 new districts. These districts were subdivided
administratively into 196 rural sub counties and 13 urban councils. The total
population in these districts, based on extrapolations from the 1991 census, was
about 5.3 million persons in 1.05 million households (about a quarter of the
national population), of which over 4.7 million persons and 947 000 households
(90%) were rural. Rural households averaged five persons, with agriculture as the
dominant occupation.
5. Rationale of the intervention. The rationale for the programme derived from
several factors: (i) growth played a fundamental role in reducing rural poverty,
however, districts lacked funds for agricultural activities; (ii) Government was
supporting private-sector initiatives and encouraging farmers to take full advantage
of economic opportunities: the scope therefore existed for an investment
programme that aimed to further commercialize smallholder farming and assist
rural communities in becoming full market participants and to cease being cash-
poor; (iii) key national programmes required support from actions within districts,
therefore area-based interventions represented a mechanism that would provide
useful experience for the eventual development of broader programmes in areas
where national approaches were still being developed; and (iv) this programme
would build roads linking farms and communities to major towns and markets,
opening up other income-generating occupations for rural communities and the
provision of goods and services.
1 The ten implementing districts are: Bundibugyo, Bushenyi, Kabale, Kabarole, Kasese, Kisoro, Mbarara, Ntungamo,
Rukungiri, and Sembabule. 2 The other three districts listed in the project completion report are: Kemwenge, Kanungu, Kyenjojo.
Annex 4
32
6. Objective of the intervention. The overall goal of the programme was increased
incomes and food security among poor rural households in the programme area,
with the objective of modernizing agriculture in the districts. The expected outputs3
were as follows: (i) increased involvement of the private sector in support of the
further commercialization of smallholder agriculture; (ii) improved capacity among
economically active farmers to organize themselves to gain better access to rural
services (technical, financial and marketing); (iii) sustainable development and
improvement of rural infrastructure; and (iv) increased public sector capacity to
perform its role in responding to production needs identified by interest groups and
rural communities. The programme was to be implemented over a six year period
with the Ministry of Local Government as the implementing agency, in collaboration
with district local governments.
7. Project target population. The programme had two major target groups:
(i) economically active smallholders living in the rural areas who wished to
participate in commercial agriculture; and (ii) existing or potential small-scale
entrepreneurs and business associations who provided services to rural
households. Among the target group, women played a major role in crop and
livestock production, processing and small enterprise operation. The programme
did not target pre-specified activities to particular areas and/or groups of potential
beneficiaries. Rather, the districts decided, within certain guidelines, how to use the
majority of resources available to them, according to the specified eligibility
criteria, and the demands of poor rural people themselves.
8. Project components and cost. The programme had four components:
(i) agricultural commercialization, including two sub-components namely
agricultural commercialization fund which the programme established and from
which the districts could draw down funds to finance eligible activities and rural
financial services training. This component has a cost of 4.1 million USD; (ii) rural
infrastructure development: 8.7 million USD; (iii) community mobilization: 1.2
million USD; and (iv) programme facilitation: 2.1 million USD. The parallel
financing arrangement with AfDB was materialized and the funds were spent on a
separate component which is the construction of feeder roads.
Programme financing plan and actual by component
Component Original plan (million USD)
Revised plan (million USD)
Percentage change after
revision
Cumulative expenditure
(million USD) Percentage
Agricultural commercialization 4.1 3.2 -20.9 2.7 83.9
Rural infrastructure 8.6 7.3 -15.9 7.3 100.6
Community mobilization 1.2 1.7 39.4 1.5 86.1
Programme facilitation 2.1 3.8 84.8 4.0 103.6
Feeder roads-ADB 14.9 - 12.7 85.1
Initial deposit 94.5
Total 16.0 30.9 28.2 91.2
Source: PCR (2008)
II. Methodology
9. Objectives. The main objectives of the PPA are to assess the performance and
results of the project based on the findings from the PCRV and the country mission.
Due to the time and budget limits, the PPA would not investigate the full spectrum
of project activities and achievements, rather to gather additional evidence only on
3 Both the appraisal report and the president’s report used the terms: “expected outputs”, but these could be considered
specific objectives.
Annex 4
33
the major information gaps of the PCR and the issues deserving further
investigation in the context of the Uganda CPE.
