mtcp2.files.wordpress.com€¦ · Web viewmtcp2.files.wordpress.com

The International Fund for Agricultural Development

For Official Use Only

ASIA AND THE PACIFIC REGION

MEDIUM TERM COOPERATION PROGRAMME WITH FARMERS’ ORGANISATIONS

IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC, PHASE II (MTCP 2)

PROGRAMME DESIGN REPORT

Stage: Final design

Main Report and Annexes

Asia and the Pacific DivisionProgramme Management Department

REPORT No. FEBRUARY 2013

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without the authorization of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

MEDIUM TERM COOPERATION PROGRAMME WITH FARMERS’ ORGANIZATIONS IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC, PHASE 2PROGRAMME DESIGN REPORT - MAIN REPORT

ANNEX A

SUMMARY SHEET

Grant title Medium Term Cooperation Programme with Farmers’ Organizations in Asia and the Pacific Region II

Proposed recipient Asian Farmers Association for Sustainable Rural Development ( AFA) is the recipient and will work in partnership with La Via Campesina (LVC).

Grant sponsor(s) Benoit THIERRY / APR

Proposed IFAD grant US$

Cofinancing US$ (and donor)

Total programme cost US$

IFAD US$ 2.0 million (APR US$ 1.5 m and PTA US$ 0.5 m)

Co-Financing from EU: several grants totalling US$ 5 million; Supplementary grant financiers (Switzerland US$ 3 million, Japan US$ 1 million, Korea US$ 0.5 million, Australia US$ 1 million, New Zealand US$ 1 million, and Agri-agencies US$ 0.678 million) to be confirmed up to US$ 7,178,000.

Total programme cost: USD 14,178,000

Duration 2013 - 2017 - 5 years for sustainability-driven investments, and attractiveness for other donors

Grant rationale (and target groups if applicable)

Rationale: FOs in Asia and the Pacific region are increasingly taking active part in the rural economic development, tackling the challenges of reducing rural poverty, improving food security, securing development opportunities for the smallholders, and developing the agribusiness value chains. Mostly The FOs aim to represent the interests of a broad range of producers of different socio-economic categories, making efforts of voicing out their views and expectations in the process of decision making related to their members’ concerns and interests, and delivering a range of member services. However, the FOs’ influential effectiveness in policy consultations is mostly at an early stage of development; institutional and operational strengthening is required to help act effectively and be recognized as one of the primary actors in the national, sub-regional and regional socio-economic development.

Target groups: Rural women and men undertaking farm and non-farm enterprises in Asia and the Pacific, and their organizations operating in rural and agricultural development with firm commitment to representing and promoting the farmers’ interests, and with their policy and service inclusiveness for the first tier of the smallholder farmers.

Links to grant policy and DSWP, and to corporate priorities (SF, CMRs)1

The MTCP 2 is aligned with IFAD grant policy, particularly with regard to its strategic area of building pro-poor capacities of partner institutions, including community-based

1 For CS grants, should read: links to grant policy, country programme and planned / ongoing projects

i


organizations. It will contribute to the achievement of the expected outputs of the revised grant policy. In accordance with directives for implementing the Fund´s Grant policy and strategy, the APR Division has prepared a 2011 Divisional Grant Strategy which aims at supporting innovations that reduce risk and vulnerability of poor rural men and women and strengthening institutions and policies that promote their interests and management systems while increasing productivity and sustainability of small holder agriculture. Relevant guiding principles include: (a) focusing on innovations and learning in areas where grants have clear advantages over loans as the financing instrument and, (b) developing a manageable and focused grant´s programme that effectively supports an innovation process.

Grant goal, objectives and outcomes

The overall goal of the MTCP 2 is to contribute to the poverty alleviation in Asia and the Pacific Region through strengthened capacities of the rural poor and their organisations that leads to improved livelihoods and positive socio-economic impacts in the rural development.

Its objective is to strengthen the farmers’ organizations in Asia and the Pacific Region in their capacities of engaging active policy consultations related to the rural smallholders’ interests at national, sub-regional and regional levels, and to provide improved and inclusive services to the rural poor.

Three principal outcomes are proposed with a continued link with the MTCP 1, as following:

a) Institutional and operational capacities of the FOs are effectively strengthened in correspondence with their roles and functions in policy process and services to the members,

b) Rural smallholders’ interests are promoted and their concerns are addressed in related policy process thanks to the strengthened capacities of the FOs, and

c) Strengthened FOs providing effective pro-poor services and actively participating in agriculture and rural development, in complement with IFAD country programmes’ interventions where applicable.

Main activities The proposed programme will comprise 3 technical components, which are: (a) Component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their Networks, (b) Component 2 of FO Participation in Policy Process, and (c) Component 3 of FO Services and Involvement in Agriculture Development Programmes. A Component 4 of Programme Management and Coordination is added to support the implementation of the three technical components.

Component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their Networks comprises 2 sub-components of Institutional Strengthening

ii


and Operational Strengthening.

The sub-component of Institutional Strengthening (1.1) aims at improving the organizational competences required for forming an effective platform of policy dialogue and representation. It is primarily based on the process of an organizational review, whose results lead to a series of actions that will bring the participating FOs collectively up to a level of institutional capacities to effectively fulfil their development mandates. Related interventions are grouped under the activities of: (1.1.1) Organizational review, (1.1.2) Partnership and network capacity, and (1.1.3) Institutional positioning.

The sub-component Operational Strengthening (1.2) tends to ensure the FOs’ endeavour of becoming a sustainable and credible actor in the agribusiness development, it supports the operational strengthening of the participating FOs, mainly by introducing actions and activities in: (1.2.1) Organizational management capacity (1.2.2) Structuring service functions for members, and (1.2.3) Market integration, which will support their members become profitable players in the agribusiness value chains.

Component 2 of FO Participation in Policy Process will group the related activities in two sub-components of Participation in national platform and Participation in regional and sub-regional platforms.

The sub-component of Participation in national platform (2.1) aims at promoting the creation of an enabling environment that allows farmers and their organizations to realise their full potential in influence local and national agriculture-related policies. The national forum will continue to exercise its function of policy dialogue with the strengthened FOs in the countries participating in the MTCP1, while any new country needs to form a functional national platform and build the required synergy among participating FOs before going into the national socio-economic scene. Related interventions are grouped under the activities of: (2.1.1) Policy advocacy, lobbying and representation, (2.1.2) Strategic networking and coordination, and (2.1.3) Research and studies.

The sub-component of Participation in regional and sub-regional platforms (2.2) will leverage the institutional and technical expertise of the FAO to create and mainstream linkages and relationship with relevant regional and inter-governmental organizations and development agencies such as ASEAN, SAARC, SCP, FAO and ADB. Its related interventions are grouped under the activities of: (2.2.1) Policy process with regional and sub-regional policy makers and influencers, (2.2.2) Regional and sub-regional networking and coordination, and (2.2.3) Research and

iii


studies on regional and sub-regional interests.

Component 3 of FO Services and Involvement in Agriculture Development Programmes will promote the service delivery and active participation in agriculture and rural development under the framework of Agriculture development programmes. The activities will be grouped in two interlinked sub-components of Development of service and Collaboration with Agriculture development programmes.

The sub-component of Development of services (3.1) aims at reinforcing the preparedness of the FOs in their future involvement in the service-driven agriculture development, and link their built capacities to the relevant interventions under the IFAD country programmes. Related interventions are grouped under the activities of: (3.1.1) Review on collaboration opportunities, and (3.1.2) FO focus capacity building.

The sub-component of Collaboration with agriculture development programmes will support a number of opportunities for the FO participation in the agriculture development programmes. Budgets will be allocated to support the FOs’ participation at different levels of intervention, and with different roles to play. Main activities are comprised under: (3.2.1) Participation in country or country programme-related policy and strategic actions, (3.2.2) Participation in implementation support and in implementing activities, subcomponents or components in IFAD-assisted projects where applicable, and (3.2.3) Participation in country knowledge tank.

Implementation arrangements (including links to other IFAD interventions in the country, region – if relevant)

the MTCP 2 will build on the operational management set-up of MTCP 1, i.e.: continuing with the two inter-related sub-regional programmes of South Asia and Southeast Asia plus China, and adding a third sub-regional programme of the Pacific in view of the phase 2 extension to the Pacific region. AFA will be the grant recipient ( regional implementing agency) in partnership with LVC and a small Regional Liaison Unit (RLU) will be set up within. In each sub-region, a sub-regional organisation will be appointed to be the implementing agency for the sub-programme. A national implementing agency shall be identified within the platform from amongst participating national FOs to carry out the national-level programme implementation.

Supervision and knowledge management

The overall supervision will be carried out by IFAD. One on-site supervision mission will be carried out every year. The Programme will establish communities of practice that will advocate for change and connect vulnerable communities to knowledge, experience and resources to help them build a better life. Knowledge dissemination will be done through several platforms and fora, especially IFADAsia.

iv


v


Table of Contents

Page

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Map of Global Farmer Cooperation

I BACKGROUND 1

II RATIONALE: RELEVANCE AND LINKAGES 7

A. LINK TO OUTPUTS OF GRANTS POLICY AND CORPORATE PRIORITIES 7B. CONTRIBUTION TO DSWP 7C. RATIONALE FOR PROJECT, FOR GRANT FINANCING AND FOR SELECTED IMPLEMENTING AGENCY 7

III THE PROPOSED PROJECT 8

A. STRATEGY, APPROACH/METHODOLOGY 8B. TARGET GROUP 9C. OVERALL GOAL AND OBJECTIVES 11D. PROJECT OUTCOMES 11E. PROJECT COMPONENTS AND ACTIVITIES 12

i. Component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their Networks 12ii. Component 2 of FO Participation in Policy Process 15iii.Component 3 of FO Involvement in Agriculture development programmes 17iv. Component 4 of Programme Management and Coordination 18

F. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR FO CAPACITY BUILDING 21

IV PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING 22

A. PROJECT COSTS BY COMPONENT/ACTIVITY 22B. PROJECT FINANCING, INCLUDING TABLE SHOWING PROPOSED BY CATEGORY OF EXPENDITURE FOR IFAD AND OTHER FINANCIERS 24

V FINANCIAL GOVERNANCE 28

A. PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES FOR GOODS, SERVICES AND HUMAN RESOURCES 28B. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, INCLUDING ACCOUNTING SPECIFICATIONS 28C. AUDIT ARRANGEMENTS 29

VI SUPERVISION AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT 30

A. SUPERVISION ARRANGEMENTS 30B. LESSON LEARNING AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT 30

ANNEXES

i Log frameii Programme structure overviewiii Outlines of SWOT analysisiv Management structure

vi


ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ADB Asian Development BankASEAN Association of Southeastern Asian NationsAWPB Annual Work Plan and BudgetCOSOP Country Strategic PaperEU European UnionFAO Food and Agriculture OrganizationFO Farmers’ OrganisationIFAD International Fund for Agriculture DevelopmentIA Implementing AgencyIGA Income Generating ActivityMEF Monitoring and Evaluation FrameworkMTCP Medium-Term Cooperation Programme with Farmers’ Organizations in

Asia and the PacificM&E Monitoring & EvaluationNIA National Implementing AgencyNPMU National Programme Management UnitPY Programme YearRIA Regional Implementing AgencyRIMS Result-based Impact Management SystemRLU Regional Liaison UnitSA Subsidiary AgreementSAARC South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation SPC Secretariat for the Pacific CommunitySRPMU Sub-regional Programme Management UnitSO Strategic ObjectiveTA Technical AssistanceWA Withdrawal Application

vii


MAP

GLOBAL FARMER COOPERATION

i

COPROFAM SFOAP

MTCP


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The MTCP 1 was implemented during November 2009 and December 2012 and it achieved in helping raise awareness in promoting inclusion of the smallholder farmers and their organizations in related policy dialogues at different levels and in investing in strengthening the regional, sub-regional and national FO platforms for further consultations with the related policy making bodies and structuring services for the FO members with inclusion of smallholders. A number of lessons learnt were drawn and continued challenges identified at the completion, such as need for more institutionally and operationally strengthened FOs leading to the sound effectiveness of policy dialogues, and ensuring the due efficiency of organisational functions towards the FO farmer members. Meanwhile, closer linkage of the FOs to the IFAD country programmes is expected to further emphasize the FOs’ roles and participation in the rural socio-economic development.

2. The MTCP 2 is proposed by national FOs and their regional networks based on the MTCP 1 experiences and lessons learnt; its design is participatory and implementation will give emphasis on the innovative practices at both the levels of approaches and processes. The MTCP 2 is consistent with IFAD Strategic Framework 2011-2015 and its grant policy, particularly in aligning with the strategic objectives of enabling poor rural women and men and their organisations to manage profitable, sustainable and resilient farm and non-farm enterprises or take advantage of decent work opportunities (SO3), enabling them to influence policies and institutions that affect their livelihoods (SO4), and enabling institutional and policy environments to support agricultural production and the full range of relate non-farm activities (SO5). It responds directly to IFAD’s engagement with farmers’ organizations through the Farmers’ forum.

3. Strategy and approach. The MTCP 2 proposes to build on the experiences and lessons learnt of the MTCP 1 and continue to support the development of the FOs along the strategic thrust of institutional and operational capacity building with an emphasis on services to FO members and knowledge management among the highly diversified sub-regional contexts in the Asia and Pacific region. This will enhance the integration of the poor smallholders, especially the women and the youth through the improved and inclusive services for FO members, therefore the latter would be able to take advantage of the decent work opportunities available for improved livelihoods. With their improved institutional and operational capacities, FOs will act and be recognized as one of the important players in the development scene, representing and promoting the interests of the farmers in the policy processes of national, sub-regional and regional levels. The overall approach of the Programme is directed towards empowering the FOs to achieve sustainable collaboration and dialogue within the network as well as with other partners and policy makers at national, sub-regional and regional levels.

4. The target group of the MTCP 2 can be understood in two tiers: the first one should be the rural women and men, especially those rural smallholders who are undertaking farm and non-farm enterprises; the second one should

1


be the FOs that operate in rural and agricultural development with firm commitment to representing and promoting the farmers’ interests, and with their policy and service inclusiveness for the first tier of the smallholder farmers.

5. Overall goal and objective. The overall goal of the MTCP 2 is to contribute to the poverty alleviation in Asia and the Pacific Region through strengthened capacities of the rural poor and their organisations that leads to improved livelihoods and positive socio-economic impacts in the rural development. Its objective is to strengthen the farmers’ organizations in Asia and the Pacific Region in their capacities of engaging active policy consultations related to the rural smallholders’ interests at national, sub-regional and regional levels, and to provide improved and inclusive services to the rural poor.