10. Evaluation criteria. The PPA would follow the evaluation criteria outlined in the
Evaluation Manual of IFAD (2009) and the newly added evaluation criteria (2010),4
and the IOE Guidelines for PCRV and PPA (Jan 2011). These include: project
performance (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency), rural poverty impact
(households income and assets, human and social capital and empowerment, food
security and agricultural productivity, natural resources and environment, and
institutions and policies), gender equality and women’s empowerment,
sustainability, innovation, replication and scaling up, overall project achievement
and performance of partners (IFAD, Government, UNOPS as cooperating institution,
AfDB as co-financier). However, given the limited resources (staff and non-staff)
for a PPA, the scope of the assessment will be selective and the emphasis given to
each criterion will depend on the PCRV assessment as well as on emerging findings
during the PPA process. As of present, findings from the PCRV suggest the PPA to
focus on efficiency, natural resources and environment, operations and profitability
of SACCOs, innovation and scaling up, and project management. Besides, the PPA
will also put emphasis on further emerging issues during the PPA process.
11. Data collection. The initial findings would be retrieved from the PCRV. During the
PPA mission, additional primary and secondary data will be collected to reach an
independent assessment of the performance and results. Data collection methods
will mostly include qualitative participatory techniques. The methods deployed will
be individual and group interviews, focus-group discussions with beneficiaries, and
direct observation. Questionnaire-based surveys are not applicable, because short
duration of the mission would not allow the generation of an adequate sample size.
The PPA will also make use – where applicable – of the additional data available
through the project M&E system. Triangulation will be applied to verity findings
emerging from different information sources.
12. Participation. In compliance with the Evaluation Policy but taking into
consideration the different nature of the PPA compared to full-fledged evaluations,
the main stakeholders of the AAMP will be involved throughout the evaluation to
ensure that the key concerns of the stakeholders are taken into account in the PPA
process, and the evaluators fully understand the context in which the project was
implemented, the opportunities and the constraints faced by the implementing
organizations. Regular cooperation and communication will be established with the
IFAD Eastern and Southern Africa Division (ESA) and Government of Uganda.
Formal and informal opportunities will be explored for discussing findings,
recommendations and lessons during the process.
III. Processes
13. The overall processes of the PPA include five (5) phases: desk work (PCRV) phase,
country work phase, drafting report and peer review phase, reviews by ESA and
government phase, and the final phase of communication and dissemination.
14. Desk work phase. The PCRV would derive the initial findings and the key issues
to be investigated in the PPA. The first draft PCRV is now available. The draft has
been peer reviewed within IOE by Mr. Fabrizio Fellon, Senior Evaluation Officer, and
Mr. Andrew Brubaker, Evaluation Officer. The PCRV, after having been shared with
ESA for comments, has now been finalized.
15. Country work phase. The PPA mission is scheduled from 11-20 April 2011. The
mission would interact with Government, other partners, project staff, and project
clients (beneficiaries). At the end of the PPA mission, a short wrap-up session will
be held in the country to summarise the preliminary findings and the key strategic
and operational issues.
4 Gender, climate change, and scaling up.
Annex 4
34
16. Drafting report and peer review. At the conclusion of the field visit, a draft PPA
report will be prepared and subject to IOE internal peer review for quality
assurance.
17. External review by ESA and Government of Uganda. The PPA report will be
then shared with ESA and thereafter the Government for comments. Upon receipt
of Government’s comments, IOE will finalise the report.
18. Communication and dissemination. The final report would be disseminated to
stakeholders in the country and in IFAD, and the key deliverables of the PPA would
post on the evaluation website of IFAD.
Flow of the Process of the PPA of the Uganda AAMP
IV. Key issues for investigation
19. Based on the findings from the PCRV, the Area-Based Agricultural Modernization
Programme apparently was a quite successful project, with nearly all expected
results achieved and in some cases even exceeded. Strong emphasis on ensuring
sustainability by the project implementers—and supported by the supervising and
financing agencies—is likely to ensure that the populations in the target districts or
even elsewhere will continue to benefit from the project’s approaches and
practices. The main concerns regarding the programme performance are the low
rating of the natural resources and environmental issues (moderately
unsatisfactory) and the uncertainties about the repayment rates and profitability of
the SACCOs. As mentioned in paragraph 10, for the PPA, a few issues are identified
for in-depth investigation and the findings from the investigations would contribute
to the Uganda CPE. Below are the proposed issues for further investigated, which
may subject to change during the PPA process with new findings emerging.