6. Outcomes. The MTCP 2 primary outcomes maintain a continued link with the MTCP 1 and anchor on the three specific objectives proposed for the implementation period of phase 2

7. Three principal outcomes are proposed with a continued link with the MTCP 1, as following:a) Institutional and operational capacities of the FOs are effectively

strengthened in correspondence with their roles and functions in policy process and services to the members,

b) Rural smallholders’ interests are promoted and their concerns are addressed in related policy process thanks to the strengthened capacities of the FOs, and

c) Strengthened FOs providing effective pro-poor services and actively participating in agriculture and rural development, in complement with IFAD country programmes’ interventions where applicable.

8. Components, sub-components and activities. The Programme will comprise three technical components, which are:

Component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their Networks, Component 2 of FO Participation in Policy Process, and Component 3 of FO Services and Involvement in Agriculture Development

Programmes.9. A Component 4 of Programme Management and Coordination is added to

support the implementation of the three technical components.10. Component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their Networks comprises 2 sub-

components of Institutional Strengthening and Operational Strengthening.11. The sub-component of Institutional Strengthening (1.1) aims at improving the

organizational competences required for forming an effective platform of policy dialogue and representation. It is primarily based on the process of an organizational review, whose results lead to a series of actions that will bring the participating FOs collectively up to a level of institutional capacities to effectively fulfil their development mandates. Related interventions are grouped under the activities of: (1.1.1) Organizational review, (1.1.2) Partnership and network capacity, and (1.1.3) Institutional positioning.

2


12. The sub-component Operational Strengthening (1.2) tends to ensure the FOs’ endeavour of becoming a sustainable and credible actor in the agribusiness development, it supports the operational strengthening of the participating FOs, mainly by introducing actions and activities in: (1.2.1) Organizational management capacity (1.2.2) Structuring service functions for members, and (1.2.3) Market integration, which will support their members become profitable players in the agribusiness value chains.

13. Component 2 of FO Participation in Policy Process will group the related activities in two sub-components of Participation in national platform and Participation in regional and sub-regional platforms.

14. The sub-component of Participation in national platform (2.1) aims at promoting the creation of an enabling environment that allows farmers and their organizations to realise their full potential in influence local and national agriculture-related policies. The national forum will continue to exercise its function of policy dialogue with the strengthened FOs in the countries participating in the MTCP1, while any new country needs to form a functional national platform and build the required synergy among participating FOs before going into the national socio-economic scene. Related interventions are grouped under the activities of: (2.1.1) Policy advocacy, lobbying and representation, (2.1.2) Strategic networking and coordination, and (2.1.3) Research and studies.

15. The sub-component of Participation in regional and sub-regional platforms (2.2) will leverage the institutional and technical expertise of the existing platforms put in place by the leading development agencies to create and mainstream linkages and relationship with relevant regional and inter-governmental organizations and development agencies such as ASEAN, SAARC, SCP, FAO and ADB. Its related interventions are grouped under the activities of: (2.2.1) Policy process with regional and sub-regional policy makers and influencers, (2.2.2) Regional and sub-regional networking and coordination, and (2.2.3) Research and studies on regional and sub-regional interests.

16. Component 3 of FO Services and Involvement in Agriculture Development Programme will promote the service delivery and active participation in agriculture and rural development under the framework of IFAD country programmes. The activities will be grouped in two interlinked sub-components of Development of service and Collaboration with IFAD country programmes.

17. The sub-component of Development of services (3.1) aims at reinforcing the preparedness of the FOs in their future involvement in the Agriculture development programmes. Related interventions are grouped under the activities of: (3.1.1) Review on collaboration opportunities, and (3.1.2) FO focus capacity building.

18. The sub-component of Collaboration with agriculture development programmes will support a number of opportunities for the FO participation in the IFAD country programmes. Budgets will be allocated to support the FOs’ participation at different levels of intervention, and with different roles to play. Main activities are comprised under: (3.2.1) Participation in country or country programme-related policy and strategic actions, (3.2.2) Participation in implementation support and in implementing activities, subcomponents or components in IFAD-assisted projects where applicable, and (3.2.3) Participation in country knowledge tank.

3


19. The Management and Coordination of the MTCP 2 will build on the operational management set-up of MTCP 1, i.e.: continuing with the two inter-related sub-regional programmes of South Asia and Southeast Asia plus China, and adding a third sub-regional programme of the Pacific in view of the phase 2 extension to the Pacific region. The programme operational management will be delegated to the sub-regional implementers, while a small liaison unit at regional level will be embedded in a regional FO to ensure the overall coordination.

20. Further to call of interest early 2013, a Selection Committee was constituted in IFAD in order to assess the strengths and weaknesses of each received application, and it recommended the selection of AFA as the grant recipient (therefore the regional implementing agency) in partnership with LVC. For the 3 sub-regions: PIFON, AFA/LVC and SEWA/ANFPA as sub-grantees therefore sub-regional implementing agencies respectively for the Pacific, the Southeast Asia and South Asia.

21. Implementing Agencies. A qualified and competitive regional FO (AFA) was selected through a call for interest (February 2013) as grant recipient for the regional implementing agency and a small Regional Liaison Unit (RLU) will be set up. In each sub-region, a sub-regional FO will be appointed to be the implementing agency for the sub-programme under the same selection process. At national level, the national farmer organisations platform (or coalition) will constitute the main implementing body. For fiduciary purpose, a national implementing agency shall be identified within the platform from amongst participating national FOs to carry out the national-level programme implementation. All overhead costs of the programme will be kept at one single digit percentage of the overall budget.

22. M&E and knowledge management. The MTCP 2 will introduce the system of M&E and knowledge management applied in most of the IFAD-assisted projects, taking into consideration the MTCP 2 particularities for due adaptations. The implementing agencies at regional, sub-regional and national levels will establish an effective and efficient Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (MEF) and it will be available online. Participating FOs will adapt a reporting format that is linked to the M&E system. The logical framework will form the basis for the overall system for measuring the programme performance based on expected outputs, outcomes and impacts. The agreed measures of output/outcome/impact form the framework for reporting by implementing agencies and participating FOs as well as for the Programme’s progress reporting to the steering committees and IFAD.

23. Key elements of the Programme’s knowledge management strategy include: i) establishment of a M&E framework to provide information and analysis on progress achieved against logframe and AWPBs; ii) routine conduct of planning and review meetings and monitoring & evaluation (“lessons-learned”) workshops at various levels; iii) participatory monitoring and evaluation by FOs and exposure to the IFAD country programmes’ M&E and knowledge management; iv) periodic conduct of workshop to consolidate “lessons learnt” and involving FOs and IAs staffs at all levels. Besides, the sub-regional and national implementing agencies and the participating FOs will be responsible for sharing experiences and lessons learnt and to promote the approach publicly with related stakeholders and interest groups. The MTCP 2 will leverage the available online tools such as the FOs’

4


individual website and facebook for the dissemination of the success stories and obtained results.

24. Costs. The total programme base cost is estimated for a total of USD 14, 178,000. About 21% for the component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their Network, 28% for the component 2 of FO Participation in Policy Process, 37% for the component 3 of FO Involvement in Agriculture development programme, and 13% for the component 4 of Programme Management and Coordination. A total of USD 5.7 million (41%) is allocated to the 10 participating countries of MTCP 1 plus the Pacific sub-region on the basis of flat base rate. At this flat allocation, the Southeast Asia plus China sub-region shares 64%, South Asia sub-region 27%, and the Pacific sub-region 9%. The final allocation distribution will be adjusted by a number of performance-based packages that will be attributed to the participating countries starting from PY 2, based on their performance and progress of implementation. Optimally, the sub-regional allocations should be spread as 55% for Southeast Asia plus China, 30% for South Asia, and 15% for the Pacific. A budget of USD 1.5 million (11%) is projected to expand the MTCP 2 to three new member countries, assuming the financing in place. 14% of the total financing is earmarked for technical assistance managed by FAO and AgriCord.

25. Note that the amount of USD 14 million is a provisional estimate of base cost; total including contingencies should amount to an approximate total of USD15 million.

26. Financing. Programme costs will be co-financed by an IFAD APR grant of 1.5 million and a IFAD PTA grant of 0.5 million (14% of total costs). The EU will co-finance by several grants totalling USD 5 million (35%). Supplementary grant financiers (Switzerland US$ 3 million, Japan US$ 1 million, Korea US$ 0.5 million, Australia US$ 1 million, New Zealand US$ 1 million, and Agri-agencies US$ 0.678 million) to be confirmed up to US$ 7,178,000 (51%). While the contribution of participating FOs will be highly valued, at this stage it is not yet included in the total programme financing. It will be mainly in kind and remain in the categories of salaries and office support, for an approximate value of USD 500,000.

27. Fund flow. Grant funds will be forwarded from IFAD to the regional implementing agency upon acceptance of the AWPBs from the sub-regions. This will be done on an annual basis in accordance with the approved AWPBs. The Regional implementing agency will report to IFAD on the consolidated regional progress and disaggregated in sub-regions in both financial and physical terms on a semi-annual basis; Similarly, Sub-regional implementing agencies will report on the financial and physical progress made semi-annually to the regional implementing agency, and the national implementing agencies on a quarterly basis to the Sub-regional implementing agencies.

28. Supervision will be carried out directly by IFAD on an annual basis. IFAD’s direct supervision will mainly relate to the programme financial management, its physical and financial progress, implementation management’s efficiency and implementing agencies’ performance at all levels.

29. A Progress review will be conducted by IFAD at PY 2, normally in conjunction with the annual direct supervision. It will pay special attention to the performance of designed components and intended approaches in

5


relationship with the targeting efficiency and in correlation with the movements towards expected outcomes and impacts. Adjustments can be proposed where necessary, which should be reflected through the adjustment of logical framework and AWPBs.

30. Implementation support will be provided by IFAD as follow-ups of its direct supervision and progress review, and as response to possible supports required by the programme management. Support will be conducted on a demand-driven basis and in accordance with needs identified.

6


MEDIUM TERM COOPERATION PROGRAMME WITH FARMERS’ ORGANISATIONS

IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC, PHASE II (MTCP 2)

PROGRAMME DESIGN REPORT

I BACKGROUND1. The Permanent Farmers’ Forum at IFAD is a bottom-up process of consultation and dialogue between organisations of small farmers and rural producers, their governments, and IFAD. Its goal is to enhance the impact of rural development and poverty reduction programmes on their membership through their economic and social empowerment. The Forum was launched in 2005 following broad consultations between stakeholders and IFAD. Since, it holds global consultations with member states of IFAD in Rome, Italy, once every two years in conjunction with the annual IFAD Governing Council sessions. 2. Further to the consultations conducted with a number of leading farmers’ organizations2 (FOs) in the region during the period of 2005 - 2006, the Medium-Term Cooperation Programme with Farmers’ Organizations in Asia and the Pacific (MTCP 1) was designed in 2006. The goal of the MTCP is to improve the livelihoods of rural poor producers, and its purpose is to enable the small farmers’ organisations in the Asia and Pacific region and their networks to influence policies affecting their members. The specific objectives are: (a) to strengthen networks of FOs; (b) to strengthen the involvement of FOs in policy processes; and (c) to promote the involvement of FOs in IFAD country programmes. The programme became effective on 23 November 2009 and was completed on 31 December 2012. The total programme cost was USD 1.953 million, covering ten countries in the region, namely: (a) India, Nepal, and Sri Lanka in South Asia; and (b) Cambodia, Lao PDR, Indonesia, Myanmar, Philippines, and Vietnam in Southeast Asia plus China. It was co-financed by a USD 1.42 Million grant (73%) from IFAD, sub-divided into: (a) a grant to the FAO for the amount of USD 1,083,000 for the MTCP’s region wide activities plus those specific to the Southeast Asia plus China sub-programme; and (b) a grant of USD 337,000 to the Self Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) of India for the South Asia sub-programme. The balance is co-financed by the FOs up to the tune of US$94,000 (5%), and by the ASEAN and SAARC in kind for a total of about USD 60,000 (3 per cent). A financing gap of USD 379,000 remains till the end, forcing some downsizing of the Programme activities.3. After three years of operations, the MTCP’s implementation is considered moderately satisfactory, with mixed results and dynamics amid the different areas of intervention, and in different countries. Overall, the MTCP helped raise awareness in promoting inclusion of the smallholder farmers and their organizations in related policy dialogues at different levels; it invested in strengthening the regional, sub-regional and national FO platforms for further consultations with the related policy making bodies and structuring services for 2 Farmers’ organizations are membership-based organizations of smallholders, family farmers and rural producers–including pastoralists, artisanal fishers, landless people and indigenous people – that are structured beyond the grassroots or community levels, at local, national, regional and global levels.

7


the FO members with inclusion of smallholders. However, a number of lessons learnt were drawn and continued challenges identified at the completion, such as need for more institutionally and operationally strengthened FOs leading to the sound effectiveness of policy dialogues, and ensuring the due efficiency of organisational functions towards the FO farmer members. Meanwhile, closer linkage of the FOs to the IFAD country programmes is expected to further emphasize the FOs’ roles and participation in the rural socio-economic development. It is in this context that a MTCP phase 2 (MTCP 2) is proposed by national FOs and their regional networks and its design is built on the phase-1 experiences and lessons learnt, while innovations will be searched at both the levels of approaches and processes. The design was organized through a bottom-up process, with FOs consulted at sub-regional level to produce a sub-regional proposal and the consolidated document reviewed by the MTCP regional steering committee.

II RATIONALE: RELEVANCE AND LINKAGES

a. Link to outputs of Grants Policy and corporate priorities

4. The MTCP 2 is consistent with IFAD Strategic Framework 2011-2015 and it particularly contributes to the strategic objectives of enabling poor rural women and men and their organisations to manage profitable, sustainable and resilient farm and non-farm enterprises or take advantage of decent work opportunities (SO3), enabling them to influence policies and institutions that affect their livelihoods (SO4), and enabling institutional and policy environments to support agricultural production and the full range of relate non-farm activities (SO5). 5. The MTCP 2 is aligned with IFAD grant policy, particularly with regard to its strategic area of building pro-poor capacities of partner institutions, including community-based organizations and NGOs. It will contribute to the achievement of the expected outputs of the revised grant policy, namely: i) innovative activities promoted and innovative technologies and approaches developed in support of IFAD’s target group, ii) awareness, advocacy and policy dialogue on issues of importance to poor rural people, iii) capacity of partner institutions strengthened to deliver a range of services in support of poor rural people, and iv) lesson learning, knowledge management and dissemination of information on issues related to rural poverty reduction promoted among stakeholders within and across regions. It will therefore enable the farmers’ organizations to gain the organizational and institutional capacity they need to participate effectively in the policy area on behalf of their memberships. It responds directly to IFAD’s engagement with farmers’ organizations through the Farmers’ forum.

b. Contribution to DSWP

6. In accordance with directives for implementing IFAD´s Grant policy and strategy, the APR Division has prepared a 2011 Divisional Grant Strategy, which aims at supporting innovations that reduce risk and vulnerability of poor rural men and women and strengthening institutions and policies that promote their interests and management systems while increasing productivity and sustainability of smallholder agriculture. Relevant guiding principles include: (a) focusing on innovations and learning in areas where grants have clear advantages over loans as the financing instrument and, (b) developing a

8


manageable and focused grant´s programme that effectively supports an innovation process. The MTCP 2 gives emphasis on promoting innovative practices in the region and building a strong knowledge management system to encourage experience sharing and learning between the sub-regions and among the countries in the region.

c. Rationale for programme, for grant financing and for selected implementing agency

7. FOs in Asia and the Pacific region are increasingly taking active part in the rural economic development, tackling the challenges of reducing rural poverty, improving food security, securing development opportunities for the smallholders, and developing the agribusiness value chains. Mostly as membership-driven organizations, the FOs aim to represent the interests of a broad range of producers of different socio-economic categories, making efforts of voicing out their views and expectations in the process of decision making related to their members’ concerns and interests, and delivering a range of member services from training, inputs, organized production and marketing, to value chain development. However, due to the development context that varies from one country to another, the FOs’ influential effectiveness in policy consultations is mostly at an early stage of development; institutional and operational strengthening is required to help act effectively and be recognized as one of the primary actors in the national, sub-regional and regional socio-economic development. In the meantime, more inclusive member-centred services need to be strengthened in response to the emerging challenges of farming under uncertainty, particularly in safeguarding the smallholders’ equitable access to opportunities and mainstreaming the disadvantaged farmer groups into the market economy in the context of globalisation and climate change.8. MTCP 1 invested in strengthening the regional, sub-regional and national FO platforms and initiated the building of synergy with a number of the IFAD country programmes. IFAD has been working with the FOs in its country programmes in the region, mostly through the loan financing and in complement with the recipient countries’ overall strategies in poverty alleviation and in agricultural development. Involvement of FOs in different IFAD country programmes tends to show different states of depth, due to the differences in the country programmes’ nature and management, various dynamics of FO development among recipient countries and the different priorities identified in the COSOPs. A voluntary action by IFAD towards more involvement of FOs in COSOP design, project design and supervision and sub-contracting of certain activities will definitely strengthen these links in MTCP2. A flexible grant financing of MTCP 2 would also contribute to rally a regional institutional dynamics of the FOs and foster innovative approaches. This will help strengthen the FOs’ service functions in both policy consultations and support to the farmer members, leading to more active roles of the FOs in their participation in the IFAD country programmes.9. The MTCP2 will continue to support the development of organizations of small farmers and food producers in the phase-1 participating countries. Potentially, the programme support would be extended to FOs in a selected number of new countries, currently under consideration such as Bangladesh, Thailand, East Timor, and the Pacific sub-region. A number of them will be selected to act as implementing agencies in their country in accordance with the required criteria under the umbrella of sub-regional federations. Technical

9


support will be provided to the implementing FOs as part of the capacity building to the FOs by related partners such as agri-agencies, UN agencies, etc.

III THE PROPOSED PROGRAMME

a. Strategy, Approach/Methodology

10. Strategy. The MTCP 2 proposes to build on the experiences and lessons learnt of the MTCP 1 and continue to support the development of the FOs along the strategic thrust of institutional and operational capacity building with an emphasis on services to FO members and knowledge management among the highly diversified sub-regional contexts in the Asia and Pacific region. This will enhance the integration of the poor smallholders, especially the women and the youth through the improved and inclusive services for FO members, therefore the latter would be able to take advantage of the decent work opportunities available for improved livelihoods. With their improved institutional and operational capacities, FOs will act and be recognized as one of the important players in the development scene, representing and safeguarding the interests of the farmers in the policy processes of national, sub-regional and regional levels.11. The MTCP-2 will shift from forming the national and regional platforms and claiming their recognition, to building in more capacities and competences for both policy dialogues and services for members, and for actions as a key player in the regional, sub-regional and national socio-economic scenes.12. The vision of the new phase is embedded in the strategy, i.e.: FOs contribute to the improved livelihoods of the farmers, especially the smallholders and other disadvantaged groups through strengthened institutional and operational capacities and inclusive member services in the highly diversified development context of the region. FOs will act and be recognized as one of the important players in the development scene, representing and safeguarding the interests of the farmers in the policy processes of national, sub-regional and regional levels.

13. The exit strategy or the sustainability of the MTCP-2 is ensured by the increased ownership of the FO forum or platforms strengthened at different levels, and their effectiveness in the policy consultations and in member services responding to the challenging and fast-changing needs. The inter-linkage of the three technical components, from strengthened capacities, effective engagement in policy processes to improved services to members, underlines the pursuing towards the expected sustainability.14. The Programme will be implemented over a period of five years (2013-2017) on two phases. During the first three years of phase 1, emphasis will be given to further consolidate the capacity building of the participating FOs, and expand to a limited number of selected countries where the development of FOs presents a growth potential that is achievable during the phase-2 period. During the phase 2 of 4th and 5th years, attention will be given to the effectiveness of the FOs’ roles and functions in policy consultations, interest representation and lobbying, which will be strongly supported and complemented by their improved services centred on members’ needs, and reflected by the FOs’ increasing participation in the rural and agricultural development under the framework of

10


IFAD country programmes in the region. By the end of the Programme, the participating FOs should gain satisfactory institutional strength to form an efficient platform for policy process and networking at national, sub-regional and regional levels, recognition of their ownership and relevance should lead to sound representation, and expanded and inclusive membership.15. The overall approach of the Programme is directed towards empowering the FOs to achieve sustainable collaboration and dialogue within the network as well as with other partners and policy makers at national, sub-regional and regional levels. The FOs networking mechanism (the counterparts of the Global Farmers' Forum at national, sub-regional and regional levels) will be strengthened to manage and maintain the networking activities within and after the term of the Programme. The FOs ownership of the networking process and their recognition of its relevance have to be further strengthened during the implementation period to ensure the post-programme sustainability.16. MTCP 2 continues to apply the strong participatory approach, which will be ensured by involving the FOs from the participating countries to help identify the main issues and interests of the smallholder members, and integrate them in the design of the programme activities. Mechanisms and institutional arrangements will be installed at all levels to actualize the programmatic and effective participation of the FOs that need to be inclusive with the disadvantaged and vulnerable groups. A special importance will be given to the inclusion and conveying of women and young farmers that are mostly likely smallholders as well.

b. Target group

17. The target group of the MTCP 2 can be understood in two tiers: the first one should be the rural women and men, especially those rural smallholders who are undertaking farm and non-farm enterprises; the second one should be the FOs that operate in rural and agricultural development with firm commitment to representing and promoting the farmers’ interests, and with their policy and service inclusiveness for the first tier of the smallholder farmers. 18. The prime beneficiaries of the Programme should be the smallholder farmers that are either already members of the participating or candidate FOs, or yet to be actively recruited under the framework of the FO inclusive membership. Special attention will be given to the vulnerable poor, women and the youth, who should represent more than 45% of the participating FO’s membership at the programme completion. The smallholders headed by women or youth should be given priority during the recruitment of new FO members. The intention is to arrive at 80% of the new members to originate from the women and youth.19. All the FOs and countries involved in the MTCP 1 will continue to participate in the MTCP 2, which will likely be extended in MTCP-1 countries to include more FOs based on the following characteristics:

a) Legally established for at least two years,b) Based in the MTCP-covered countries,c) Accept due inclusiveness principles and values,d) Have established or initiated some policy-nature consultations with the

national policy makers or influencers,

11


e) Showed signs of improving the organisational relevance to smallholders and credibility to the agribusiness and market access,

f) Strong leadership in applying quality standard of organized or cooperative farming, processing, and marketing,

g) Commitment to systematically recruit the poor smallholder farmers, especially the women and the youth as members and applying tailor-made technical coaching for their inclusion,

h) Support of national policy makers or influencers.20. FOs participating in MTCP 1 will continue to align themselves with the above-mentioned criteria with due consistency.21. At least 150 FOs representing 20 million farmer members will benefit from the MTCP-2 support in the sub-regions of Southeast Asia, South Asia and the Pacific, 22. In order to promote performance-based implementation, countries that have successfully demonstrated sound performance and maturity in implementing MTCP-1 such as Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines and Nepal will constitute the core group of strategic countries during MTCP-2; incentive resources should be allocated to this core group in order to help draw the best experiences for the purpose of replication and up-scaling in the countries in question and elsewhere.23. The activities of the Programme will be implemented in the Asian and the Pacific region, focusing on selected countries in the Southeast (plus China), South Asia sub regions, and expanding to the Pacific region in countries where FO development presents a growth potential within the programme support timeframe.24. In the perspective of expanding the MTCP 2 to a limited number of selected countries, candidate countries should present the following characteristics:

a) FO sustainable development is on the strategic agenda of the country and related support institutions show positive signs of encouragement, and at least being open to its awareness raising,

b) Potential of FO development growth mainly reflected by increasing participation of FOs in agribusiness and market access,

c) Signs of collective dynamics among FOs in the country,d) Expression of interests by the consortium of FOs, and their agreement

on working on policy instead of politics, ande) IFAD country programme supportive for including the country in MTCP

2. (see below list).

List of proposed MTCP 2 countries:South Asia: MTCP1 and 2: Nepal, Sri Lanka, India,

MTCP2: Bangladesh (Pakistan & Afghanistan will be considered at a later stage).

South-East Asia:MTCP1 and 2: Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Philippines, Philippines

MTCP2: Thailand (Malaysia will be considered at a later stage).

Pacific:

12


MTCP2 : Fiji, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Vanuatu , Cook Islands (Papua New Guinea, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue and Tuvalu will be considered at a later stage).

25. In view of the well-recognized dynamics of FO development in countries such as Japan, Korea, Malaysia and Thailand, and the first signs of their leading FOs’ interests in participating and supporting in the MTCP 2, there should be consideration for creating a advisory category of membership, which should lead to leverage their FO development experiences among other resources to promote and achieve the MTCP 2. A twinning cooperation can be considered in order to help adapt and adopt the god practices of FO development in the leading countries in the Region.

c. Overall Goal and Objectives

26. The overall goal of the MTCP 2 is to contribute to the poverty alleviation in Asia and the Pacific Region through strengthened capacities of the rural poor and their organisations that leads to improved livelihoods and positive socio-economic impacts in the rural development.27. The objective of the Programme is to strengthen the farmers’ organizations in Asia and the Pacific Region in their capacities of engaging active policy consultations related to the rural smallholders’ interests at national, sub-regional and regional levels, and to provide improved and inclusive services to the rural poor. The specific objectives are:

a) To develop FOs’ networking between themselves and with others at the national, regional and global levels;

b) To facilitate and improve dialogue between FOs, national level policy making bodies and the sub-regional inter-governmental organisations and development agencies such as ASEAN, SAARC, SCP and ADB; and

c) To promote the active participation of FOs in the IFAD country programmes in the region.

d. Programme Outcomes

28. The MTCP 2 primary outcomes maintain a continued link with the MTCP 1 and anchor on the three specific objectives proposed for the implementation period of phase 2, which should go beyond the forming of FO platform and establishing consensus among FOs and participating countries, but focusing on demonstrating improved competences and strengths on policy dialogue process, and recognized member-centred services embedded in the organization. Implementation successes should be linked to policy consultations and strategic decision making where applicable; sustainability-driven member services should be developed and adapted to complement with the IFAD country programmes. Interventions under MTCP 2 should therefore undertake a shift from building the form of FO platform as effectively under the MTCP 1, to building member-driven institutional and operational capacities and services that lead to enhance the healthy development of FOs in the country, and in the region as a whole. This will help consolidate the FO platforms established under MTCP 1.29. Three principal outcomes are therefore proposed, as following:

13


d) Institutional and operational capacities of the FOs are effectively strengthened in correspondence with their roles and functions in policy process and services to the members,

e) Rural smallholders’ interests are promoted and their concerns are addressed in related policy process thanks to the strengthened capacities of the FOs, and

f) Strengthened FOs providing effective pro-poor services and actively participating in agriculture and rural development, in complement with Agriculture development programmes’ interventions where applicable.

e. Programme Components and Activities

30. The Programme will comprise three technical components, which are:a) Component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their Networks,b) Component 2 of FO Participation in Policy Process, andc) Component 3 of FO Services and Involvement in Agriculture

Development Programmes.31. A Component 4 of Programme Management and Coordination is added to support the implementation of the three technical components.

i. Component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their Networks

32. Under this component the activities will be grouped in two sub-components, which are interlinked. Following are the outlined descriptions of the two sub-components and their related activities.33. Sub-component 1.1: Institutional Strengthening. In view of the organizational competences required for forming an effective platform of policy dialogue and representation, the Programme will support the institutional capacity building of the participating FOs in the selected countries. The sub-component is primarily based on the process of an organizational review, whose results lead to a series of actions that will bring the participating FOs collectively up to a level of institutional capacities to effectively fulfil their development mandates. Main activities are as follows:34. Activity 1.1.1: Organizational review. Based on MTCP1 FO mapping, the national FO forum will organize and conduct the review on by-law of the participating national and sector FOs, particularly their state of membership of the smallholder farmers disaggregated to show the weighs of women and young members. In the event of household-driven membership, the poor, women-led and young-farmer-led households will apply. The participating FOs should therefore revisit their state of membership with differentiations in socio-economic wealth, gender and age range, including results attained, activities patterns, participation in the FO production and marketing, membership and service fees, and involvement in management. Member meetings should be also held in this regard at least among representative FOs, and the FO by-law should be revised to reflect the inclusion of the poor, the women and the young farmers as one of the organizational mandates. Meanwhile, principles of sound governance should be revisited and incorporated, including values such as democracy, transparency and social equity.