Efficiency – profitability of the enterprises (sub-projects) 20. Economic and financial analysis presented in the PCR showed that positive net
benefits had been realized from the programme supported interventions. The
estimated economic rate of return (ERR) for the last three years of the programme
was 42% and the PCR projected it to be 48% in the next five years (2009-2013).
The presentation of the PCR on the ERR is very informative and allows the readers
to get a good understanding of the costs/benefits of the enterprises. However,
while the assumptions are moderate and based on actual observations by the M&E
unit, the methodologies used in computing the ERR do not follow textbook or
internationally approved practices, and thus undermining the validity of the results.
The PPA will try to look further into this issue to have more clarity on the
uncertainties and shortcomings just mentioned.
Natural resources and environment 21. The PCR acknowledged that besides the infrastructural development just
mentioned, some environmental concerns remain because of the increasing use of
B. Drafting
PPA report
C. First IOE
peer review
D. Second IOE peer review
F. Review by
ESA
J. Finalization
H. Send to
Government I. Review by Government
G. Revision and audit
trail
E. Send to ESA for
comments
A. PPA
mission
TORs
Annex 4
35
agricultural chemicals and their potential percolation to the water table. For the
time being, use of agricultural chemicals is still modest, but the use of herbicide
and fertilizer in upland rice gardens is likely to increase because farmers were
motivated to increase production and because the labour requirements for rice
weeding are more costly compared to the application of herbicide. Another problem
is that the new feeder and community roads have improved the access to areas
that used to be difficult for large trucks to reach, and the amount of timber
harvested has grown. While this activity has brought new income to more remote
areas, the depletion of forests needs to be checked and kept within stipulated
national and district guidelines. However, the district environmental officers
responsible for environmental monitoring and mitigation at the district level have
inadequate resources to cover the large area and all interventions in their districts.
The PPA will look further into this issue.
Institutions – The operations and profitability of SACCOs 22. The original programme concept for supporting rural finance was to provide
training in rural financial services to staff of microfinance institutions, including
lending groups and associations. However, because there were other sources to
support microfinance institutions and few of them were interested in going outside
commercial centres, AAMP was directed to concentrate on helping establish
SACCOs in the project areas. By project completion, 35 SACCOs had been
established in the AAMP districts (compared with the target of 32). However, as
indicated in the impact assessment study, the sustainability of SACCOs is
precarious. Given the importance of rural finance issue in the whole country
portfolio, the PPA will look more into this issue.
Project management 23. The last Project Status Report noted that the Programme Facilitation Team,
composed of a headquarters team situated in Kampala and a field office together
having a staff of about 15 professionals plus support staff was extremely efficient
and knowledgeable. Although the programme had very wide coverage, it was
implemented through government systems for decentralization while the
Programme Facilitation Team took the initiative for initiating and coordinating many
activities as well as having put in place excellent computerized financial control
systems. Since this could be a very good example and lesson for the whole
portfolio, the PPA will look more into this issue.
Other issues 24. In addition to the above mentioned issues, the PPA would also devote attention to
other selected issues which merit further verification and/or enquiry, including:
(i) innovation, replication and scaling up and (ii) gender equality and
empowerment. Other issues emerging from the PPA process will also be included.
V. The PPA team
25. Under the supervision of Mr. Andrew Brubaker, Evaluation Officer (IOE) and lead
evaluator of the CPE Uganda, Ms. Oanh Nguyen, Evaluation Research Analyst
(IOE), was appointed as lead evaluator for this PPA exercise, and who is
responsible for delivering the PCRV and the PPA reports. Ms. Nguyen would be
assisted by one senior consultant, Mr. Turto Turtiainen, rural development
specialist, who would contribute to the draft PPA report with a write up on the
findings and recommendations on efficiency, SACCOs, project management,
innovation and scaling up and natural resources and management, etc.
Annex 5
36
Definition of the evaluation criteria used by the
Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD
Criteria Definitiona
Project performance
Relevance The extent to which the objectives of a development intervention are consistent with beneficiaries’ requirements, country needs, institutional priorities and partner and donor policies. It also entails an assessment of project design in achieving its objectives.
Effectiveness The extent to which the development intervention’s objectives were achieved, or are expected to be achieved, taking into account their relative importance.
Efficiency A measure of how economically resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time, etc.) are converted into results.
Rural poverty impactb Impact is defined as the changes that have occurred or are expected to occur in the lives of the rural poor (whether positive or negative, direct or indirect, intended or unintended) as a result of development interventions.