14


35. Regarding the regional or sub-regional FOs involved, the review will focus on the mission statement and the scope of business related to the interests of the smallholder farmers in the next five years, with similar differentiation in addressing the particular needs of women and young smallholders.36. A strategic plan should be drafted on the subject of mainstreaming the poor, the women and the young smallholders for the following five years. As result, the FOs should reiterate their commitments of targeting the economically active smallholders, which will become part of their primary corporate social responsibility (CSR). Such exercise should be repeated every two years to reflect the new needs and challenges.37. Activity 1.1.2: Partnership and networking capacity. In conjunction with the organizational review or as part of the same exercise, the FOs will revisit their partnership with the stakeholders and other FOs, assessing the networking capacity in FO development as a whole, and at different levels, but also as their effectiveness and efficiency in responding to the needs of the existing and future members. Therefore their roles, functions and capacities in a number of key areas should be revisited, such as in policy dialogue, advocacy actions, lobbying, networking, research and studies. Results should help identify the key areas of capacity building in this regard, leading to a number of following up actions or support in order to build the due partnership and effective networking competence. In another word, the FOs need to be institutionally prepared to participate in different platforms under the FO forum or beyond this networking framework, at the levels required for achieving the expected objectives. This review should be renewed every two years as part of the continued institutional development.38. FO development in the region is experiencing a fast changing environment and the new challenges emerge in different sectors where FOs intervene, and sometimes requiring immediate responses that are usually beyond the planned activities of the programme. The MTCP 2 acknowledges the need of immediate response instrument and it will sensibilize its partners in the region such as ASEAN, SAAR, ADB and other development agencies to create an instrument of FO solidarity fund. The MTCP 2 could contribute along with the other development agencies to a start-up seed capital, which needs to be matched by the FOs themselves. The governance and operational management of such fund could be part of the TA from one of the potential donor agencies.39. Propose creation seed capital fund at ASEAN and SAARC co-funded by MTCP2. (like it was done in Latin America/Mercosur 6 years ago). This fund would be co-managed by FOS and cofinance by European commission.40. Activity 1.1.3: Institutional positioning. As a continued process of the profiling under MTCP 1, the FOs will include an exercise of SWOT analysis to help assess their current performance in delivering the organizational mandates. In combination with the results of institutional review in the other activities under the same sub-component, the exercise should segment the business scope in accordance with the needs of the present and future membership, identify the core segment and primary areas of intervention, and determine the institutional positioning in both the development and commercial markets. 41. As key steps, the FOs’ primary alliance and competition should be identified, their positioning analysed and understood, FOs’ own positioning clarified or/and compared with the partners and competitors, positioning concept renewed or developed with differentiation and value added. A positioning statement should be created with key messages and member-value propositions.

15


42. The exercise should aim at enhancing the institutional belongingness and meaningfulness, closing the gap between the institutional positioning and the perception by stakeholders and members. Results of institutional positioning will be referred to guide the interventions of operational strengthening under the sub-component 1.2.43. An outline of SWOT analysis is provided as annex iii. 44. Sub-component 1.2: Operational Strengthening. In order to ensure the FOs’ endeavour of becoming a sustainable and credible actor in the agribusiness development, this sub-component will support the operational strengthening of the participating FOs, mainly by building their organizational management capacity, structuring their services to be more responsive to the members’ needs, and strengthening their competitiveness to support their members become profitable players in the agribusiness value chains. Main activities are as follows:45. Activity 1.2.1: Organizational management capacity. A brief internal review will be undertaken among participating FOs regarding their management structure; the organizational governance and economic efficiency will be assessed to help envision the senior leadership. If necessary, national consultants should be hired to conduct the review and facilitate the internal consultation. As soon as areas of improvement are identified, an international study tour should be organized preferably in the region for a limited number of FO senior managers in order to expose them to the best practices that are adaptable. The exposure should take place in relevant countries of similar challenges, either present or past, with FOs that have successfully undergone the process of management capacity optimization.46. Related training should be organized both for FO managers and professional staffs to help integrate the managerial and operational changes, especially in the key areas of governance, inter-departmental coordination, financial control, accounting, M&E and communication, and management of services related to agri-business.47. This support should be provided during the first three years of the implementation on a continued basis in order to lift up the capacities of the FOs to the level of sound management performance.48. Activity 1.2.2: Structuring service functions for members. Internal consultations will be conducted among the FOs belonging to the same national platform in order to review the current state of function structure and service effectiveness for the members, in accordance with the types of FOs they belong to. Tailor-made and differentiated services for integration or mainstreaming of the vulnerable groups should be part of the structured services functions and they should be linked with the organizational targeting strategy in inclusiveness of the poor, women and young smallholders. The regional and sub-regional FOs located in the same countries will be included and they may take the lead of facilitating the process due to their likely better capacities in cross-organizational consultations. Consultations will focus on functions of interest representation and safeguard, farmer capacity building, production and marketing information dissemination, quality input supply, organized production and marketing, quality standardization and certification, market linkage, and training and development.49. External technical support would be recruited if necessary, in addition to the designated technical assistance, especially in the areas of technical functions related to agribusiness development.

16


50. This activity should only be implemented once the organizational management capacity has been revisited and strengthened. The exercise should be renewed at least once during the programme term, but focusing more on services that bringing up the members to become profitable suppliers of the agribusiness sector.51. Activity 1.2.3: Market integration. This activity can be considered as part of the service functions for members. It is however addressed separately as an intervention of special attention, given its importance in providing the decent work opportunities to the member farmers, especially in mainstreaming the disadvantaged groups such as the poor, women and the youth into the value chains.52. At present the FOs are mostly set up on the basis of monotype product or activity, product specialization is crucial in achieve sound performance in production and then market linkage. The FOs should give emphasis on bringing advanced techniques and know-how to improve members’ skills. Techniques and methods of high efficiency should be acquired through training, exposure, technical transfer. Selection of such new techniques and know-how needs to be realistic; corresponding to the identified needs of members with quick leverage effect.53. The FOs should seek to move towards production diversification in order to reduce the co-variant risk of collectively handling a same product. Diversified IGAs based on local consumption and with sound external market potentials should be experimented on a systematic manner. Introduction of new techniques and know-how for diversified IGAs should follow the similar process of specialization.54. The FOs will pay special attention to increasing the profit margin of member households along the value chain, by applying techniques and methods of quality production and processing at farm level. This should be done mainly through efforts of standardization and certification.55. The FOs will work with related quality control agencies and leading buyers and wholesalers to introduce certified farming. Agenda should be set with those agencies and among members regarding future certification of safe products or organic products where applicable.56. Periodically, the FOs will call in qualified consultants and experts that should be locally recruited to undertake market studies on members’ existing and prospective IGAs. Market trends, assessment of major competitors and their strategies should be reviewed, efficiency of the channels of distribution revisited and profiles of target customers defined to help establish a strategic marketing plan for the FOs. Based on the results of such marketing plan, which should be revised on an annual basis, the FOs will try to improve the market access for their members, establish value chain linkage with the other actors, likely the businesses engaged in product transformation, wholesale and retail at the upstream of value chain.57. The FOs should build on their standard quality production and processing at farm level, trying to reach some formal or informal arrangements with networks of distribution or retail. Domestic corporate buyers should be targeted as they seek for reliable production bases. Contract farming should be pursued where it is applicable.58. Once the FOs are able to ensure a steady supply of quality products through their organized or cooperative farming by the members, they should

17


explore the opportunity of diversifying the market destinations, regularly attending sector trade fairs to promote the members’ products. The FOs may need to establish business alliance with other FOs, private or state-owned enterprises, consulting firms or government agencies to promote their products and services in existing and new business territories.59. External technical assistance will be necessary for introducing and coaching such exercise. Related TA will be mandated to qualified service providers and more details will be described in the section of Technical Assistance for FO Capacity Building.

ii. Component 2 of FO Participation in Policy Process

60. Under this component the activities will be grouped in two sub-components, which are mutually supported. Following are the outlined descriptions of the two sub-components and their related activities.61. Sub-component 2.1: Participation in national platform. This sub-component aims at promoting the creation of an enabling environment that allows farmers and their organizations to realise their full potential in influence local and national agriculture-related policies. The national forum will continue to exercise its function of policy dialogue with the strengthened FOs in the countries participating in the MTCP1, while any new country needs to form a functional national platform and build the required synergy among participating FOs before going into the national socio-economic scene. 62. Activity 2.1.1: Policy, advocacy, lobbying and representation.

The national forum (or FO coalition) will maintain and renew a two-year agenda with clear objectives of policy positions and interests safeguarding; events of participation and representation should be updated at the beginning of each year. Training in lobbying and advocacy will be provided to FO leaders in order to render more substantial and substantive their participation in advocacy meetings with relevant stakeholders. Results of participation and representation will be presented and shared with the FO community and the related stakeholders in the country, and if relevant at sub-regional and regional levels.63. Meanwhile, campaigns of policy awareness raising will be periodically conducted to reach the related policy makers and influencers. Means of media will be identified based on the cost-effectiveness and audience efficiency; FOs’ bulletins and briefs should include a section on policy analysis and advice, while production and broadcasting of radio or TV programmes will be considered. Related actions and results should be closely linked to the Knowledge Management and communication activities of MTCP2 (component 4).64. Activity 2.1.2: Strategic networking and coordination. The national forum will leverage the collective exercise of institutional positioning and identify the principal actors, supporters and influencers on the national policy process related to agriculture and FO development. It will engage in dialogues and networking with them in order to achieve acceptance and recognition in the national mechanisms of policy dialogue therefore the FO network’s participation will be mainstreamed and become more effective.65. While ways of building a strategic network and coordination mechanism can vary, the expected result should be to present or defend the farmers’ policy interests on dialogue platforms of well recognized national mainstream, and avoid presenting issues and proposing solutions in a stand-alone position.

18


66. Activity 2.1.3: Research and studies. Research needs will be identified and the priority themes should not exceed more than two each year. It is not necessary that all the thematic studies be undertaken and financed by the Programme and under the national forum itself; joint forces should be made with the other stakeholders. In practical terms, the national forum may use its limited budget to help identify the priority issues and hand them over to the other stakeholders such as academic and research institutions, or government R&D departments for research and studies. Alternatively, the national forum can participate in some national research and studies that are convergent with the well-identified interests. In any case, related government agencies will be involved and consulted along the process of research and studies in order to ensure the policy compatibility under the legal and regulatory framework in place.67. Sub-component 2.2: Participation in regional and sub-regional platforms. Participation of the FOs in regional and sub-regional platforms will leverage the institutional and technical expertise of the existing platforms put in place by the leading development agencies to create and mainstream linkages and relationship with relevant regional and inter-governmental organizations and development agencies such as ASEAN, SAARC, SCP, FAO and ADB.68. Activity 2.2.1: Policy process with regional and sub-regional policy makers and influencers. The sub-regional and regional policy consultations will first try to link the related activities with needs identified at the national levels, and build a synergy and cross-country dynamics on the identified issues and concerns. The process will go along with the major existing events and activities led by the leading development agencies in the relevant fields, then seek for other opportunities either through participation or through organization of relevant events with the stakeholders at related levels.69. In addition, the MTCP2 will work to bring some substantial contributions to the Global Farmers Forum that takes place every two years in Rome. It will focus on achieving a successfully proven process of strategic planning for inclusive targeting and good practices in value chain mainstreaming of the disadvantaged groups, which will be shared at the Governing council in Rome in terms of the experience sharing with Africa and Latin America, among member states and counterpart ministries.70. Activity 2.2.2: Regional and sub-regional networking and coordination. Based on the common regional and sub-regional agenda identified through the regional and sub-regional sharing, the sub-regional forum will identify the principal actors, supporters and influencers on the sub-regional and regional policy processes related to agriculture and FO development. It will engage in dialogues and networking with them in order to achieve acceptance and recognition in the sub-regional and regional mechanisms of policy dialogue therefore the FO network’s participation will be mainstreamed and become more effective. The expected result should be to present and defend the farmers’ policy interests on dialogue platforms of well recognized sub-regional and regional mainstreams, and avoid presenting issues or proposing solutions in a stand-alone position. Previous engagement of regional/sub-regional FOs shall be leveraged to promote the agenda of the FOs. Policy gains at international level e.g. declaration of IYFF and other farmer-friendly policy instruments/treaties shall likewise be maximized as take-off points for the regional and subregional policy dialogues.71. Activity 2.2.3: Research and studies on regional and sub-regional interests. Research and studies at sub-regional and regional levels will be linked

19


to the priority interests and benefits of the farmers’ community as a whole, and respond to the issues and concerns along the four thematic areas of the Global Farmers’ Forum plus other urgent and pressing challenges that the FO development faces at sub-regional and regional scales. Major activities of research and studies are planned for every two years, involving related country forums as much as possible. In case of pressing need for immediate action, resources can be adjusted through the exercise of the AWPB approval, or written approval by IFAD.72. A number of regional and global events related to agriculture development, food security and farmers’ development will take place during the programme term. The regional and sub-regional committees should provide early guidance to the implementing agencies and identify a number of regional issues as topics of research or studies, and produce thematic or position papers to present in those policy platforms.73. The sub-regional implementing agencies will be responsible for screening the thematic topics of research and studies, select the qualified researchers or consultants to undertake the tasks and ensure quality assurance of the process and the deliverable.

iii. Component 3 of FO Involvement in Agriculture Development Programmes

74. Under this component the activities will be grouped in two sub-components, which are interlinked. Following are the outlined descriptions of the two sub-components and their related activities.75. Sub-component 3.1: Development of services. This sub-component aims at reinforcing the preparedness of the FOs in their future involvement in the Agriculture development programmes.76. Activity 3.1.1: Review on collaboration opportunities. Starting from PY 1 and at each COSOP annual review, the national FO platform should conduct a joint workshop with the IFAD country programme to review the collaboration opportunities. The workshop should not only explore the participation opportunities of the FOs in the IFAD ongoing and future projects but also the possibilities of the FO involvement in IFAD-assisted initiatives, and of IFAD support to FO development which are equally important. Those opportunities should be identified in a forward thinking; prerequisites of collaboration or joint actions should be highlighted. Particularly, the review should go through the IFAD country programme’s dialogue and consultation mechanism, its agenda and pipeline. Ongoing and future thematic and sector priorities should be outlined to be compared with the FOs’ core competences in search of building synergy and complementarity. Areas of FO involvement should be identified and the natures of FO involvement determined, such as supporter, implementer, or influencer. The review should result in a programme of FOs involvement in IFAD country programme for the next two years, and to be renewed by the next joint workshop.77. In addition, the national forum’s representatives or FOs of identified and confirmed competences should regularly join the IFAD country programme’s activities in consultation, exchange and sharing, take part as a member of the country management team or other support groups. This will help update on the country programme’s progress and deepen discussions on opportunities of collaborations with the country programme itself, but also with the other partners involved.