Household income and
assets
Household income provides a means of assessing the flow of economic benefits accruing to an individual or group, whereas assets relate to a stock of accumulated items of economic value.
Human and social capital
and empowerment
Human and social capital and empowerment include an assessment of the changes that have occurred in the empowerment of individuals, the quality of grassroots organizations and institutions, and the poor’s individual and collective capacity.
Food security and
agricultural productivity
Changes in food security relate to availability, access to food and stability of access, whereas changes in agricultural productivity are measured in terms of yields.
Natural resources and the
environment and climate change
The focus on natural resources and the environment involves assessing the extent to which a project contributes to changes in the protection, rehabilitation or depletion of natural resources and the environment as well as in mitigating the negative impact of climate change or promoting adaptation measures.
Institutions and policies
The criterion relating to institutions and policies is designed to assess changes in the quality and performance of institutions, policies and the regulatory framework that influence the lives of the poor.
Other performance criteria
Sustainability
The likely continuation of net benefits from a development intervention beyond the phase of external funding support. It also includes an assessment of the likelihood that actual and anticipated results will be resilient to risks
beyond the project’s life.
Promotion of pro-poor innovation and scaling up
The extent to which IFAD development interventions have: (i) introduced innovative approaches to rural poverty reduction; and (ii) the extent to which these interventions have been (or are likely to be) scaled up by government authorities, donor organizations, the private sector and other agencies.
Gender equality and women’s empowerment
Relevance of design in terms of gender equality and women’s empowerment. Level of resources of the project dedicated to these dimensions. Changes promoted by the project at the household level (workload, nutrition status, women’s influence on decision making). Adoption of gender-disaggregated indicators for monitoring, analysis of data and use of findings to correct project implementation and to disseminate lessons learned.
Overall project achievement This provides an overarching assessment of the project, drawing upon the analysis made under the various evaluation criteria cited above.
Performance of partners
IFAD
Government
Cooperating institution
NGO/community-based
organization
This criterion assesses the contribution of partners to project design, execution, monitoring and reporting, supervision and implementation support, and evaluation. The performance of each partner will be assessed on an individual basis with a view to the partner’s expected role and responsibility in the project life cycle.
a These definitions have been taken from the OECD/DAC Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results-Based Management
and from the IOE Evaluation Manual. b It is important to underline that the IFAD Evaluation Manual also deals with the “lack of intervention”. That is, no specific
intervention may have been foreseen or intended with respect to one or more of the five impact domains. In spite of this, if positive or negative changes are detected and can be attributed in whole or in part to the project, a rating should be assigned to the particular impact domain. On the other hand, if no changes are detected and no intervention was foreseen or intended, then no rating (or the mention “not applicable”) is assigned.
Annex 6
37
List of persons met
A. In Kampala
Mr. Keith J. Muhakanizi, Deputy Secretary to the Treasury, Ministry of Finance, Planning
and Economic Development
Mr. John Kashaka Muhanguzi, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Local Government
Mr. Benjamin Kumumanya, Under Secretary, Finance and Administration, Office of the
Prime Ministry (former Programme Facilitator of AAMP)
Mr. Pontian Muhwezi, IFAD Country Programme Officer
Mr. Yasin K. Sendaula, Assistant Commissioner, Ministry of Local Government, National
Programme Facilitator of the Community Agricultural Infrastructure Improvement
Programme (CAIIP)
Dr. Sam Mugasi, Programme Facilitator of the District Livelihoods Support Programme,
former M&E officer of AAMP
Mr. Sam Sakwa, Financial Controller of CAIIP – Ministry of Local Government, former
Financial Controller of AAMP
Dr. John Mbadhwe, Infrastructure Adviser for CAIIP, Ministry of Works and Transport
Mr. Wilson Kabanda, CEO, Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union
Mr. Joab Baryayaka, M&E officer, Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union
Mr. Andrew Byamugisha, Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries, former