20


78. Activity 3.1.2: FO focused capacity building. In accordance with the operational and technical competences required in IFAD’s thematic and sector investments, the FOs will determine their priority areas of capacity building that will help ensure their effective and efficient involvements. Those needs of capacity building should be addressed timely in order to match the implementation timeline of the country programme. Focus capacity building can be provided by designated technical service provider such as FAO and AgriCord for the sake of quick response and expectable efficiency based on their past records. In principle, the focus capacity building should lead the FOs from their role of supporter or influencer to an increasingly important function of implementer in the IFAD-assisted projects where applicable.79. Sub-component 3.2: Collaboration with Agriculture development programmes. This sub-component will support a number of opportunities for the FO participation in the Agriculture development programmes. Budgets will be allocated to support the FOs’ participation at different levels of intervention, and with different roles to play. Main activities are comprised under:

a) Participation in country or country programme-related policy and strategic actions,

b) Participation in implementation support and in implementing activities, subcomponents or components in IFAD-assisted projects where applicable, and

c) Participation in country knowledge tank.

80. Mechanisms of participation should be determined and agreed by the joint workshop between the FO national platform and the IFAD country programme management. . However, focus should be given to the activities that can be implemented relatively easily and quickly, and with close relevance to the agricultural development in the country in question. These could include (i) consolidating the regional and sub-regional activities where applicable, (ii) linking all project design and preparations at the country level with key FOs (including cooperatives, especially for input supply, marketing, value chains, and rural finance), and (iii) organizing joint training for key people from different programme countries.

iv. Component 4 of Programme Management and Coordination

81. The MTCP 2 will build on the operational management set-up of MTCP 1, i.e.: continuing with the two inter-related sub-regional programmes of South Asia and Southeast Asia plus China, and adding a third sub-regional programme of the Pacific in view of the phase 2 extension to the Pacific region. The programme operational management will be delegated to the sub-regional implementers, while a small liaison unit at regional level will be embedded in a regional FO to ensure the overall coordination. 82. Steering committees. The overall programme management will be guided by the leadership of one regional steering committee and three sub-regional committees. They are responsible for the following: (i) overall guidance on regional, sub-regional and national forums’ operations where applicable, (ii) coordination between sub-regional and national forums, and with other stakeholders involved in programme implementation, (iii) review and endorse

21


AWPBs and annual progress reports, and (iv) coordination of joint actions such as strategic consultations, lobbying and representation.83. At regional level, the steering committee will in principle be composed of 1 representative from a sub-regional FO. Each sub-region will send 1 observer from a national FO to attend the regional steering committee’s meetings. Those representatives and observers can be but not necessarily the same sitting on the sub-regional committees. Sub-regional representation at regional steering committee will be proposed by the sub-regional steering committees. The regional steering committee will meet three times over the programme duration, in principle in an interval of 18 months, and in preference to be coincided with a sub-regional steering committee meeting. In general, the regional meeting should be hosted in rotation by each sub-region. Chairmanship of the steering committee will be renewed on a regular basis by vote. The RIA shall be an ex-officio member of the Regional Steering Committee member.84. At sub-regional level, the steering committee will be composed of 8 – 10 representatives from the national forums and the sub-regional FOs. Representation of sectoral FOs will also be ensured, such as for fishery and organic farming. Starting from the second year of implementation, half of the national forums’ representatives should be in principle renewed every two years by rotation in order to give the equitable access of representation to all the national FOs, and at the same time maintaining a stable working efficiency of the steering committees. The SRIA shall be an ex-officio member of the Sub-regional steering committee.85. Implementing agencies. At the regional level, the following criteria are considered to identify the grant recipient, which will also act as regional implementing agency:

a) A regional organisation (FO, NGO…) that has an extensive network and recognized representation for the FOs in the region;

b) Experienced in project management and fund administration with sufficient resources and capacities;

c) Recognised by and working with the donors and development agencies on a continued basis.

86. Due to the highly specialised technical capacity that is required for managing and coordinating the grant funds awarded by IFAD at regional level, for coordinating and implementing the MTCP 2 at sub-regional level, a call for applications was circulated by the APR/PTA Divisions on 11 Feb. 2013 to a restricted number of agencies pre-selected by IFAD including regional FOs networks who participated in MTCP1. The Purpose of the call for applications is to identify, through a competitive selection process, the organizations or the consortium of organizations which will carry out the program coordination at regional level (MTCP2 regional unit for Asia and Pacific) and implementation at sub-regional level (South Asia unit, South East Asia unit, the Pacific unit).87. Six organisations and consortium of organizations responded to the call and presented their expression of interest in line with the procedures and timelines provided. On 26 February 2013 a Selection Committee constituted in IFAD met to evaluate the content of the presented proposals and with the highest score based on the following criteria:

a) Technical capacity and relevant expertise of the applicant and its partners,

22


b) Management and implementation capacity of the applicant,c) Level of engagement with the Farmers’ Organisations in Asia-Pacific

region ,d) Regional and/or country presence,e) Partnership and resource mobilisation capacity, andf) Proposed Budget.

88. The Selection Committee members assessed the strengths and weaknesses of each received application, and it recommended the selection of AFA as the grant recipient (therefore the regional implementing agency) in partnership with LVC, and PIFON, AFA and ANFPA/SEWA as sub-grantees therefore sub-regional implementing agencies respectively for the Pacific, the Southeast Asia and South Asia.89. The grant recipient will act as the regional implementing agency with a small Regional Liaison Unit (RLU) set up. 90. Sub-regional Programme Management Unit (SRPMU). A SRPMU will be set up within the SR implementing agency. The salaries of a SR coordinator and an administrative assistant will be financed by the Programme, among other support related to M&E, knowledge management, and budgets to share some costs of office utilities and logistic expenses related to the programme implementation. The SR implementing agencies will contribute to the programme financing by offering their M&E support and secretariat service among others. They will also ensure communication and representation of the programme in order to raise additional co-financing to MTCP2 for the benefit of sub-regional and nationals levels.91. At national level, the national platform (or coalition) will constitute the main implementing body. For fiduciary purpose, a national implementing agency shall be identified within the platform from amongst participating national FOs to carry out the national-level programme implementation. A Subsidiary Agreement (SA) should be signed between the sub-regional implementing agency and each national implementing agency at the beginning of the MTCP 2 to clarify the respective roles and responsibilities. The SA is subject to the approval by IFAD management and overhead cost will be kept for the whole programme within a single digit percentage.92. National PMU (NPMU) will be established within each NIA. Salary subsidies for a NPMU coordinator and a secretariat will be financed by the Programme, among other support related to M&E, knowledge management, and budgets to share some costs of office utilities and logistic expenses related to the programme implementation. The NIA will appoint a qualified senior professional as its NPMU coordinator and it will provide due support to the programme management and coordination at national level, ensuring the key operations of M&E and secretariat. The main functions of the NIAs include coordinating the national platform strengthening and all the component activities at national level.93. The operational management structure is illustrated in Annex IV, Management Structure.94. Monitoring & Evaluation. Under the MTCP 1, FO forums at related level and the participating FOs achieved numerous realisations; positive

23


feedbacks were reported. However, there seems to be a lack of systematic M&E and reporting to help capitalise those achievements. In view of this lesson learnt and for the sake of sound programme management, the MTCP 2 will introduce the system of M&E and knowledge management applied in most of the IFAD-assisted projects, taking into consideration the MTCP 2 particularities for due adaptations. The topic of knowledge management will be addressed later in the chapter VI.95. The implementing agencies at regional, sub-regional and national levels will establish an effective and efficient Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (MEF) that is in line with IFAD’s M&E guidelines - and it will be available online. Participating FOs will adapt a reporting format that is linked to the M&E system. Overall responsibility for monitoring and evaluation (M&E) will be vested in the implementing agencies that should assign their M&E Specialist in charge of the functions. In order to undertake the key M&E functions the following activities will be carried out: a) the M&E training at start-up workshop in programme year one; b) regular review of M&E in line with the programme reporting requirements; c) technical backstopping and continuous external support for the reporting system; d) training for IA and participating FO staffs to further develop their M&E skills.96. The logical framework will form the basis for the overall system for measuring the programme performance based on expected outputs, outcomes and impacts. The agreed measures of output/outcome/impact form the framework for reporting by implementing agencies and participating FOs as well as for the Programme’s progress reporting to the steering committees and IFAD. The annual supervision will provide a forum for analyzing implications of the results/outputs achieved in the previous years with respect to outcome and overall goal. In order to help assess the programme achievements, baseline survey may be adapted to lay down the start point and further measure the progress and performance. This may be done in conjunction with related M&E97. Monitoring will concentrate on selected indicators. This monitoring will feed into the annual performance report and help guide the programme management in its decision making. Performance monitoring will include internal monitoring of implementation progress by each of the FOs involved in implementation as well as participatory M&E activities conducted by the FOs or by an external technical service.98. Evaluation focuses on the outcome and impact levels of the Programme. This impact evaluation would measure changes in the livelihoods of the beneficiaries that relate to the implemented programme activities. The impact evaluation will also attempt to reveal the relevance, sustainability and targeting performance of the programme activities. - A benchmark survey will be conducted three times for the Programme, namely at beginning, mid-term and completion and adapting a selected number of indicators where applicable. Such evaluation should be synchronized with the programme knowledge management, applying due know-how where required. If necessary, external technical service provider should be called in for FO capacity building in this regard, likely for assisting or undertaking directly result-based actions related to quality evaluation and knowledge management. Meanwhile, self-assessment on expected outcomes will be undertaken by the national implementing agencies and the participating FOs, as part of the annual progress report.99. Adaptive implementation by participating countries. Due to the diversity of context and dynamics in FO development among participating countries, implementation of the three technical components and their related

24


activities will adapt a flexible approach in selecting the country priorities for each AWPB period. However, at least two must-to-do interventions per technical component should be defined and decided by the sub-regional steering committee in accordance with the sub-regional strategic interests in order to maintain the mainstream of the programme implementation in the country and in the sub-region. This exercise should be incorporated in the process of country AWPB making and its approval by the sub-regional steering committee.

f. Technical Assistance for FO Capacity Building

100. The FOs of different levels and scales indicated the need of capacity building at the MTCP 1 completion. Given the operational and technical implications of the FOs roles in phase 2, it is crucial to provide timely technical assistance to accompany the institutional and operational strengthening of the participating FOs along the implementation agenda, and lift them up to a level of operational efficiency and institutional sustainability.101. In addition to the continued strengthening of management efficiency under the component 4 of Programme Management and Coordination, activities planned under the three technical components require some minimum levels of skills, knowledge and efficiency to achieve the expected results. The building, transfer and improvement of such capacity building by external expertise will not be properly done without tailoring the support in accordance with the FOs’ needs, and under a committed partnership for continued coaching.102. Partnership for technical assistance. In view of the above, a partnership for technical assistance will be established with FAO and AgriCord and their associated members like Asiadhraa, both are well recognized for their expertise in supporting the institutional development of the farmers’ organizations and agri-businesses, with long proven records of experiences and commitment in working with the FOs in Asia, and in the other regions.103. Note this TA partnership is not exclusive; FOs of different levels and relevant competences will be encouraged to share their expertise and provide some technical assistance in line with the TA recipient platforms and FOs, either sub-contracted under the framework of this partnership with FAO and Asiadhraa, or with financial support of additionally mobilized resources in this regard.104. Outlines of technical assistance. The following table outlines the technical assistance and the service providers under the programme components:

Table 1: Technical assistance by service providers

Component/Sub-component

Areas of TA required Service provider

S-com 1.1Institutional strengthening

- Review on FO Governance and membership- Strategic planning- Review on institutional functions- SWOT analysis and institutional positioning

FAO

S-com 1.2Organisational strengthening

- Operational management (re)structuring- Member service functions- Agri-business development- Value chain and market linkage- Organized farming and marketing- Disadvantaged groups mainstreaming

AgriCord/Asiadhraa

S-com 2.1National platform

- Strategies and techniques of policy, advocacy and lobbying- Member interest-driven representation- Alliance building and networking

FAO

25


- Thematic research and studiesS-com 2.2Regional and SR platform

- Coaching and facilitation in regional and sub-regional policy process- Organization and facilitation of sub-regional and regional platform events- Thematic research and studies

FAO

S-com 3.1 - Dev collaboration in Agriculture development programme

- Programming for FO involvement in Agriculture development programme- Focused technical capacity building

AgriCord/Asiadhraa

S-com 3.2 – Collaboration with IFAD country programmes

- Coaching in participation AgriCord/Asiadhraa

Component 4MGT & Coordination

- M&E and knowledge management, financial management- Other operational management skill training

AgriCord/Asiadhraa & other SP

105. Scope of the technical assistance. Note that the technical assistance provided to the FOs under the programme framework deals mainly with the FOs’ required competence and efficiency in implementing the programme-related activities. It is recognized that the FOs will have increasing needs of capacity building in a number of key areas but they may not be necessarily met with funding resources of the Programme. Those unmet needs should be part of the FOs’ organizational targets to achieve mainly with their own resources, and the FOs themselves should take their own initiative of achieving their institutional and operational capacity building, searching and leveraging the external support where applicable. The MTCP 2 technical assistance at FO level should generally remain in the scope of helping initiate the process of capacity building and introduce a selected number of key competences directly required to the programme implementation.

IV PROGRAMME COSTS AND FINANCING

a. Programme Costs by Component/activity

106. The overall MTCP 2 will be implemented over a period of five years. The total programme base cost is estimated for a total of USD 14,178,000. About 21% for the component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their Network, 28% for the component 2 of FO Participation in Policy Process, 37% for the component 3 of FO Involvement in Agriculture development programme, and 13% for the component 4 of Programme Management and Coordination, as showed in the following table.