Agricultural Adviser to AAMP
Mr. Asaph Nuwagira, Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist, African Development
Bank
Mr. Waiswa Ayazika Arnold, Director, Environmental Monitoring and Compliance,
National Environment Management Authority
Mr. Alex Winyi Kiiza, Environmental Impact Assessment Officer, National Environment
Management Authority
Dr. Francis Byekwaso, Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Manager, National Aricultural
Advisory Services (NAADS) Secretariat
Mr. Yusuf Kiwala, Planning and Monitoring Officer, NAADS Secretariat
Mr. Colin Agabalinda, Operations Manager, Rural Financial Services Programme
Mr. Denis Magezi, Infrastructure Engineer, CAIIP
Mr. Kenneth Ssenyange, Accountant, CAIIP
B. Field visits
Mr. Deo Karusigarira, Chairperson, Katojo Market Management Committee
Mr. Byanyamuhanga J, Vice Chairperson, Katojo Market Management Committee
Mr. Kajubi Benoni, Committee member, Katojo Market Management Committee
Ms. Baryaruha Rose, Committee member, Katojo Market Management Committee
Ms. Margaret Tibahungwa, AAMP former Programme Support Officer, Mbarara District
Mr. Tibugyenda Wilson, Chief Administrative Officer, Mbarara District
Mr. Kayumbu William, District Community Development Officer, Mbarara District
Mr. Asingwire Valerian, Road Inspector, Mbarara District
Ms. Byamugabe Beatrice, District Production Coordinator, Mbarara District
Mr. Kagaaju Gershorm, Agricultural officer, Ntungamo District
Annex 6
38
Mr. Godfrey Kagina, Chairman of the Omungyenyi Milk Cooler Management Committee
Ms. Atwiine Esther, Subcounty coordinator, Nyabihoko subcounty, Ntungamo District
Mr. Kusasira Ramonic, Treasurer, Nyabihoko SACCO, Ntungamo District
Mr. Muhumuza Asaph, Chairman of the loan committee, Nyabihoko SACCO, Ntungamo
District
Mr. Abbas Iga, Board member, Nyabihoko SACCO, Ntungamo District
Mr. Becungura Ephraim, Chairman, Nyabihoko SACCO, Ntungamo District
Mr. Kayise, Chief Administrative Officer, Ntungamo District
Mr. Kiiza Fideric, Deputy Chief Administrative Office, Ntungamo District
Dr. Nuwagaba, District Production Coordinator, Ntungamo District
Mr. Byaruhanga Remigio K, Agriculture officer, Sembabule District
Mr. Muwanga Kutaaya, Internal Security Officer, Sembabule District
Mr. Ndugu Kamara Bayeeye, Resident District Commissioner, Sembabule District
Mr. Galabuzi Denis, District Engineer, Sembabule District
Ms. Nakalungi Sarah, Chief Administrative Officer, Sembabule District
Mr. Murangira Levius, Subcounty Chief Administrative Officer, Lugusulu subcounty,
Sembabule District
Mr. Rwahlampola Bonns, Chairman of the milk cooler association, Sembabule District
Mr Karangura Matia, Vice chairman of the milk cooler association, Sembabule District
Mr. Tayebwa Kaginah Yosam, Manager of SACCO, Sembabule District
Mr. Banawana Tandenes Johnson, Accountant of SACCO, Sembabule District
Mr. Kafiro, Chairperson, Kawangire Pineapple Marketing group, Sembabule District
Annex 7
39
References and data sources
African Development Bank: Feeder Roads Component of the Area-Based Agricultural
Modernization Programme. Appraisal Report, May 2000.
African Development Bank: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. PCR, July
2009
African Development Bank: Agricultural Sector Strategy 2010-2014. January 2010
Government of Uganda (J. Mugisha, J. Beijuka and V. Male): Impact Assessment of the
Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme, August 2008.
Government of Uganda (Ministry of Local Government): Area-Based Agricultural
Modernization Programme 2002-2008, PCR, December 2008.
Government of Uganda/IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme.
Internal Mid-Term Progress Review, July 2005.
Government of Uganda/IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Mid-
Term Review Report, March 2006.
Government of Uganda/Mbarara District Local Government: Area-Based Agricultural
Modernization Programme, Completion Report for Greater Mbarara District. June 2008
IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Appraisal Report, Volume I
(main report). December 1999.
IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Appraisal Report, Volume II
(working papers), December 1999
IFAD: Report and Recommendation of the President to the Executive Board on a
Proposed Loan to the Republic of Uganda for the Area-Based Agricultural Modernization
Programme. December 8-9, 1999
IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme — Project Loan Agreement.
February 15, 2002.
IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme — Amendment to Loan
Agreement. 10 March, 2004.
IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme — Amendment to the
Programme Loan Agreement. February 9, 2006.
IFAD: Evaluation Manual — Methodology and Processes. April 2009.
IFAD: Guidelines for Project Completion Report Validation. January 2011.
UNOPS: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Supervision Report, July
2003.
UNOPS: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Supervision Report, May
2005.
UNOPS: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Supervision Report, June
2006.
UNOPS: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Supervision Report, May
2008.
Annex 8
40
Physical progress of the programme
Activity Unit Programme
Target Actual Achievement
(%)
AGRICULTURAL COMMERCIALIZATION COMPONENT
Provide revolving fund for eligible groups No. of groups supported 3 650 2 788 78.2
People supported with revolving funds No. of persons 71 200 66 197 92.9
Establishment of on-farm demonstration plots No. of demo plots 500 470 94.0
Establish on-farm trials No. trial plots 1 080 1 020 94.4
Establish on- station trials No. of home station trials 72 41 56
Training of subcounty field extension workers No. FEWs trained 216 209 96.7
Exchange visits for technology adaptation specialists
No. of exchange visits 278 225 80.9
Participate in national agricultural shows and competitions
No. of farmers participating 18 18 100
Carry out feasibility studies on value- addition enterprises
No. of studies conducted 6 6 100
Train subcounty staff in logical framework No. of staff trained 146 146 100
Train selected beneficiary groups in logical framework
No. of farmers groups trained 1 780 1 020 57
Conduct agricultural research training workshop for staff and technology adaptation specialists (TAS)
No. of TAS trained 13 13 100
Conduct training of trainers for subcounty coordinators
No. of trainers trained 73 73 100
Train paraprofessional and equip them with skills to be able to offer technical support to groups.*
No. of paraprofessionals trained
0 292 +
Build up capacity of SACCOS for better delivery of services
No. of groups formed 32 35 109
Facilitate extension staff to support SACCOs and mobilize for savings
No. of sensitization meetings 128 118 80.8
Facilitate implementation of the exit strategy by all implementers
No. of meetings held 146 146 100
Persons trained in record keeping No. of persons 53 400 37 380 70
RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT
Training of district engineers No. of training workshops 6 5 83.3
Carry out socio-economic surveys for infrastructures
No. of studies 4 4 100
Carry out environmental impact studies for all infrastructures.
No. of studies 4 4 100
Train small contractors No. of contractors trained 480 430 89.5
Train road inspectors No. of inspectors 104 98 94.2
Rehabilitate community roads Km 2 000 1,011 50.6
No. of roads 200 113 56.5
Feeder roads rehabilitated Km 700.6 1,121 160.0
No. of roads 54 75 138.9
Construct valley tanks/dams No. of valley tanks/dams 6 5 83.3
Procure milk storage facilities No. of milk coolers 12 7 58.3
Annex 8
41
RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT (continued)
Capacity of milk coolers Litres 36 000 39,000 108.3
Renovate dip tanks No. of functional dip tanks 15 4 26.7
Rehabilitate water channel* No. of functional channels 0 2
Improve market No. of markets 42 42 100.0
Build market structures No. of markets structures 64 120 187.5
Build produce stores* No. of produce stores 0 3 +
Build maize cribs* No. of maize cribs 0 7 +
Construct potato stores* No. of potato stores 0 6 +
Construct pineapples sheds* No. of pineapple sheds 0 1 +
COMMUNITY MOBILIZATION COMPONENT
Conduct district start-up workshops No. of workshops 13 13 100
Subcounty start-up workshops No. of workshops 73 73 100
Organize community meetings to ensure meaningful participation and establishment of management systems for the improved rural infrastructure
No. of meetings 292 315 107
Support subcounties to develop workplans No. of workplans 438 438 100
Hold meetings to assist communities and interest groups to identify investment priorities
No. of meetings 292 212 72.6
Identify music, dance and drama groups to disseminate appropriate information to communities.
No. of groups 146 146 100
Production of promotional materials, radio programmes, and newsletters
No. of radio programmes 156 219 140.