Table 2: Cost by component/sub-component, base cost in USD

Components/Cost centerscountries of phase 1

The Pacific

New member countries

Perform-based Packs

RIA 1 + SRIA 2

TA TOTAL %

1. STRENGTHENIG FOs & THEIR NETWORKS 10 1.0 3.0 9.0 3.0 2.0

1. 1 Institutional strengthening 390,00

0.0 39,000.0 117,000.0 351,

000.0 180,00

0.0 897,000.0

1.2. Operational strengthening 700,000.0

70,000.0 210,000.0 630,000.0

1,610,000.0

26


340,000.0

SUB-TOTAL COMPONENT 1 1,090,0

00.0 109,000.0 327,000.0 981,

000.0 520,000.0 2,507,000.0 21%

2. FOs PARTICIPATION IN POLICY PROCESS

2.1. Participation in national platform

690,000.0 69,000.0 207,000.0

621,000.0

200,000.0 1,587,000.0

2.2. Participation in regional and sub-regional platforms

690,000.0 69,000.0 207,000.0

621,000.0

225,000.0

420,000.0 1,812,000.0


00.0 138,000.0 414,000.0 1,242,

000.0

225,000.0 620,000.0 3,399,000.0 28%

3. FO INVOLVEMENT IN AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

3.1. Development of collaboration platform

840,000.0 84,000.0 252,000.0

756,000.0

480,000.0 1,932,000.0

3.2. Collaboration with Agriculture development programme

1,150,000.0 115,000.0 345,000.0

1,035,000.0

200,000.0 2,645,000.0


00.0 199,000.0 597,000.0 1,791,

000.0 680,000.0 4,577,000.0 37%

4. PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT & COORDINATION

775,000.0 77,500.0 232,500.0

-

690,000.0

100,000.0 1,775,000.0 13%

TOTAL

5,235,000.0 523,500.0

1,570,500.0

4,014,000.0

915,000.0

1,920,000.0

14,178,000.0 100%

Percentage spread 37% 4% 11% 28% 6% 14% 100%

107. A total of USD 5.7 million (41%) is allocated to the 10 participating countries of MTCP 1 plus the Pacific sub-region on the basis of flat base rate. At this flat allocation, the Southeast Asia plus China sub-region shares 64%, South Asia sub-region 27%, and the Pacific sub-region 9%. The final allocation distribution will be adjusted by a number of performance-based packages that will be attributed to the participating countries starting from PY 2, based on their performance and progress of implementation. Optimally, the sub-regional allocations should be

27


spread as 55% for Southeast Asia plus China, 30% for South Asia, and 15% for the Pacific. 108. A budget of USD 1.5 million (11%) is projected to expand the MTCP 2 to three new member countries, assuming the financing in place.109. 14% of the total financing is earmarked for technical assistance managed by FAO and AgriCord/Asiadhraa.110. Note that the amount of USD 14 million is a provisional estimate of base cost; total including contingencies should amount to an approximate total of USD15 million.

b. Programme Financing, including table showing proposed by category of expenditure for IFAD and other financiers

111. Programme costs will be co-financed by APR in the amount of 1.5 million and PTA in the amount of 0.5 million (14% of total costs) and used as core financing for the first three years of phase2. The EU will co-finance several grants totalling USD 5 million (35%). (Switzerland US$ 3 million, Japan US$ 1 million, Korea US$ 0.5 million, Australia US$ 1 million, New Zealand US$ 1 million, and Agri-agencies US$ 0.678 million) to be confirmed up to US$ 7,178,000. While the contribution of participating FOs will be highly valued, at this stage it is not yet included in the total programme financing. It will be mainly in kind and remain in the categories of salaries and office support, for an approximate value of USD 500,000.

112. The following table shows the utilisation of the programme financing by category of expenditure.

28


Table 3 : Cost by category, base cost in USD

DAEA CATEGORIES AMOUNTS %

1 A Review, workshop and training 4,439,000.

0 0.31

2 B Research, studies and publication 1,194,000.

0 0.08

3 C Travel costs 4,910,000.

0 0.35

4 D Technical assistance 1,920,000.

0 0.14

5 E M&E, knowledge management 278,000.

0 0.02

6 F Salaries and allowance 1,010,000.

0 0.07

7 G Office utilities and logistic support 427,000.

0 0.03

TOTAL 14,178,000.

0 1

113. IFAD financing by a APR grant of USD 1.5 million and a PTA grant of USD 0.5 million will be used to as core financing for the first three years of phase 1, mainly supporting the activities under component 1 of Strengthening FOs and their networks and component 4 of Programme management and coordination, or the expenditure categories of: A – review, workshop and training, B – research, studies and publication, C – Travel costs, E – M&E, knowledge management, F – salaries and allowance, and G – office utilities and logistic support, as showed by the following tables of 4 and 5.

Table 4: IFAD financing by activity, by year

Components/Cost centres PY1 PY2 PY3 PY4PY5 TOTAL IFAD

1. STRENGTHENIG FOs & THEIR NETWORKS APR PTA APR PTA APR PTA

APR GRANT

PTA GRANT

1.1. Institutional strengthening

1.1.1. Organizational review 55,000

-

55,000

55000 55000

1.1.2. Partnership and networking capacity

33,000

-

33000

1.1.3. Institutional positioning 55,000

-

55,000

55000 55000

1.1.4. Technical assistance to SC 1.1 (FAO)

-

-

-

-

-

29


Sub-total Institutional strengthening -

-

1.2. Operational strengthening -

-

-

-

-

1.2.1. Organizational management capacity

66,000

66,000

65,000

150000 47000

1.2.2. Structuring service functions for members

-

66,000

-

64000 -

1.2.3. Value chain and market linkage 88,000

88,000

88,000

264000 -

1.2.4. Technical assistance to SC 1.2 (AgriCord/Asiadhraa)

-

-

Sub-total Operational strengthening -

-

SUB-TOTAL COMPONENT 1 -

-

2. FOs PARTICIPATION IN POLICY PROCESS

-

-

-

-

-

2.1. Participation in national platform -

-

-

-

-

2.1.1. Policy, advocacy, lobbying and representation

-

-

2.1.2. Strategic networking and coordination

22,000

22,000

22,000

66000

2.1.3. Research and studies 33,000

66,000

66,000

10000 65000


-

-

Sub-total Participation in national platform

-

-

2.2. Participation in regional and sub-regional platforms

-

-

-

-

-

2.2.1. Policy process w/ regional and s-regional policy makers/influencers

-

-

2.2.2. Regional and s-regional networking and coordination

-

-

2.2.3. Research and studies on regional and s-regional interests

-

-


-

-

Sub-total Participation in regional and sub-regional platforms

-

-


-

3. FO INVOLVEMENT IN AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

-

-

-

-

-

3.1. Development of collaboration platform

-

-

-

-

-

3.1.1. Review on collaboration opportunities

88,000

-

62000 26000

3.1.2. FO focused capacity building -

-

-

3.1.3. Technical assistance to SC 3.1 (AgriCord)

-

-

30


Sub-total Development of collaboration platform

-

-

3.2. Collaborations with Agriculture development programme

-

-

-

-

-

3.2.1. Participation in country policy and strategic actions

-

-

3.2.2. Participation in implementation support

-

-

3.2.3. Participation in country knowledge tank

-

-

3.2.4. Technical assistance to SC 3.2 (AgriCord)

-

-

Sub-total Collaboration with Agriculture development programme

-

-


-

4. PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT & COORDINATION

-

-

-

-

-

4.1. Monitoring and Evaluation, knowledge management

20,000

20,000

30,000

500

50000 20500

4.2. Communications and Knowledge management

16,500

16,500

16,500

-

49500

4.3. Financial management, audit 36,500

36,500

36,000

99000 10000

4.4. Salaries 178,000

178,000

178,000

490000 40000

4.5. Office and logistic support 33,000

33,000

35,000

101000 33000

4.6. Regional/s-regional event facilitaton & coordination

12,000

12,000

12,000

4.7. Technical assistance to Programme management (AgriCord +Asiadhraa)SUB-TOTAL PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT & COORDINATION

-

-

TOTAL 719,500

16,500

587,500

16,500

642,000

17,000

1,500,000 500,000

TOTAL APR & PTA 2,000,000

Table 5: IFAD financing by category, by year

PY1 PY2 PY3 TOTAL IFAD

APR PTA APR PTA APR PTAAPR GRANT

PTA GRANT

A Review, workshop and training 385,0

00 220,000

264,000

B Research, studies and publication 33,000

66,000

66,000

C Travel costs 34,000

34,000

34,000

D Technical assistance -

31


E M&E, knowledge management 20,000 16,500 20,000 16,500 30,000 17,000

F Salaries and allowance 178,000 178,000 178,000

G Office utilities and logistic support 70,000 70,000 70,000

TOTAL 720,000 16,500 588,000 16,500 642,000 17,0001,500,000 500,000

TOTAL APR &PTA BY CATEGORY BY YEAR 2,000,000

114. Despite the expressed interests of co-financing, uncertainty exists until resources committed and in place. As measure of managing the uncertainty, IFAD presently committed financing resources will focus on C1 and C4 to maintain the minimum requirements in FO support and programme management, while others resources are expected to mainly finance the activities under the three technical components and over the 2 phases of this 5 years programme.

V FINANCIAL GOVERNANCE

a. Procurement Procedures for Goods, Services and Human Resources

115. Procurement. Goods and services financed through the proceeds of the Programme will be procured by following IFAD’s Procurement Guidelines. The recipients’ procurement guidelines or procedures may be accepted upon review and assessment of the recipient’s procurement guidelines or procedures. All procurement valued above USD 100,000 for goods and above USD 80,000 for services shall be subject to prior review by IFAD.116. A procurement plan covering a period of 18 months will be prepared as part of the first AWPB to be reviewed by IFAD. The procurement plan will be based on the individual procurement plans prepared by each country, consolidated at sub-regional level by the implementing agencies. Any changes and amendments to the procurement plan shall be subject to IFAD’s No Objection. The plan will provide information of goods and services disaggregated into different components and categories. IFAD review of and no objection to the Recipient’s procurement plans is compulsory and the 18 month procurement plans submitted by the Recipient must include as a minimum:

(i) A brief description of each procurement activity to be undertaken during the period and name of the agency/unit (as applicable) responsible for the procurement.;

(ii) The estimate value of each procurement activity;(iii) The method of procurement to be adopted for each activity and; (iv) The method of review IFAD will undertake for each activity

indicating either post review or prior review. 117. For the purposes of IFAD’s Procurement Guidelines, the following procurement decisions shall be subject to prior review by the Fund for the award of any contract for goods, estimated to cost above USD 100,000 and services estimated to cost USD 80,000 and above:

A. Procurement of goods: i. Bid Documents for goods;ii. Evaluation Report and Recommendation for Award; andiii. Contract and amendments.

32


B. Procurement of consultancy services and servicesi. Prequalification documents and shortlist when

prequalification is undertaken;ii. Request for Proposal;iii. Technical evaluation reportiv. Combined (technical and financial) evaluation report and the

recommendation for award; andv. Contract and amendments

C. Procurement of Individual Consultantsi. Evaluation Report of the Selection Panel

118. The implementing agencies will maintain all relevant documents, bids, purchase orders and payment vouchers for post review by IFAD and for audit purpose.

b. Financial Management System, including accounting specifications

119. Fund flow. Grant funds will be forwarded from IFAD to the regional implementing agency upon acceptance of the AWPBs from the sub-regions. This will be done on an annual basis in accordance with the approved AWPBs. The Regional implementing agency will report to IFAD on the consolidated regional progress and disaggregated in sub-regions in both financial and physical terms on a semi-annual basis; Similarly, Sub-regional implementing agencies will report on the financial and physical progress made semi-annually to the regional implementing agency, and the national implementing agencies on a quarterly basis to the Sub-regional implementing agencies.120. Withdrawal Application. Withdrawal applications will be sent to IFAD through the single window of the regional implementing agency. Each Sub-regional implementing agency will send the regional implementing agency a signed annual withdrawal application approved by the sub-regional steering committee, together with an AWPB and, as of second year of implementation, a technical and financial progress report and a signed statement of expenditure for the precedent year. The regional implementing agency will review the sub-regional WAs and send them to IFAD for processing. Note that in synchronized WA with all the sub-regions is preferred for the sake of processing cost efficiency, but not necessary if waiting compromises the disbursements and the implementation of the well progressing sub-region(s). The withdrawal application will cover the resources needed for the implementation of activities both at the sub-regional and at the national levels, as planned in the sub-regional AWPB. Both AWPBs and financial report will jointly cover all financiers’ contribution.121. Financial Reporting. AFA, the regional implementing agency will send IFAD consolidated annual progress reports, covering both technical and financial information. Financial reports will contain information on: (i) the use of funds at the all levels, against the activities and categories of expenditure indicated in the relevant AWPBs; (ii) a consolidated table showing total expenditure per subcomponent and per activity at national/sub-regional level; (iii) a consolidated statement of expenditure for the year.122. Accounting and Financial Statement. Separate and disaggregated Implementation Accounts will be maintained by implementing agencies of sub-regional and national levels, in accordance with IFAD’s requirements and internationally acceptable accounting standards. Involved national FOs at various levels will also maintain disaggregated Implementation Accounts for programme-funded activities. Sub-regional implementing agencies will be responsible for periodic review of national IA accounts so as to ensure their adherence to

33


acceptable standards of transparency and accuracy; national implementing agencies are responsible for periodic review of recipient national FOs’ accounting soundness.123. Implementing agencies and participating FOs will have a dedicated bank account to receive all funds disbursed by IFAD.124. Training on programme financial management will be provided to the implementing agencies at the programme start-up.

c. Audit Arrangements

125. The regional implementing agency will be responsible for the submission of consolidated audited financial statements to IFAD. The regional implementing agency will appoint, with prior approval of IFAD, independent auditors acceptable to IFAD to audit the financial statements relating to the programme for each Fiscal Year.126. Audit Report. Audits should be submitted within six months after the end of recipient’s fiscal year. If audit not received 180 days after “due date, the grant WILL be suspended.

VI SUPERVISION AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

a. Supervision Arrangements

127. Supervision will be carried out directly by IFAD on an annual basis. IFAD’s direct supervision will mainly relate to the programme financial management, its physical and financial progress, implementation management’s efficiency and implementing agencies’ performance at all levels. Supervision missions will primarily address issues as following:

a) Programme fiduciary aspects,b) Implementation progress,c) Outputs and outcomes under related components and sub-components,d) Sustainability,e) Risks and opportunities,f) Innovations an knowledge management, andg) Targeting and gender mainstreaming.

128. A Progress review will be conducted by IFAD at the end of PY 3, normally in conjunction with the annual direct supervision. It will pay special attention to the performance of designed components and intended approaches in relationship with the targeting efficiency and in correlation with the movements towards expected outcomes and impacts. Adjustments can be proposed where necessary, which should be reflected through the adjustment of logical framework and AWPBs. 129. The progress review will also look at the funding resources available and the priorities identified during PY 1-3 as phase 1, and adjust the investment priorities in the phase 2 during the PY 2 – 5.130. Implementation support will be provided by IFAD as follow-ups of its direct supervision and progress review, and as response to possible supports required

34


by the programme management. Support will be conducted on a demand-driven basis and in accordance with needs identified.

b. Lesson Learning and Knowledge Management

131. Experience and lesson learnt. After three years of operations, the MTCP 1 has successfully raised awareness in promoting inclusive FO member services for the disadvantaged smallholders, and FO platforms at national, sub-regional and regional levels have taken shape in a number of policy consultations and dialogues. A number of good practices were identified, summarized as follows:

a) The MTCP-1 has successfully catalyzed and sustained the important process of FO networking and platform building in the region and this positively contributed to the policy engagement of farmers' organizations with governments and IFAD at the national and sub-national levels

b) The strengthened FO networks have become a platform for leveraging the lobbying capacities of the other stakeholders in policy process. Example of Nepal in mobilizing the National Peasant Council (NPC), a broad-based peasant network, to catalyze the Farmers' Forum in support of the three-pronged MTCP objectives through the organized National Oversight Board (NOB) and the Regional Oversight Boards (ROB).

c) The farmer forum at different levels was utilized as a platform for exchange of information and joint activities among farmers’ organizations, leading to collective capacities strengthened joint actions for policy engagement and coalition work.

d) The regional platforms played an increasing role as venue to discuss and raise awareness on burning issues felt at the local level and where resolutions for action at local and national levels are identified.

e) The MTCP-1 successfully contributed to strengthen the FO and their members’ capacities through training of farmers groups, with targeting sensitivity for women.

f) The united and consolidated voices of FOs through the Farmers' Forum at national and sub-national levels have clearly impacted on the extent of response by their respective governments and other development stakeholders to their various advocacies.

g) The MTCP-1 interventions have helped bring to the attention of government the issues faced by small scale men and women producers and the growing seriousness of the farmers to strengthen their ranks for political and policy dialogues to push common agenda.

h) The NIA showed some potential of leading the policy consultations, as showed in Nepal a strengthened NIA was successfully engaged in leading the lobbying for policies and schemes for small and marginal farmers, resulting in recognized demands of farmers under the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM).

i) Successful direct involvement of FOs in the IFAD country programmes depended on openness of both the FOs and the IFAD country programme management; close consultations between the FOs and the IFAD CPMT in Nepal led to the direct participation of some FOs in the IFAD-assisted projects in the country.