Organize exchange visits/study tours for farmers
No. 436 350 80.3
Train community development officers (CDOs)
No. of workshops 13 13 100
Training of extension workers (FWES) No. FEWs trained 292 292 100
Organize information exchange seminars for CDOs
No. of exchange visits 26 13 50
Conduct community meetings to identify priority rural infrastructure investments
No. of meetings held 616 600 97.4
Establish O&M systems for rural infrastructure investments
No. of meetings held 292 292 100
Form rural infrastructure management committees
No. of committees formed 308 208 100
Train rural infrastructure management committees
No. of committees trained 308 108 100
Form marketing associations No. formed 146 146 100
Train marketing associations No. rrained 146 146 100
Drama presentations No. of drama presentations 850 539 63.4
Radio programmes aired No. of radio programmes 312 219 70.2
HIV/AIDS awareness campaigns* No. of awareness campaigns 0 46 +
Annex 8
42
PROGRAMME FACILITATION COMPONENT
Procurement of transport facilities No. of vehicles 22 22 100
No. of motorcycles 39 39
No. of bicycles 351 351
Identify and contract a consultant to design and document financial systems and control procedures
No. 1 1 100
Identify and contract a consultant to design and document an M&E system.
No. 1 1 100.
Attend regional workshop organized by IFAD for managers of IFAD-funded projects.
No. of workshops 6 6 100
Project management course in Turin, Italy No. 1 1 100
M&E skills training seminar provided No. of staff trained 16 16 100
Carry out a comprehensive baseline survey. No. of studies 1 1 100
Carry out district and subcounty assessment of compliance with minimum conditions and performance measures.
No. of assessments 13 13 100
Conduct monthly PFT management meetings No. 48 36 75
Conduct PFT-district quarterly review meetings
No. 12 20 50
Prepare and submit annual progress reports No. of reports 6 6 100
Hire consultant to carry out mid–term review No. of reports 1 1 100
Facilitate and coordinate supervision by IPC No. of meetings 12 6 50
Prepare and submit semi-annual progress reports
No. of reports 6 6 100
Carry out independent annual audit No. 6 6 100
Facilitate and coordinate UNOPS supervision missions
No. of missions 6 6 100
*Activities were not part of programme design but were implemented as a result of beneficiary demand.
Sta
tisti
cs o
n S
AC
CO
s s
up
po
rte
d b
y A
AM
P a
nd
th
e R
ural
Fin
an
ce S
up
po
rt
Prog
ram
me
1.
SA
CC
Os e
sta
blish
ed
befo
re A
AM
P m
id t
erm
Dis
tric
t S
ubcounty
S
AC
CO
nam
e
Me
mbers
hip
S
hare
capital
Savin
gs
Loans
PA
R %
* O
SS
%**
Mbara
ra
Ndaija
N
daija
People
s’ S
AC
CO
692
12 5
30 0
00
30 9
87,2
50
34 0
20 0
00
8
150
Ibanda
Ishongoro
ro
subcounty
N
yats
imbo
-Ishongoro
ro
SA
CC
O
539
48 0
04 0
00
163 0
61 2
50
164 3
50 8
00
8.5
187
Ibanda
K
ate
nsani S
AC
CO
964
76 6
66 6
50
40 0
06 0
95
164 8
43 6
17
8.7
158
Kiruru
ra
Sanga
Sanga S
AC
CO
516
10 3
20 0
00
4 7
18 3
00
19 7
53 5
17
45
37
Kiruru
ra
K
aru
ngi S
AC
CO
591
14 9
73 0
00
16 5
50 0
00
20 5
55 0
00
- -
Isin
giro
K
abuyanda A
gr,
SA
CC
O
895
27 7
62 6
00
78 3
36 5
00
146 1
30 5
00
1
149
Isin
giro
N
yakitunda F
arm
ers
’ S
AC
CO
737
4 9
50 0
00
3 1
95 0
00
5 3
80 0
00
- -
Ngungam
o
Rukoni
Bure
bero
SA
CC
O
742
44 6
23 5
00
43 8
55 5
24
51 9
79 4
98
16
112
Kam
wenge
K
am
wenge
subcounty
B
usin
ge S
AC
CO
1,0
15
34 8
85 0
00
41 3
97 2
72
132 1
08 5
96
2
83
Kam
wenge
K
ichence
Kic
hence S
AC
CO
772
17 2
15 0
00
31 2
08 6
75
80 7
78 4
56
4
112
Bundib
igyo
Rw
ebis
engo
R
webis
engo S
AC
CO
734
39 8
57 8
00
141 8
93 0
00
113 9
41 4
00
30
185
Kyenjo
jo
K
yegegw
a P
eople
s’ S
AC
CO
419
6 9
96 0
00
11 4
01 0
88
34 6
00 6
50
26
115
Bushenyi
Kitagata
K
itagata
Fin
ancia
l S
erv
ices
SA
CC
O
2,9
17
348 2
15 5
00
479 6
87 8
91
856 2
43 4
17
12
120
Rukungiri
Ruhin
da
Rw
enshaka S
AC
CO
1602
109 7
88 9
00
174 9
06 8
00
423 3
63 9
60
14
166
Kis
oro
Busanza D
ute
rim
bere
396
7 5
73 0
00
12 4
23 0
50
21 1
08 2
75
Sourc
e: U
CS
CU
Sta
tistical U
nit
* P
ort
folio
at
risk (
over
dues m
ore
than o
ne d
ay).