35


j) Differentiated approaches could be adopted to constitute an effective FO forum or platform in view of the different country contexts. Example can be cited for Vietnam and Indonesia; for the first a more internal consultative process was pursued among the VNFU provincial chapters to achieve a strong representation of the FOs, while for the latter, three major national FOs formed the basis of the forum and expanded to include a broader FO membership for the MTCP national Farmers Forum.

k) MTCP-1 contributed to the empowerment of the FOs and their members. Various activities funded by the MTCP-1, such as mapping and profiling, national farmers’ forum consultation, policy dialogues, researches and trainings were able to effectively contribute to the empowerment of FOs, providing with opportunities for interacting and cooperating on common agenda

l) MTCP-1 achieved in bringing positive impacts on influencing pro-farmer policies. Cases were found, for sound policy proposals put forward by FOs supported with good policy researches based on their on-ground experiences. In Vietnam, the creation of appropriate regulatory policy led to more contract farming arrangements for the farmers. In the Philippines, concrete policy proposals coupled with mobilization and lobbying activities have been collectively pursued by PHILFAFO members to create pressure to the Philippine Coconut Authority to recognize the claim of small-coconut farmers over the coconut levy. In Indonesia, the policy against food import has been proposed, as well as policy on the Right to Food in relation to the right to seed, land, and water.

132. However, it is noted at the phase-1 completion that the FOs need to be further strengthened in order to undertake effective policy dialogues and to deliver efficient organisational services to the member farmers. Collecting and replicating the good practices and innovations seems to be limited. A result-based mechanism of monitoring and management is hence necessary in order to help ensure the full achievement of the expected objectives and outcomes.133. Other important lessons learnt can be summarized as following:

a) Need for quality implementation of the outputs and activities,b) Strong coalition and genius partnership required among FOs,c) Rotating arrangement for the chair of the sub-regional steering

committee should be oriented to a constructive resolution of issues and allowing the MTCP cooperation to build on its gains,

m) Sub-regional coordination approach needs to be review in order to optimize the resources and expertise of the RCPU partners, especially, the regional FOs,

n) Of the three MTCP Objectives, involvement of FO in IFAD country programmes remains to be the most challenged, with uneven progress among participating countries. Integration of FOs in IFAD's country programming is key in the achievement of MTCP's over-all objective,

o) Knowledge management is key in facilitating cross-learning and promoting innovations that should lead to the replication or scale-up of the good practices.

p) Implementation and operational capacities are yet to be reinforced for the NIAs, especially in the areas of broadening the participation to

36


include the FOs that are not affiliated to the existing involved networks or platforms, translating related the outputs of policy researches and related workshops into concrete and viable policy proposals.

q) NIA physical set-up with due operational resources is necessary in order to ensure required coordination among FOs

r) Effective communication strategy is needed among FO members, with more emphasis on participatory approach and pro-member sensitivity.

134. Knowledge management. Key elements of the Programme’s knowledge management strategy include the following: i) establishment of a M&E framework to provide information and analysis on progress achieved against logframe and AWPBs; ii) adaptation of RIMS; iii) routine conduct of planning and review meetings and monitoring & evaluation (“lessons-learned”) workshops at various levels; iv) participatory monitoring and evaluation by FOs and exposure to the IFAD country programmes’ M&E and knowledge management; v) periodic conduct of workshop to consolidate “lessons learnt” and involving FOs and IAs staffs at all levels.135. Besides, the sub-regional and national implementing agencies and the participating FOs will be responsible for sharing experiences and lessons learnt and to promote the approach publicly with related stakeholders and interest groups.136. The MTCP 2 will leverage the available online tools such as the FOs’ individual website and facebook for the dissemination of the success stories and obtained results. It will also take advantage of the online project management web tools that IFAD is building, incorporating the knowledge management in each country programme’s portal and at IFADASIA. Actions in communications, knowledge management and results of M&E and related studies will be included along with the other programme documents.

37

39


ANNEX I: PROPOSED MTCP 2 LOGFRAME

Objectives-hierarchy Objectively verifiable indicators Means of verification Assumptions

A. STRATEGIC GOAL

To contribute to the poverty alleviation in Asia and the Pacific Region through strengthened capacities of the rural poor and their organisations that leads to improved livelihoods and positive socio-economic impacts in the rural development

- Increased pro-poor policies adopted by national and sub-regional institutions

- increased relevant national and regional regulations or guidelines adopting proposals or contributions from the FO forums.

- Reports by FO forums at related levels

- Regulations and guidelines published and reported

Regional, sub-regional and national policy makers and influencers continue to include poverty alleviation and poor-poor rural and agriculture development as part of their strategic objectives

B. PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

To strengthen the farmers’ organizations in Asia and the Pacific Region in their capacities of engaging active policy consultations related to the rural smallholders’ interests at national, sub-regional and regional levels, and to provide improved and inclusive services to the rural poor

- Strengthened national FO forums effectively ensuring regular position of representation in the mainstream of national policy dialogue

- Increased number of proposals related to farmer interests incorporated by the FO forums in the sub-regional and regional policy processes

- Progress reports

- Official documents

- Policy papers

- Favourable overall political environment, e.g. no major conflicts

- Policy makers are open to dialogue with FOs

- FOs are strengthened up to the level of competence and gain recognition

C. OUTPUTS

40


- Institutional and operational capacities of the FOs are effectively strengthened in correspondence with their roles and functions in policy process and services to the members

- Smallholder farmers’ interests are promoted and their concerns are addressed in related policy process thanks to the strengthened capacities of the FOs

- Strengthened FOs providing effective pro-poor services and actively participating in agriculture and rural development, in complement with Agriculture development programmes’ interventions where applicable

- At least 120 FOs that undergone an organizational review with strategic development plan made.

- At least 20 million of farmer members served and represented by the strengthened FOs

- At least 15 formal partnerships and alliances the FO forums take part in

- At least 15 joint policy actions the FO forums took with other stakeholders

- At least 100 FOs reporting agri-business development service in their org structure

- At least 30 FOs reporting participation in more than two value chain sectors

- 15 FOs reporting success in certified product or production

- 25% of women and youth in incremental increase of membership since start-up

- 15 of issues introduced by the FO forums and adopted by the policy makers, disaggregated by levels, themes

- 30 regular representation seats in policy consultation platforms

- Programme progress reports

- Sector or value chain studies

-Government reports and publications

- IFAD project progress reports in related country programmes

- Motivation of Farmers’ Organisations to collaborate, maintain and expand their joint activities

- Common issues of importance to all the participants are identified

- Agreement on the composition of the Steering Committee at different levels is achieved

41


- At least 18 FOs participating in IFAD country programme implementation, by country and by areas of intervention

- At least 7 countries where IFAD country programmes incorporate FO as partner in the project design

D. KEY ACTIVITIES

Act 1.1.1 : To undertake organizational review among participating FOs

Act 1.1.2.: To build partnership between FO forums and policy process allies of related levels and to strengthen their network capacity

Act 1.1.3 : To determine FOs institutional positioning at national level

Act 1.2.1 : To strengthen FOs organizational management capacity

Act 1.2.2 : To structure FOs service functions for members

Act 1.2.3 : To undertake measures of

- FOs undertake organizational review in each participating country

- Sub-regional and national FO forums build their partnership with lobbying and representation bodies of related levels

- National FO forums or platforms undertake their institutional review and define their institutional positioning

- FOs are strengthened in their organizational management capacity

- FOs restructure their member service functions driven by demands

- FOs introduce mechanism of market

- Programme and IFAD project progress reports

42


market integration as member service in response to needs of agri-business development

Act 2.1.1 : Policy, advocacy, lobbying and representation

Act 2.1.2.: Strategic networking and coordination

Act 2.1.3 : Research and studies

Act 2.2.1 : Policy process with regional and sub-regional policy makers and influencers (ASEAN, FAO, FAFO Rome…)

Act 2.2.2 : Regional and sub-regional networking and coordination

Act 2.2.3 : Research and studies on regional and sub-regional

Act 3.1.1 : Review on collaboration opportunities

Act 3.1.2.: FO focus capacity building

Act 3.2.1 : Participation agriculture development programmes in related

integration as part of their services to the members

- Regional, sub-regional and national FO forums or platforms undertake actions in policy process, advocacy, lobbying and representation

- Regional, sub-regional and national FO forums or platforms build synergy with the related stakeholders and interest groups through strategic networking and coordination

- Researches and studies of regional, sub-regional or national interests are conducted in response to the crucial and emerging issues that the FO development is facing

- Review is conducted jointly with IFAD country programme management to identify the collaboration opportunities in each participating country

- Focus capacity building is provided to FOs

43


countries and in IFAD country actions

Act 3.2.2 : Participation in implementation support and in implementing activities, subcomponents or components in IFAD-assisted projects where applicable, and in the other agriculture development programmes where appropriate

Act 3.2.3 : participation in country knowledge tank

based on results of SWOT analysis to render the FOs technically more compatible with areas and sectors in which the mainstreams of agriculture development are intervening in the related countries, and that IFAD-assisted projects are supporting in the country

- FOs participate in relevant agriculture development programmes, and in IFAD country actions, including implementation support and acting as implementing agency

- FOs participate as an integrated part in the IFAD country programme knowledge tank, bringing their good practices and experiences in poverty alleviation and rural development

44

SUB COMPONENT 1.1 :

Act 1.1.1 : Organizational reviewAct 1.1.2.: Partnership and network capacityAct 1.1.3 : Institutional positioning

SUB COMPONENT 1.2 : Act 1.2.1 : Organizational management capacityAct 1.2.2 : Structuring service functions for membersAct 1.2.3 : Market integration

Development Objective: strengthen the farmers’ organizations in Asia and the Pacific Region in their capacities of engaging active policy consultations related to the rural smallholders’ interests at national, sub-regional and regional levels, and to provide improved and inclusive services to the rural poor

Outcome 1: Institutional and operational capacities of the FOs are effectively strengthened in correspondence with their roles and

functions in policy process and services to the members

Outcome 3 : Strengthened FOs providing effective pro-poor services and

actively participating in agriculture and rural development, in complement with Agriculture development programmes’ interventions

where applicable

Component 1:Strengthening FOs and their Networks

Component 3: FO Involvement in Agriculture development programmes

SUB COMPONENT 3.1 :Act 3.1.1 : Review on collaboration opportunitiesAct 3.1.2.: FO focus capacity buildingSUB COMPONENT 3.2 : Act 3.2.1 : Participation in IFAD country actionsAct 3.2.2 : Participation in implementation support and in implementing activities, subcomponents or components in IFAD-assisted projects where applicableAct 3.2.3 : participation in country knowledge tank

Component 4: Programme Management and Coordination- SC 4.1. Facilitation and coordination

- SC 4.2: M&E, and knowledge management and communication, -- SC 4.3: Financial management, -

Strategic goal : Contribute to the poverty alleviation in Asia and the Pacific Region through strengthened capacities of the rural poor and their organisations that leads to improved livelihoods and positive socio-economic impacts in the rural development

Outcome 2: Rural smallholders’ interests are promoted and their concerns

are addressed in related policy process thanks to the strengthened capacities of the FOs

Component 2:FO Participation in Policy Process

SUB COMPONENT 2.1 :Act 2.1.1 : Policy, advocacy, lobbying and representationAct 2.1.2.: Strategic networking and coordinationAct 2.1.3 : Research and studies

SUB COMPONENT 2.2 : Act 2.2.1 : Policy process with regional and sub-regional policy makers and influencers (ASEAN, FAO, FAFO Rome…)Act 2.2.2 : Regional and sub-regional networking and coordinationAct 2.2.3 : Research and studies on regional and sub-regional interests

Technical Assistance


ANNEX II: MTCP 2 STRUCTURE OVERVIEW

45


ANNEX III: OUTLINES OF SWOT ANALYSIS

Notions of SWOT analysis. SWOT analysis (alternately SWOT Matrix) is a structured planning method used to evaluate the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats involved in a project or in a business venture. It involves specifying the objective of the business venture or project and identifying the internal and external factors that are favorable and unfavorable to achieve that objective. Setting the objective should be done after the SWOT analysis has been performed. This would allow achievable goals or objectives to be set for the organization.

Strengths: characteristics of the business, or project team that give it an advantage over others

Weaknesses: are characteristics that place the team at a disadvantage relative to others

Opportunities: external chances to improve performance (e.g. make greater profits) in the environment

Threats: external elements in the environment that could cause trouble for the business or project

Example of a SWOT Matrix:FACTORS INTERNAL EXTERNAL

POSITIVE STRENGTHS OPPORTUNITIES---------

---------

NEGATIVE WEAKNESSES THREATS---------

---------

Example of SWOT:FACTORS INTERNAL EXTERNAL

POSITIVE STRENGTHS OPPORTUNITIESInternational collaborative programsGood relationship with local communityResponsive faculty and staff, even in times of budget restraint

Opportunity for growthOpportunity to capitalize on niche programming

NEGATIVE WEAKNESSES THREATSLack of effective evaluative instrumentsReliance on government fundingStructure - too few resources; too many programs

Lack of accountabilityCompetition moving in and serving the same demographic

46


ANNEX IV: MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE

Sub-Regional Steering

Committee

Regional Steering

Committee

FO nFO 2FO 1, NIA

National FO Platform/Coalition

FO nFO 2FO 1, NIA


FO nFO 2FO 1, NIA


Pacific S-regional IA PIFON

(Secretariat)

SA S-regional IA ANFPA/SEWA

(S-regional PMU)

SEA S-regional IA AFA-LVC

(S-regional PMU)

(Regional Liaison Unit)LVC-AFA


Annex V

Eligibility and Due Diligence Checklist

(LEG and CFS to review)

1. The recipient is: (check the appropriate box)

The government of a developing member state of IFAD

A non-profit, non-governmental organization in an IFAD member state

An intergovernmental organization with more than one IFAD member state as a member.

Private sector entity

Other

(Governments and government agencies of developed Member States and non-Member States are not eligible. Non-profit, non-governmental organizations in non-Member States are eligible only if a specific waiver is granted by the President.)

2.(A) If the recipient has previously received grant(s) from IFAD, has it provided all necessary progress reports and audited financial reports/statements?

Yes No n/a

If the answer is no, the recipient is not eligible.

2(B) If the recipient has previously received grant(s) managed by your division, was its performance fully satisfactory?

Yes No n/a

If the answer is no, please explain why the recipient should receive a new grant.

3. Can the recipient provide audited financial statements for the two previous years?

Yes No

If the answer is no, describe special circumstances that justify giving the grant to this recipient and provide supporting documentation.

4. Is IFAD the prime beneficiary of the grant?

Yes No

5. Will this grant support activities normally supported by other IFAD resources (i.e. IFARB)?

Yes No

6. Will this grant support activities that duplicate efforts being financed by other donors?

Yes No

If the answer to 4, 5 or 6 is yes, the grant does not comply with the IFAD Grant Policy. No waiver is possible. It is the responsibility of the grant sponsor to confirm the eligibility of the recipient and the conformity of the grant with all aspects of IFAD’s policies and procedures. If the grant sponsor requests a waiver of any policy or procedure which is subject to being waived, it must be set forth

47


below.

7. Deviation from IFAD policies and procedures List any aspects of the grant that do not comply with IFAD’s grant policy or procedures.

48


Annex VI

Financial management questionnaire

The Financial management questionnaire (FMQ) should be used only in the following circumstances:

The recipient has not received funds from IFAD in the past or for a considerable length of time, and is not able to provide current audited financial statements acceptable to IFAD.3

The grant amount is significantly larger than the recipient normally manages.

There is a need to reconfirm the recipient’s financial integrity, including its financial management capacity.

The FMQ contains questions designed to review the systems adopted by the recipient related to: a) budgeting, b) accounting, c) internal control, d) funds flow, e) financial reporting, and f) auditing arrangements. Based on the answers provided by the recipient, the grant sponsor and the grants officer will be able to assess the best way forward, including disbursement conditions, disbursement amounts, frequency of supervision, etc.

Project:

Self-assessment completed by: Date:

IFAD review/assessment completed by:

Date:

Note: If there is more than one implementing entity, a questionnaire should be completed for each one.

Topic Yes No N/A Review* Remarks/ comments

1.Implementing entity

1.1 What is the legal status/registration of the entity?

1.2 Has the entity implemented in the past projects financed by i) international financial institutions (IFIs), ii) United Nations agencies or iii) donors that are members of the OECD? If yes, please provide name and year.

2. Funds flow

3 An external assessment by an audit firm or an audit report will have to be provided prior to first disbursement.

49



2.1 In which bank will the grant account be opened?

3. Staffing

3.1 What is the organizational structure of the accounting department? Attach an organization chart.

3.2 Is the project finance and accounts function staffed adequately?

3.3 Is the finance and accounts staff adequately qualified and experienced?

3.4 Indicate key positions not contracted yet, and the estimated date of appointment.

3.5 Does the project have written position descriptions that clearly define duties, responsibilities, reporting lines and limits of authority for all officers, managers and staff?

4. Accounting Policies and Procedures

4.1 Does the entity have an accounting system that allows for the proper recording of project financial transactions, including the allocation of expenditures in accordance with the respective components, disbursement categories, and sources of funds? Will the project use the entity accounting system?

Segregation of Duties

4.2 Are the following functional responsibilities performed by different units or persons: (a) authorization to execute a transaction; (b) recording of the transaction; and (c) custody of assets involved in the transaction?

4.3 Are the functions of ordering, receiving, accounting for, and paying for goods and services appropriately segregated?

4.4 Are bank reconciliations prepared by staff other than those who make or approve payments?

Budgeting System

4.5 Do the budgets lay down physical and financial targets?

4.6 Are actual expenditures compared to the budget with reasonable frequency, and explanations required for significant variations from the budget?

4.7 Who is responsible for preparation and approval of budgets?

Payments

50



4.8 Do invoice processing procedures provide for: Copies of purchase orders and receiving reports

to be obtained directly from issuing departments?

Comparison of invoice quantities, prices, and terms, with those indicated on the purchase order and with records of goods actually received?

Comparison of invoice quantities with those indicated on the receiving reports?

Checking the accuracy of calculations?4.9 Are all invoices stamped PAID, dated, reviewed

and approved, and clearly marked for account code assignment?

Policies And Procedures

4.10 What is the basis of accounting (e.g., cash, accrual)?

4.11 What accounting standards are followed?

4.12 Does the project have an adequate policies and procedures manual to guide activities and ensure staff accountability?

Safeguard over Assets

4.13 Is there a system of adequate safeguards to protect assets from fraud, waste, and abuse?

4.14 Are there periodic physical inventories of fixed assets and stocks?

4.15 Are assets sufficiently covered by insurance policies?

Other

4.16 Has the project advised employees, beneficiaries and other recipients to whom to report if they suspect fraud, waste or misuse of project resources or property?

5. Internal audit

5.1 Is there an internal audit department in the entity?

5.2 What are the qualifications and experience of audit department staff?

5.3 To whom does the internal auditor report?

6. External audit

6.1 Are the entity’s financial statements audited regularly by an independent auditor? Who is the auditor?

6.2 Are there any delays in audit of the entity? When are the audit reports issued?

51



6.3 Is the audit of the entity conducted according to the International Standards on Auditing?

6.4 Have any major accountability issues been brought out in audit reports in the past three years?

6.5 Is the project subject to any kind of audit by an independent governmental entity (e.g. the supreme audit institution) in addition to the external audit?

7. Reporting and monitoring

7.1 Are financial statements prepared for the entity? If so, in accordance with which accounting standards?

7.2 What is the frequency of preparation of financial statements? Are the reports prepared in a timely fashion so as to be useful to management for decision making?

7.4 Are financial management reports used by management?

7.5 Do the financial reports compare actual expenditures with budgeted and programmed allocations?

7.6 Are financial reports prepared directly by the automated accounting system or are they prepared by spreadsheets or some other means?

8.Information systems

8.1 Is the financial management system computerized?

8.2 Can the system produce the necessary project financial reports?

8.3 Are staff adequately trained to maintain the system?

8.4 Do the management organization and processing system provide safeguards of confidentiality, integrity and availability of the data?

52


Annex VII

THE ASSESSMENT TOOL - SCORING SHEET

NAME OF ENTITY/AGENCY BEING ASSESSED: DATE OF ASSESSMENT: IFAD ASSESSMENT TEAM: Persons interviewed:

GENERAL FEATURESWhat is the legal corporate status of this agency? (i.e. a government department, a state corporation, a parastatal enterprise?) Do the national laws and regulations apply to this agency? Refer to existing assessment tools (i.e. CPAR, OECD assessment) for analysis of the legal system.

PROCUREMENT PLANNINGAre procurement plans prepared ahead of time as a norm and realistic? Are the methods of procurement being used in accordance with the national framework?Are project components appropriately packaged for procurement purposes?

BIDDING DOCUMENTSDoes the agency have capable staff for preparation of bidding documents?What is the general quality of documentation produced by the agency? Identify improvements needed.Are technical specifications and Terms of Reference clear, neutral and accurate (including schedules of requirements)?Do standard bidding documents (either national or international) exist for goods, works and consultants? If so list them.Do bidding documents contain all information necessary (to prepare responsive bids and clearly communicate the evaluation criteria?Are the contractual conditions contained in the bidding documents include the minimum requirements to ensure adequate protection for the procuring entity? Are standard purchase orders (or equivalent order) used for shopping?

PRE-QUALIFICATIONIs pre-qualification carried out when appropriate? Do pre-qualification documents clearly and completely describe all requisites for submitting responsive applications and the qualification requirements?Is financial information required and analysed to assess financial capabilities to perform contracts?

ADVERTISEMENTAre contracts to be awarded by competitive bidding publicly advertised in a widely circulated media?Is the required minimum time allowed to obtain documents and prepare bids observed? (check the national regulations for minimum time scales)?

COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN BIDDERS AND THE PROCURING AGENCYAre requests for clarifications answered promptly and completely in a written form and communicated to all prospective bidders?Are clarifications, minutes of the pre-bid conference, if any, and modifications of the documents promptly communicated to all prospective bidders?

RECEIPT OF BIDS AND OPENINGAre bids received prior to the deadline securely stored (i.e. secure tender box or other lockable facility)?Are public bid openings conducted?If public bid openings are conducted, are they done within 48 hours following the deadline for submission?Do bid opening procedures generally follow those specified in the Guidelines? Are minutes kept?

BID EXAMINATION AND EVALUATIONAre evaluations conducted by a suitably qualified evaluating committees? Is responsiveness determined on the basis of the documentary requirements described in the documents?Are bid evaluations carried out thoroughly and on the basis of the criteria specified in the documents?Are evaluations completed within the original bid validity period?Are bid evaluation reports prepared containing all essential information?

CONTRACT AWARD AND EFFECTIVENESSAre contracts required to be awarded to the lowest evaluated responsive bidder who has been determined to be qualified to perform the contract satisfactorily?Are unsuccessful bidders informed in writing that they have not won the contract?Are conditions precedent to contract effectiveness clearly defined in the contract? (ie - performance security, advance payment etc)

53


CONTRACT ADMINISTRATIONIs there a contract monitoring system, either in manual or electronic format, in use? Review sampleIs there a process being used to monitor delivery of goods and services to verify quantity, quality and timeliness?Are contract amendments handled promptly in accordance with the contract conditions and established practice? Are contractual disputes handled in accordance with a formal complaints /arbitration system? Are works contracts supervised by Independent Engineers or a named Project Manager?Are contracts completed on schedule and within the originally approved contract price?Are final payments and contract final closure handled in accordance with the relevant national procedure?

ORGANISATION AND FUNCTIONSDo procurement staff have access to copies of the national procurement regulatory framework (i.e. law, regulations, manuals/user guides)?Are the procurement and financial management functions separated?

SUPPORT AND CONTROL SYSTEMSIndependent auditing arrangements are in place and audits are undertaken?Does the unit have access to legal advice and is there evidence that is utilises that service?

RECORD KEEPINGDoes the agency maintain a complete record of the process? Are adequate contract administration records maintained? Are periodic reports prepared on overall procurement activities?Is a record of contract prices maintained? How is it used? To establish national price indices?

STAFFINGIs the agency staffed with trained procurement personnel in line with any requirements within the national regulatory framework?

54


ANNEX VI : Cost Tables

Asia and Pacif icMedium Term Cooperation Programme w ith Farmers Organisations, Phase 2

Expenditure Accounts by Years -- Base Costs(US$ '000)

Base Cost2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

I. Investment Costs A. Review , w orkshop and training 1 377.0 440.0 1 157.0 374.0 1 091.0 4 439.0B. Research, studies and Publication 343.0 66.0 376.0 33.0 376.0 1 194.0C. Travel and representation 1 266.0 501.0 1 321.0 501.0 1 321.0 4 910.0D. Technical assistance 470.0 390.0 400.0 300.0 360.0 1 920.0E. M&E, know ledge management 83.5 61.5 94.5 61.5 114.5 415.5

Total Investment Costs 3 539.5 1 458.5 3 348.5 1 269.5 3 262.5 12 878.5II. Recurrent Costs

A. Salaries and allow ance 218.0 178.0 218.0 178.0 218.0 1 010.0B. Office utilities and logistic support 67.7 43.2 67.7 43.2 67.7 289.5

Total Recurrent Costs 285.7 221.2 285.7 221.2 285.7 1 299.5Total BASELINE COSTS 3 825.2 1 679.7 3 634.2 1 490.7 3 548.2 14 178.0

Physical Contingencies 191.3 84.0 181.7 74.5 177.4 708.9Price Contingencies

Inflation Local 60.2 80.2 293.1 170.8 530.5 1 134.8Foreign - - - - - -

Subtotal Inflation 60.2 80.2 293.1 170.8 530.5 1 134.8Devaluation - - - - - -

Subtotal Price Contingencies 60.2 80.2 293.1 170.8 530.5 1 134.8Total PROJECT COSTS 4 076.7 1 843.8 4 109.0 1 736.0 4 256.1 16 021.7

55


Asia and Pacif icMedium Term Cooperation Programme w ith Farmers Organisations, Phase 2

Project Components by Year -- Base Costs(US$ '000)

Base Cost2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

A. Strengthening FOs & Their Networks 1. Institutional strengthening 539.0 - 539.0 - 539.0 1 617.02. Operational strengthening 494.0 300.0 514.0 234.0 408.0 1 950.0

Subtotal 1 033.0 300.0 1 053.0 234.0 947.0 3 567.0B. FOs Participation in Policy Process

1. Participation in national platform 404.0 216.0 492.0 183.0 492.0 1 787.02. Participation in regional and sub-regional platforms 620.0 186.0 620.0 186.0 620.0 2 232.0

Subtotal 1 024.0 402.0 1 112.0 369.0 1 112.0 4 019.0C. FO Services and Involvement in Ag. Dev. Programmes

1. Development of collaboration platform 614.0 370.0 304.0 280.0 304.0 1 872.02. Collaboration w ith IFAD country programme 753.0 293.0 753.0 293.0 753.0 2 845.0

Subtotal 1 367.0 663.0 1 057.0 573.0 1 057.0 4 717.0D. Programme Management & Coordination 401.2 314.7 412.2 314.7 432.2 1 875.0Total BASELINE COSTS 3 825.2 1 679.7 3 634.2 1 490.7 3 548.2 14 178.0

Physical Contingencies 191.3 84.0 181.7 74.5 177.4 708.9Price Contingencies

Inflation Local 60.2 80.2 293.1 170.8 530.5 1 134.8Foreign - - - - - -

Subtotal Inflation 60.2 80.2 293.1 170.8 530.5 1 134.8Devaluation - - - - - -

Subtotal Price Contingencies 60.2 80.2 293.1 170.8 530.5 1 134.8Total PROJECT COSTS 4 076.7 1 843.8 4 109.0 1 736.0 4 256.1 16 021.7

56

Date post:	05-Aug-2019
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vancong
View:	239 times
Download:	0 times