** O
pera
tio
nal self-s
uffic
iency (
ratio o
f re
venues o
ver
expenses).
Annex 10
44
2.
SA
CC
Os e
sta
blish
ed
aft
er A
AM
P m
id-t
erm
**
*
Dis
tric
t S
ubcounty
S
AC
CO
nam
e
Me
mbers
hip
S
hare
capital
Savin
gs
Loans
PA
R %
* O
SS
%**
Bushenyi
Kadshenshero
K
aju
nju
Abaham
bani S
AC
CO
406
38 4
89 7
44
49 4
17 2
31
94 4
72 5
66
K
aru
ngu
Karu
ngu S
AC
CO
539
12 7
20 0
00
11 8
13 9
28
25 7
25 7
71
Mbara
ra
Bih
arw
e
Bih
arw
e F
arm
ers
SA
CC
O
822
24 6
00 0
00
92 7
43 8
00
99 4
95 0
00
30
223
Ntu
ngam
o
Nyabih
oko
Nyabih
oko S
AC
CO
600
45 7
68 2
00
27 8
80 7
30
50 2
51 7
00
6
142
Kabaro
le
Buhesi
Kabbic
ai S
AC
CO
340
8 1
00 0
00
11 3
60 0
00
9 7
60 0
00
15
R
wim
i R
wim
i S
AC
CO
923
20 4
37 0
00
53 1
24 7
87
72 1
75 9
50
64
242
B
usoro
B
usoro
SA
CC
O
332
3 3
30 0
00
9 7
00 0
00
Kasese
Mukynyu
M
ukynyu S
AC
CO
342
12 6
80 5
00
5 1
56 7
50
14 6
75 9
00
Rukoki T
weyam
be S
AC
CO
602
19 5
64 3
00
13 4
59 0
00
24 4
53 0
00
4
74
Kyenjo
jo
Butiti
Miranga S
AC
CO
559
11 4
72 0
00
19 7
90 1
00
71 7
00 1
00
17
Kabale
B
ufu
ndi
Kacere
re S
AC
CO
946
19 0
00 0
00
41 5
97 5
65
28 0
96 7
50
76
B
uta
nda
Buta
nda S
AC
CO
414
8 7
88 0
00
22 8
26 0
00
44 4
01 7
77
44
360
Kanungu
Kih
ihi
Kabuna C
om
munity S
AC
CO
306
8 5
00 0
00
5 5
63 6
00
7 4
82 0
00
21
53
R
uyeyo
R
ute
nga C
om
munity S
AC
CO
463
22 7
55 5
00
7 4
83 4
93
37 1
37 3
74
Kis
oro
N
yakabande
N
yakabande F
arm
ers
SA
CC
O
554
13 9
60 0
00
14 6
93 9
50
38 0
75 0
00
B
uhunga
Kih
anga S
AC
CO
339
13 5
19 3
50
25 3
14 3
20
28 4
36 9
53
B
wam
bara
B
ikuru
ngu S
AC
CO
1,3
26
72 2
43 5
00
124 9
64 9
00
218 8
72 2
50
Sem
babule
S
em
babule
T/s
S
em
babule
SA
CC
O
1,6
97
67 7
40 0
00
103 1
98 4
81
3.2
148.5
Sourc
e: U
CS
CU
Sta
tistical U
nit
***
Som
e o
f th
ese S
AC
CO
s m
ay h
ave b
een a
ctu
ally
esta
blis
hed b
efo
re A
AM
P u
ndert
ook t
heir s
upport
.
Annex 10
45
International Fund forAgricultural DevelopmentVia Paolo di Dono, 4400142 Rome, ItalyTel: +39 06 54591Fax: +39 06 5043463E-mail: [email protected]/evaluation
Enabling poor rural peopleto over come poverty
Enabling poor rural peopleto over come poverty
P R O J E C T P E R F O R M A N C E A S S E S S M E N T
February 2012
IFAD IFAD
Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme