Partnership between CORAF/WECARD · PDF filethinking to CORAF/WECARD and ... Extending the...

Conseil Ouest et Centre Africain pour la Recherche et le Développement Agricoles / West and Central

African Council for Agricultural Research and Development (CORAF/WECARD)

and

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research

Organisation (CSIRO)

Partnership between CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO

Design Document

August 2 2010

CORAF/WECARD – CSIRO Partnership Design Document ‐ DRAFT to July 25, 2010

2

Table of Contents

List of Acronyms......................................................................................................................................3

1 Context and Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 5

1.1 CORAF/WECARD....................................................................................................................8

1.2 CSIRO ...................................................................................................................................10

2 Partnership Description ............................................................................................................... 11

2.1 Management Arrangements ............................................................................................... 15

2.2 Funding Flows...................................................................................................................... 17

2.3 Implementation Arrangements. .......................................................................................... 19

2.4 Workplan .............................................................................................................................24

2.5 Partnership Budget.............................................................................................................. 26

2.6 Coordination Arrangements................................................................................................ 29

3 Risks and Risk Management......................................................................................................... 30

4 Monitoring and Evaluation........................................................................................................... 35

4.1 Monitoring and Evaluation Plan ......................................................................................... 35

4.2 Annual Review and Reporting ............................................................................................. 36

4.3 Annual review 2011................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

5 Over‐Arching Issues...................................................................................................................... 37

5.1 Gender Equity...................................................................................................................... 37

5.2 Sustainability .......................................................................................................................38

5.3 Environment and Climate Change....................................................................................... 39

Annex 1: CORAF/WECARD Budget Details............................................................................................ 41

Annex 2: Review of the DfID‐funded Change Management Project within CORAF/WECARD .............43

Annex 3: Sub‐grant Agreement for CORAF/WECARD Commissioned Projects ....................................47

Annex 4: Multi Donor Trust Fund for CORAF/WECARD – Financial Management Input to PAD .........55

Annex 5: Monitoring and Evaluation Matrix......................................................................................... 63


3

List of Acronyms

AfDB African Development Bank

ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa

AU African Union

AusAID Australian Agency for International Development

BecA Biosciences East and Central Africa

CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme

CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research

CIAT‐TSBF Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical – Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility Institute

CIRAD Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement

CORAF Conseil Ouest et Centre Africain pour la Recherche et le Développement Agricoles

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

CTA Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation ACP‐EU (Africa Caribbean Pacific – European Union)

DfID Department for International Development (UK)

DONATA Dissemination of New Agricultural Technologies in Africa

EC European Commission

ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States

FARA Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa

IAR4D Integrated Agricultural Research for Development

ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi‐Arid Tropics

IDRC International Development Research Centre

IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute

IITA International Institute for Tropical Agriculture

ILRI International Livestock Research Institute

MDG Millennium Development Goal

MDTF Multi‐Donor Trust Fund

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

NARI National Agricultural Research Institution

NARS National Agricultural Research System


4

NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development

NRM Natural Resources Management

RDE Research, Development and Extension

SAF Sustainable Agriculture Flagship

SCARDA Strengthening Capacity for Agricultural Research and Development in Africa

STC Scientific and Technical Committee (of CORAF/WECARD)

TAG Technical Advisory Group

UEMOA West African Economic and Monetary Union

USAID United States Agency for International Development

WAAPP West African Agricultural Productivity Program

WECARD West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development


5

1 Context and Analysis

Economic stagnation, ongoing conflict, natural disasters and prevalence of HIV/AIDS and other diseases have left African countries both more vulnerable to shocks and less able to invest in mechanisms to reduce vulnerability. While countries such as South Africa, Botswana and Namibia have developed social protection mechanisms, sub‐Saharan Africa spends significantly less on social protection than any other region in the world. Without adequate safety nets, the near‐poor are pushed below the poverty line and the poor fall deeper into poverty, often taking children out of school, skipping meals and selling assets.

Sub‐Saharan Africa is the only region in the world where the proportion of the population living below the poverty line is growing. With the highest proportion of people suffering from chronic hunger, Millennium Development Goal 1: to half extreme poverty and hunger by 2015, is an especially big challenge in many countries in the region. Recently, rising food prices, increased fuel costs and the global recession have worsened the food security situation across the region, especially in dry areas.

One of the major challenges to food security in Africa is an underdeveloped and underproductive agricultural sector. Over two‐thirds of Africa’s population is dependent on agriculture for employment and sustenance. However, the region produces less food per person today than it did in the 1970’s1. The poor state of the sector also reflects inadequate public investment in agriculture and a rapid decline in donor support for agricultural production over the last 30 years2. Years of neglect have resulted in environmental degradation, low fertility soils, poorly organised farmers’ associations, poor infrastructure, and inadequate agricultural education, research and technology transfer systems.

Furthermore, inefficient market systems entail that farmers in sub‐Saharan Africa are regularly unable to participate effectively in agricultural markets. Market inefficiencies are caused by poor infrastructure, high transaction and transport costs, lack of information systems, lack of appropriate policy and regulatory environments, weak regional integration, varying market standards and low competitiveness.

The impact of climate change is generally expected to be detrimental for agriculture in Africa. Even with moderate warming, there are likely to be substantial shifts in the patterns of African cropping and livestock production systems. By 2050, higher temperatures and lower rainfall might reduce crop yields by 10‐20%, but in some places the impact may be far greater, and it is the poor who are most likely to be affected. Increasing frequency of heat stress, drought and flooding will exacerbate the impact on crop and livestock productivity and in some places it will be necessary to change livelihood strategies and agricultural systems in order to preserve or ensure food security3.

1 IFPRI:5 2 While overall development assistance to Africa has risen, the share of agriculture in official development assistance (ODA) declined sharply over the past two decades, from a high of about 18 percent in 1979 to 3.5 percent in 2004.

3 P.G.Jones & P.K.Thornton “Croppers to livestock keepers: livelihood transitions to 2050 in Africa due to climate change”, Environmental Science and Policy, 12(2009) 427‐437


6

While climate change will bring greater challenges for food security in Africa, constraints to agricultural productivity are already profound. Addressing this suite of current challenges will greatly improve the preparedness of farming systems to the challenges of climate change.

Despite challenges from climate variability and change, disease and conflict and post‐conflict situations, there is significant potential for agriculture in West and Central Africa. There is a growing labour force and a widening range of higher‐yielding technologies and improved farming systems. Large gaps between potential and achieved yields suggest that there are strong opportunities to increase productivity, and urbanisation is expanding local markets while globalisation is opening international markets. While there are several national and regional initiatives on climate change mitigation, such as through FANRPAN, COMESA and the African Climate Solution (ACS), the most immediate responses and impacts are likely to be though development and adoption of farmer‐based adaptation strategies. The sub‐humid to semi‐arid zone of West Africa is one which is predicted to be severely challenged by climate change. Innovative adaptation strategies are urgently required to enable farmers to attain food security and improved livelihoods through transition to more livestock production and use of more water‐efficient options in crop production.

CSIRO and other Australian research agencies are world leaders in farming systems research in semi‐arid tropical environments with highly variable rainfall. That expertise will not only be employed in projects that are undertaken under this partnership, but the Partnership will bring stronger systems thinking to CORAF/WECARD and its partner NARS and will undoubtedly influence the research programs undertaken through other donors.

Reflecting the Government’s increased commitment to Africa, the 2009‐2010 Australian Budget provided $100 million of this commitment to the African Food Security Initiative. AusAID is responsible for $83.3 million and ACIAR responsible for $16.7 million.

From inception, the African Food Security Initiative was designed around a number of key principles. These included: alignment with the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP)4, ensuring that any Australian contribution would need to demonstrate a clear Australian value addition, that activities would generate recognition and a positive profile (particularly amongst African leaders), and ensuring strong African ownership. The CAADP framework is built around 4 Pillars:

1. Extending the area under Sustainable Land Management and Reliable Water Control Systems

2. Improving rural infrastructure and trade‐related capacities for market access

3. Increasing Food Supply and Reducing Hunger

4. Agricultural Research, Technology Dissemination and Adoption

AusAID is supporting the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) to develop an institutional partnership with the Conseil Ouest et Centre Africain pour la Recherche et le Développement Agricoles / West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development (CORAF/WECARD). This document describes the design for that Partnership.

4 Of the African Union (AU) and the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD)


7

CORAF/WECARD is mandated by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) to coordinate the implementation of CAADP Pillar IV in West and Central Africa. The CORAF/WECARD region also has several important similarities to northern Australia in terms of its climate and soils, especially in the sub‐humid and semi‐arid mixed crop‐livestock zones of the sub‐region. Australia’s science credentials and experience in such environments means that it therefore has exceptional potential to add value to agricultural research development in the sub‐region.

In addition to this focus on West and Central Africa though CORAF/WECARD, AusAID (and CSIRO) has a parallel research partnership with BecA (Biosciences for East and Central Africa) based at the ILRI campus in Nairobi. Details of that partnership are provided under a separate design document. Although the research focus and the technologies in the two partnerships are, in many respects quite different, there are several complementarities, especially in relation to the animal health research focus, and it is planned that some aspects of the research be co‐located in Nairobi.

Similarly, the ACIAR funded maize‐based farming systems project in east and southern Africa will have similarities with some of the CORAF/WECARD research program, and appropriate linkages between the two programs are being developed, including the likelihood of annual joint workshops.

CORAF/WECARD has undergone significant change through a refocussing process over the past five years and has adopted new strategic and operational plans. That refocussing has seen its role in the sub‐region expand and be more strongly recognised both within the sub‐region and by donors. In the sub‐region, national governments have committed annual contributions of about US$ 1.5 million. Six subregional countries (Ghana, Mali, Senegal, Cote d’Ivoire, Burkina Faso and Nigeria) contribute further funding via the World Bank initiative (WAAP 1A and WAAP 1B).

External donors have aligned their financial support to CORAF/WECARD in a number of ways. DfID has focussed on institutional support, especially as it relates to the organisational design and function over the past years, together with some regional capacity strengthening in projects such as SCARDA. USAID has focussed on both institutional support and research programs that have focussed on the development and adoption/scale‐out of new varieties of a range of crops such as sorghum, rice, cassava, yam and cowpea. The African Development Bank has supported commissioned projects such as DONATA – a project on dissemination of research results, as have CTA. The Syngenta Foundation and ECOWAS have supported research in biotechnologies and biosafety. IDRC are currently supporting a livelihoods resilience project based on livestock.

With few exceptions, most current commissioned research projects have a commodity focus, an adoption focus (often built around a particular commodity), or a capacity building focus. The current set of commissioned projects does not have projects focussing on the integration of crops and livestock, and there is an absence of projects which encompass the broader farming systems. It is this niche – whole‐of‐system and integration of livestock and cropping, which distinguishes the proposed Australian‐supported projects. This integrated approach will undoubtedly add value in whole‐of‐system research and also add value through development of farming systems concepts in the CORAF/WECARD secretariat and the partnering NARS. Discussions at various African fora only confirm that despite the almost unanimous aim of embracing IAR4D principles, transferring that aim to projects and project development is rare.


8

New partnerships currently being developed, but not yet finalised are those with Germany, France (via CIRAD) and the European Community. There will also be a greater level of support from USAID in coming years. Including the Australian support, about 85% of CORAF/WECARD’s financial needs for the five‐year period of the 2008‐2013 operational plan has been met, with the biggest gap being in program (research) support.

1.1 CORAF/WECARD

CORAF/WECARD was created in 1987 and is currently made up of 22 member States: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape‐Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea‐Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo5. These countries have a total area of over 11.5 million square kilometres, with a population of over 318 million, 70% of whom depend directly on agriculture for their livelihoods.

CORAF/WECARD is based in Dakar, Senegal. Although an entity since 1987, it has reformed its governance, objectives and program structure over the last few years. That period of intensive organisational reform and change management, which has been supported by DFID, is drawing to a close and has yielded major changes to how CORAF/WECARD does business. The revised governance of CORAF/WECARD retains the General Assembly as the peak governing body, electing broad‐based agriculture stakeholder representation onto the Governing Board and approving changes to its Statutes and governance bodies. It comprises members from the National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) of member states, with one voting representative from each country. The Governing Board has elected representatives from member countries plus invited members from other agencies and sectors including the private sector, non‐government organisations, CGIAR and development partners. A Scientific and Technical Committee of 12 members is chosen on the basis of their personal expertise in the area of development research to provide specialist advice and oversight of the CORAF/WECARD research and development agenda.

The institutional reforms implemented by CORAF/WECARD reflect the recognition that the region needed to address food security, rural employment and sub‐regional market integration rather than just make simple gains from production systems addressed individually by each country. As a result, CORAF/WECARD has revitalised its approach to tackling the region’s agricultural challenges, using a commissioned report prepared by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), which addresses priorities for the region based on commodities and thematic areas. Through an intensive participatory process it has developed new Strategic and Operational Plans, which defines its research direction and partnerships. CORAF/WECARD also targets the building of partnerships with regional universities and the private sector of the economy across the sub‐region.

The CORAF/WECARD Strategic Plan (2007‐2016) translates the institution’s vision to achieve: “a sustainable reduction in poverty and food insecurity in West and Central Africa through an increase in agricultural‐led economic growth and sustainable improvement of key aspects of the agricultural research system…”. It is explicitly intended to contribute to the CAADP strategies and targets. The four key objectives for the period include:

5 Members are National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS)


9

• identifying opportunities for greatest food security impact, e.g. focussing on bridging the gap between potential and actual farmer yields in crop or mixed crop‐livestock systems in the sub‐humid to semi‐arid zones rather than the livestock‐only production systems of the more arid zones;

• research which links with the private sector and with markets;

• focusing research on cross‐cutting natural resource management programs that underpin food security; and

• focussing strongly on capacity building across the research for development “value chain”, linking CORAF/WECARD and the research, extension, NGOs, and the private sector with farmers in improved systems approaches towards ensuring food security

Operational research priorities at CORAF/WECARD are built around eight Programs:

1. Livestock, Fisheries and Aquaculture

2. Staple Crops

3. Non‐Staple Crops

4. Natural Resource Management

5. Biotechnology and Biosafety

6. Policy, Markets and Trade

7. Knowledge Management

8. Capacity Strengthening and Co‐ordination

Program managers have been appointed for all of these programs. The recruitment of the Non‐Staple Crops Program Manager is in progress and will be completed by the end of 2010.

CORAF/WECARD facilitates research by either open competitive calls for proposal or by commissioned research. In either case, at least three countries are required to participate in any particular project, with one stakeholder organisation in one of the countries taking the role of coordinator. Advanced Research Institutes such as CIRAD6 and CGIAR partners can also be participants in CORAF/WECARD projects and may act as technical backstopping institutions.

CORAF/WECARD does not manage project operations. The principal mode of operation is for the coordinating or focal organisation, usually a National Agricultural Research Institute (NARI), to manage and co‐ordinate collaborating organisations within a project (financially and operationally). In some cases, difficulties are encountered in transferring funds from the coordinating organisation to other participating institutions due for example to low capacity; in these cases, funds disbursement is done directly by the CORAF/WECARD Secretariat.

The Strategic Plan proposes considerable growth during the CSIRO‐CORAF/WECARD Partnership period: a total budget in 2009 of US$10.76 million of which US$3.44 million was in support of the

6 Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement


10

Secretariat and the remaining US$7.31 million was allocated to Programs will increase to more than US$18 million in 2010 (see previous comments with regard to discussions with USAID, Germany, France and the EU). Funding for this growth is still to be finalised, and our funding will be critical in building a base from which CORAF/WECARD can achieve the growth that has been mandated by member countries (see details in Annex 1, which also provides details of donor support for the period 2008‐2013).

DfID is the major donor providing on‐going institutional support for the period of the Operational Plan, i.e. until 2013, and also supporting the change management exercise until June 2010, designed to facilitate implementation of the Operational Plan. USAID is also providing both institutional and programmatic support for the period June 2009 to June 2013, including the funding of a special adviser to the Executive Director.

The intention of DfID and the EC is to pool their support for CORAF/WECARD into a Multi‐Donor Trust Fund which will be administered by the World Bank. The process of establishing this MDTF is ongoing and until it is operational, donor support is being provided directly by DFID.

1.2 CSIRO

CSIRO is one of Australia’s national science agencies with large food, agricultural and farming systems research portfolios, which are delivered through a number of organisational Flagships. The organisation’s agricultural and farming systems portfolios range from plant and animal genetics and improvement to biosecurity, pest and disease management, forestry, farming systems, human nutrition and socio‐economics. It is this breadth of science which enables CSIRO to contribute across the entire range of anticipated research in this partnership with CORAF/WECARD, and with the parallel partnership with BecA. The farming systems research which will be the key research alignment with this Partnership, is within the Sustainable Agriculture Flagship. Note that in this context, the term “Farming System” as used in this design document relates to the whole system and includes issues elements such as genetics, production of both crops and livestock, pest and disease management, the socio‐economic, environmental issues, marketing and policy. The term as used here equates to what is sometimes referred to as “IAR4D” (International Agricultural Research for Development), with the key elements of IAR4D being engagement and partnership with a full range of stakeholders, targeting change and adoption of new practices at various scales from on‐farm to policy, and an imbedded capacity building and learning focus for all stakeholders.

CSIRO has a long‐established reputation for its contribution to international research, development and extension, both through leadership of development aid projects undertaken in developing countries and via collaboration with national and international RDE agencies. Many of these collaborations are with African national agencies or with key CGIAR centres with significant research and development agendas across sub‐Saharan Africa.

The Partnership between CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD will build on this history of engagement in farming systems research and animal health in Africa. The partnership will facilitate its engagement with the wider international research community, both internal and external to Africa, which is a fundamental role for Australia’s national science organisation. The Partnership will also strengthen CSIRO’s science base through new research opportunities and questions, and the partnering of researchers in projects will foster the career development of CSIRO researchers. Exposure to new


11

research communities and new research paradigms are recognised as catalysts for both research innovation and leadership development.

2 Partnership Description

The Partnership will support CORAF to implement its Strategic Plan above, by focusing primarily on a program of priority agricultural research over four years 2010 – 2013. The logical structure of the Partnership design was initially developed in a workshop between CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD staff and subsequently adjusted in consultation with AusAID and CORAF/WECARD. It will contribute directly to the implementation of the CORAF/WECARD operational and strategic plans and to the achievement of CAADP Pillar IV in West and Central Africa. CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO will work together as partners through a jointly‐agreed program of research and capacity building activities.

The Partnership will work in the context of the overlapping priorities and expertise of the two partners, with interventions in semi‐arid and sub‐humid regions in West and Central Africa. It will focus on jointly‐identified areas of research that are drawn from the CORAF/WECARD Strategic Plan, namely:

1. identifying or developing more efficient water and nutrient use and management that will enable smallholder farmers to increase their crop productivity;

2. identifying or developing improved management of feed and animal diseases so smallholder farmers can increase their livestock productivity; and

3. developing improved and appropriate agricultural inputs and market opportunities for smallholder farmers through better informed agribusiness and advisory sectors.

The overall purpose of the CSIRO‐CORAF/WECARD Partnership is to assist CORAF/WECARD to more effectively discharge its responsibility to drive improved agriculture research in West and Central Africa. To achieve this, the Partnership design is aligned with the CORAF/WECARD strategic plan. The Partnership will support the key research result areas defined in the plan, viz.:

1. appropriate technologies and innovations developed;

2. strategic decision‐making options for policy, institutions and markets developed;

3. sub‐regional agricultural research system strengthened and coordinated;

4. demand for agricultural information from target groups facilitated and met;

CORAF/WECARD states in its Strategic Plan that these result areas ‘constitute the nucleus of the paradigm shift away from conventional research focusing on the technology packages’. CSIRO has a long history of systems research which encompasses these four result areas and endorses this statement, intent and its application in the joint development of research plans and proposals with CORAF/WECARD and the NARS.

Figure 1 demonstrates how the CSIRO partnership builds on key elements of the Strategic Plan. Thus the effort is to build genuine partnerships to maximise ownership of outcomes and to minimise transaction costs to CORAF/WECARD.


12

The logic of the Partnership adopts CORAF/WECARD program design language, thus nesting the Partnership within the CORAF/WECARD institutional logframe.


13

Partnership will CONTRIBUTE to the CORAF/

WECARD Specific

Objective and target

Results…

…over the long‐term

Figure 1: CORAF – CSIRO Partnership Logic

CORAF/WECARD SPECIFIC OBJECTIVEBroad‐based agricultural productivity, competitiveness and markets sustainably improved in West and Central Africa

CORAF/WECARD RESULT 1

Appropriate technologies and innovations developed

(to improve smallholder farming systems and market access in mixed crop livestock systems in semi‐arid and sub‐humid regions

of WCA)


Demand for agricultural knowledge from targeted clients facilitated and met

(to improve extension/dissemination of new technologies in mixed crop‐livestock systems in semi‐arid and sub‐humid

regions of WCA)

PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 1

A research portfolio that can add value to crop productivity through more

efficient water and nutrient use and management


A research portfolio that can

add value to livestock

productivity through better feed and animal

disease management


Current and new knowledge being disseminated at the farm and

community level


Strategic decision‐making options for policy, institutions and markets developed

AND CORAF/WECARD RESULT 3

Sub‐regional agricultural research system strengthened and coordinated


Capacity building with institutional partners and community stakeholders


Research portfolio aimed at

addressing market access and

informing policy

Partnership will COMPLETE these activity

areas, contributing to CORAF/ WECARD Results…

…by 2012

Links between African and Australian agricultural scientists


Research includes socio‐economic

aspects to underpin adoption


14

CORAF/WECARD’s existing programmatic structure for research, development and extension (RDE) investment in its sub‐region is both sectoral (i.e. with programs based around staple crops, non‐staple crops, natural resource management (NRM), livestock and fisheries) and cross‐cutting (i.e. with programs addressing policy and markets, biotechnology, knowledge and capacity development).

Expected results of the Partnership are:

• national and sub‐regional research plans that specifically address soil and water management, resulting in increased resource use efficiencies and use by smallholder farmers;

• national and sub‐regional animal health plans that address two major animal diseases of the sub‐region – trypanosomiasis and contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CBPP);

• capacity building across the value chain ‐ involving Government research and extension services, NGOs, the private sector (agribusiness) and farmers, and CORAF/WECARD. This capacity building will focus on participatory systems analysis, which is the essential innovation required to address intervention options under high climate variability and investment risk;

• existing and emerging agri‐input and output market entities providing pathways for adoption of research as agribusiness becomes increasingly engaged in the participatory and IAR4D model of research and development.

• farmers implementing new options which address key constraints such as soil water and nutrients and improve production across a range of crop and livestock practices;

• farmers and NARS implementing new vaccination and disease management initiatives to improve animal health and animal production in cattle and small ruminants such as goats.

The Partnership will employ several strategies to ensure development impact, while contributing to an enhanced profile for Australia. These include:

• ensuring that activities undertaken align with CORAF/WECARD priorities and its strategic plan, and are therefore responding to issues identified by the NARS as being of the highest importance;

• ensuring the relevance and a systems approach to research activities by adoption of an IAR4D model of research for development with farmer groups, agribusiness and other major stakeholders as active participants in all stages of the research, from priority setting, to design, implementation and adoption

• ensuring activities are relevant and of sufficient size to “make a difference” at national and institutional scale. Spreading any investment too thinly within CORAF/WECARD will reduce science impact at the national and institutional level;

• paying close attention to planning for dissemination and adoption activities at the start of project design, and identifying ways to resource dissemination and adoption activities throughout research and on completion, and making budget commitments for scale out activities;


15

• ensuring that capacity building across the “research for development” value chain is given sufficient priority so that real impacts flow through to the university sector, the NARIs and the emerging private sector input and output markets;

• ensuring that sufficient resources and effort are applied to communication strategies for the Partnership and individual projects; with this in mind CORAF/WECARD will appoint a communications professional in the Secretariat to ensure that relevant CORAF/WECARD stories get told. This position will be supported both financially and professionally by the CSIRO in the Partnership;

• maintaining communication between CSIRO and the Australian High Commissions in Accra and Pretoria so that opportunities for linking with other initiatives such as the AusAID scholarship program can be maximised;

• CSIRO engaging with and providing technical advice to the CORAF/WECARD Scientific and Technical Committee as requested by CORAF/WECARD;

• Australian program and project team members maintaining close links with the CORAF/WECARD Secretariat, especially the Executive Director and Director of Programmes and supporting their capacity, especially in areas such as communication which has been identified as being one area in need of specific institutional support;

• attendance by Australian representatives from AusAID and/or CSIRO at various fora, such as sub‐regional meetings as well as higher level CAADP and Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) donor meetings;

• continuous engagement with CORAF/WECARD and other donors and others in the research community to ensure that the research in this Partnership adds value to the whole‐of‐region research agenda, and that the partnership research builds synergies with other donors and researchers. This will be especially important and the CORAF/WECARD portfolio of research grows in 2011 and beyond.

2.1 Management Arrangements

The partnership implementation principle is to use, and thereby support and strengthen, the existing planning, management and reporting arrangements in CORAF/WECARD. With considerable support from DfID, CORAF/WECARD has developed a new Strategic Plan (2007‐2016); an Operational Plan (2008‐2013), which has included institutional restructuring and expansion, mainly through the establishment of the eight program areas and the employment of program managers; and extensive systems development. The support by DfID has also involved the undertaking of an extensive change management process, which was initiated in January 2009, to facilitate implementation of the Operational Plan. The process will end in June 2010 but there are plans are to continue certain aspects of the change management. The details of this have yet to be finalised.

The Partnership will be managed jointly by CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD (Figure 2). AusAID will provide the majority of partnership funding through a separate partnership relationship with CSIRO. Management arrangements have been designed to minimise the additional management processes or systems, while providing sufficient structure and clarity for both partners, and for AusAID. The primary mechanism for management is the Partnership Management Committee. The Committee will provide a forum for both partners to make decisions about Partnership activities, monitor the


16

state of the relationship between the two institutions, and monitor progress with the implementation of research and capacity building projects.

The Management Committee will comprise the CORAF/WECARD Director of Programmes and the CSIRO Partnership Leader. It will meet in Africa twice a year, with at least 2 additional meetings held each year, as determined by the Management Committee.

Both partners will dedicate resources to staffing and managing the Partnership and its research activities. The CSIRO Partnership Leader will manage the Partnership on the CSIRO side, dedicating at least 60% of his time to both this Partnership and the parallel partnership with Biosciences East and Central Africa (BecA). CSIRO has also designated a staff member as Partnership Coordinator, supporting and assisting the Partnership Leader. She will be supported by CSIRO’s administration and management staff and systems. The CORAF/WECARD Director of Programmes will lead Partnership management on the African side. CORAF/WECARD will also designate a staff member (a Programme Officer) as the Partnership Coordinator, who will similarly support the Director of Programmes in Partnership management and implementation.

For CORAF/WECARD, the Partnership Management Committee reports to the Executive Director as the most senior officer of CORAF/WECARD, to the Scientific and Technical Committee, which has a critical role in science and its implementation through the science investment policy of CORAF/WECARD, and to the CORAF/WECARD Board who has ultimate responsibility for the sub‐regional organisation. Similarly, the Partnership Management Committee reports to the appropriate CSIRO Sustainable Agriculture Flagship (SAF) Theme Leader, the SAF Director and its senior management team, and ultimately to the CSIRO Board.

While AusAID itself does not have direct representation on the Partnership Management Committee, AusAID will continue to support the program and monitor activities as required and in agreement with CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD. AusAID will continue to provide technical experts to assist CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD develop aspects of the partnership as required (eg. monitoring and evaluation, review, reporting and social aspects (gender, environment)). This Technical Advisory Group (TAG) of appointed experts will have key oversight and advisory roles across the range of activities and responsibilities within the management matrix, and especially in monitoring and evaluation and reviews, and consultation with AusAID. At a minimum, the TAG will consist of a M&E specialist, an institutional/partnership design specialist and a science advisor with extensive African experience.


17

2.2 Funding Flows

Partnership funding will follow a streamlined process that provides an important level of certainty to CORAF/WECARD while providing appropriate fiduciary controls. The funding process is based on the recognition that CORAF/WECARD has put considerable effort into strengthening its financial management and reporting processes and practices and will, therefore, contribute to the ongoing institutionalisation of these enhanced processes.

CORAF/WECARD financial processes have been extensively developed and reviewed over the past years as part of the DfID‐funded change management program and through a World Bank Review of processes The DfID reviews of progress with the change management program over the course of

CORAF/WECARD Board CSIRO Board AusAID

Partnership Management Committee CORAF/WECARD Director of Programmes

CSIRO Partnership Leader CORAF/WECARD Director Admin & Finance Partnership Coordinator (CORAF/WECARD)

Partnership Coordinator (CSIRO)

CORAF/WECARD CSIRO

Scientific & Technical Committee

AusAID‐contracted Technical

Advisory Group

Figure 2: CORAF/WECARD‐CSIRO Partnership – Management and Governance S

Sustainable Agriculture Flagship

CORAF/WECARD Executive Director

CSIRO Theme Leader

NARS / Project Implementers


18

20097 have found that the new systems are sound and well‐established in the institution. One reviewer (author of the Machin Review8) commented that: “neither (he) nor the World Bank report of 2008 found any significant weaknesses” in the CORAF/WECARD financial systems (see Annex 2 for review). Nevertheless the Machin Review in particular suggested the need for a number of modifications to financial and administrative management with the most critical being the disbursement of funds to NARS, procurement, IT Infrastructure, and the appointment of an administrative manager. Two of the main issues, raised were:

1. Disbursement of project/programme funds to NARS

CORAF/WECARD Response: Rather than the ad‐hoc assessment of financial systems by the CORAF/WECARD Director Finance, CORAF/WECARD now insists on partnering NARS having a Certified Financial Management System in place together with annual external auditing and an evaluation by the CORAF/WECARD financial staff every two years.

2. Procurement and IT Infrastructure

CORAF/WECARD Response: A Procurement specialist has been appointed since the Machin Report and he has reviewed and updated the procurement section of the finance and administration manual and set out well defined procedures to be followed for all contracts and procurement activities throughout CORAF/WECARD. A new IT system has also been purchased and is in use and a IT manager appointed.

After discussions with relevant staff in April, CSIRO is confident the matters raised by Machin are being addressed. The appointment of the HR Manager has not yet been actioned as CORAF/WECARD is considering whether of not this role may be handled by the Administrative Manager. Whilst institution support for CORAF’s corporate functions largely covered by other donors, CSIRO stands ready to provide TA should CORAF require it under its capacity building support.

As noted above, major donors (DfID and EC) intend to direct their support through a Multi‐Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) once it has been established by the World Bank. There are, however, some concerns about the capacity of the MDTF mechanism to disburse funds in a timely fashion. Discussions in 2009 by CSIRO and the Director of ASARECA and others identified a number of concerns relating to both sub‐regional organisations. Those concerns were in relation to the slow delivery of committed funding, cumbersome processes and what was seen in some cases as repetitive reviews of governance arrangements. The restricted flow of funding from the Trust Fund to ASARECA was seen as a major constraint to the organisations’ ability to deliver. It is recommended that Australian support is provided directly to CORAF/WECARD, rather than contributing to the MDTF. That position may need review in years to come, once the Trust Fund is fully operational and there is a history of efficient and timely flow of funding to the sub‐regional organisations. A review/comparison of the two methods of funding delivery (MDTF and Direct Funding) was compiled by Pengelly, Carberry and Sutherland in May 2009.

7 The first review was by consultant Mr Harry Machin from IDL Consulting Group (the firm supporting the DfID‐funded change management program) in mid 2009. The second was by DfID Governance Adviser Mr Luke Mukubvu, in December 2009 (see Annex 2)

8 Machin Report, IDL Consulting Group and The Regional Multi Donor Trust Fund for CORAF/WECARD (see Annex 5)


19

Funding will be provided by AusAID to CSIRO through a single annual transfer. CSIRO will then allocate the funds into two accounts: one the Australian Inputs Fund and the other for eventual transfer to CORAF/WECARD. CSIRO and other Australian partners will provide additional contribution into the Australian Inputs Fund, representing their co‐investment into the Partnership’s research activities in West and Central Africa. Once the Partnership has commenced, funds will flow from AusAID to CSIRO to CORAF/WECARD and on to the NARS for the implementation of the research projects.

Financial supervision and reporting of funds flowing to and from CORAF/WECARD will employ existing CORAF/WECARD systems and processes. Overseen by the Director of Administration and Finance, CORAF/WECARD employs quarterly financial reporting from projects to the CORAF/WECARD Secretariat, and will provide quarterly financial reporting on to CSIRO. It also includes annual independent financial audits, conducted by an international audit firm (Currently MAZARS, Dakar – Senegal) which are provided to the CORAF/WECARD Board. These audits meet the requirements of other development partners such as DfID and the World Bank so should also be sufficient for AusAID/CSIRO.

CORAF/WECARD manages the downstream risk associated with partnerships with NARS through its well established processes, established criteria for selecting NARS which have appropriate governance, and through the use of well established, standard contracts between the NARS and itself (Annex 3). Each project has its own dedicated bank account and payments to the NARS payments are dependent on milestone delivery.

2.3 Implementation Arrangements.

The Partnership between CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO will be implemented over the four years 2010 – 2013, with funding support from AusAID. The first 15 months of the partnership up until June 2011 reflects modest funding support and focus on supporting the sub‐regional decision‐making on priorities via a number of workshops (see below), undertaking reviews and baseline studies of some of the main components of the sub‐regional socio‐economic and bio‐physical environment, the design of research activities, and a number of critical capacity building activities. Research projects which have undergone design, review and approval will commence before April 2011.

Budget allocations to the Food security initiative will result in a substantial increase in funding from July 2011, and this will support the implementation of a full program of research projects and associated capacity building and communication and planning for dissemination of information and adoption.

Research priorities have been decided on by CORAF/WECARD in partnership with sub‐regional stakeholder via scoping analysis done by Program Managers and through various workshops. All priorities are within the main farming system and environmental scope of the partnership focus, i.e. crop‐livestock systems within the sub‐humid to semi‐arid region. The research and development program will be scoped out by CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO with input from other key stakeholders such as selected NARS and CGIAR scientists. The actual proposals will be designed through a process of discussion between NARS, the CORAF/WECARD program management team, and CSIRO, whether they be commissioned or initiated via a competitive call.


20

Achieving impact at the farm and community levels as a result of the research activities of CORAF/WECARD and its implementing partners will take time. It will also require the support and participation of key partners such as agricultural extension services, NGOs and social scientists, in order to tread a clear pathway to impact. Most research projects are 2‐3 years long – necessary, for example, to allow field trials over more than one planting and harvesting season and to adequately prove advanced hypotheses. They will, therefore, come to an end at around the same time as this Partnership. It will thus be critical to address issues of potential impact in several ways:

• ensuring projects are not component research but rather large enough to enable a breadth of issues, biophysical and socio‐economic, to be addressed and the IAR4D principles to be applied and that each project has well developed plans for capacity strengthening and pathways to adoption;

• the design and implementation of each research project will include a range of sub‐regional and local stakeholders such as farmers/farmer groups, and the agribusiness sector. This participative process ensures that the “relevance” of the research is examined with end‐users and that both stakeholder groups have the understanding and “ownership” of the research findings that are so critical in gaining practice change and adoption;

• the design of every research project will involve other relevant stakeholders such as NGOs to support the adoption and dissemination of successful research outputs, particularly if NARS capacity for extension is limited;

• participating NARS/CGIAR institutions leading research projects supported by this initiative will coordinate and ensure that project activities and results contribute to their on‐going strategies for achieving adoption and impact;

• any future phases of Partnership support will address adoption and dissemination as well as the commencement of new or extended research activities.

The CSIRO Partnership Leader will identify appropriate CSIRO expertise to participate in this process and where appropriate, other interested parties such as those from CGIAR may be invited to contribute. This process is one which ensures that the research portfolio and the overall investment are aligned with sub‐regional priorities and that CSIRO has ample opportunity for input at all stages of the research and development design, implementation and subsequent scale‐out of research outputs. The process also allows for ample opportunity for input from a range of other stakeholders including CORAF/WECARD Program management team, NARIS, CGIAR centres, regional research centres, CSIRO and others national research agencies, in particular CIRAD.

Once developed in principle and articulated in a CORAF/WECARD Concept Note, research activities will be subject to review by the CORAF/WECARD Scientific and Technical Committee, with their recommendation being finally sent to the CORAF/WECARD Board for approval (this is in accordance with the usual CORAF/WECARD project development cycle, and is normal practice of drawing on the advice of Resource Persons to support the deliberations of the Scientific and Technical Committee). Although CSIRO scientists will not be members of the Scientific and Technical Committee, they will have the opportunity to participate throughout design and implementation of activities, and through their advice to the Scientific and Technical Committee. This will occur through CSIRO having


21

“observer” and “resource” status on the Science and Technology Committee, will be able to contribute to discussion and decisions of the Committee.

The decisions and recommendations of the Scientific and Technical Committee will be documented and publically available after they have been endorsed by the CORAF/WECARD Board. Under the CORAF/WECARD procedures, all submissions will receive feedback from the Scientific and Technical Committee. The processes of the Science and Technology Committee are outlined in detail in the CORAF/WECARD Competitive Grant Manual.

As noted above, CORAF/WECARD uses two processes for actioning activities, commissioned and open call, and both will be employed in the Partnership. To ensure that the Partnership moves from planning to research activities as quickly as possible and to accommodate the overall budget plan of increased funding in 2011‐12 and 2012‐13, two commissioned activities will be designed for commencement in the first half of 2010‐11. The majority of activities will be developed under the open call process which will see them commence in early 2011.

The CORAF/WECARD project cycle, and the points at which CSIRO will provide technical advice to support high quality research design, can be understood as follows:

The key elements of each of the research activities will be

• in both models (commissioned and open call) and in line with CORAF/WECARD policy, at least three countries from the sub‐region will participate in each project with one of these countries providing the coordinating or focal organisation;

• other parties such as those from Centres of the CGIAR or from advanced research institutions such as CIRAD can participate with activities funded through the CORAF/WECARD budget where appropriate;

Partnership Mgt C’ttee agrees priorities for support

Project concepts developed

Call for Proposals OR research proposals commissioned

Scientific & Technical Committee evaluates proposals

Implementation

Monitoring by CORAF/WECARD CSIRO scientific and

technical input

Identification of research priorities coordinated by

Program Managers (participatory process)


22

• Australian scientists will participate in each project from concept and design through to on‐ground work and analyses. This participation will be funded through the Australian Input component of the budget.

The Partnership’s research will commence with two commissioned projects. The Concept Notes for these two initial projects will be developed through CORAF/WECARD Program management priorities, alignment with CSIRO expertise and the emerging logic of the Partnership, and priorities identified in two subregional workshops held in Saly, Senegal in April 2010. Concept Notes were finalised in July 2010 during meetings in Senegal and Burkina Faso.

One commissioned project will be initiated in farming systems research and focus on seed systems including seed availability, distribution, agribusiness and comparison of varieties. The second commissioned project will be in animal health and the management of Contagious Bovine Pleuro Pneumonia. Concept Notes for the open call projects were developed at the July 2010 meetings in West Africa. These Concept Notes are of sufficient detail to enable CORAF/WECARD to progress to their open‐call process, followed by a selection process, refinement of the successful project proposals, evaluation by the Science and Technology Committee, commissioning and contracting. A similar process will be applied to the commissioned projects but for these, there will be no selection process. This timing will enable on‐ground research of the commissioned projects to commence in late 2010, and the research in the open call projects to commence by March 2011.

It is expected that the total number of projects within the 3 year period of the main partnership agreement will be about five (one in animal health and 4 in crop‐livestock systems projects). Fewer and larger projects will enable sufficient resources to be employed in each to conduct the full range of project components such as benchmarking, on‐ground research, capacity building and knowledge management and communication using participative processes, while employing the IAR4D principles.

CORAF/WECARD has identified nine of its constituent countries which are stable and have strong governance and capability that can underpin research and development as well as pathways to impact (market). These countries are Cameroon, Burkina Faso, Mali, Senegal, Nigeria, Niger, Benin, Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire. CORAF/WECARD management reported in the AusAID May mission that their relationships with these countries’ NARS were sound, as was their relationship with NGOs working in that region. CORAF/WECARD and partner countries also have existing partnerships with CGIAR centres working in the sub‐region, and these agencies already have considered pathways to impact on which the Australian initiative will be able to build. CORAF/WECARD made clear during the May Mission that engagement and partnerships with the eight countries listed above would not be problematic. CORAF/WECARD, however, made clear that it wishes to draw other constituent countries with lesser capacity into project implementation, whenever the opportunity arises, through training activities, in order to build their capacity.

In addition to these more general considerations and focus on existing capacity and relationships, considerable impact considerations have also been built into the design of the proposed projects. All of these projects have a strong systems and participatory design and strong engagement with both agribusiness and farmers.


23

Contracting Arrangements

Management and implementation arrangements will be formalised through a series of contractual arrangements. Implementation commence in March 2010 through short‐term, small scale funding agreements between CSIRO and AusAID, and CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD, enabling immediate activities to commence early in 2010.These agreements cover the period to 30 September 2010. The second agreement for Partnership implementation will run from October 2010 to June 2013 inclusive, and will focus on the research activities, knowledge transfer and communication across the sub‐region. Annex 4 provides the financial detail associated with the contracting approach. The two‐term approach has been used to enable the partnership proper to commence as soon as possible, so that the more complex partnership documentation and contracting associated with the second partnership term can be completed in parallel with term one.


24

2.4 Workplan

During the design process the partners developed an implementation workplan for the first phase of the Partnership (Table 1).

Table 1: CORAF/WECARD – CSIRO Partnership Workplan to June 2011

2010 2011 What Who

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Finalise CORAF‐CSIRO Partnership Design

CSIRO CORAF

Select research topics (project portfolio) ‐ Partnership Management Committee meeting

CSIRO CORAF

Finalise first 2 Project Concept Papers for commissioning

CSIRO CORAF

Commission 2 projects CORAF Commissioned proposals received CORAF

Commissioned projects evaluated by Scientific & Technical Committee (STC)

CORAF (+CSIRO)

Commissioned projects launched CORAF

Commissioned projects implementation NARS

Finalise Project Concepts for Open Call

CORAF CSIRO

Open Call for Proposals CORAF

Open Call proposals received CORAF CST evaluates open call proposals

CORAF (+CSIRO)

Projects contracting CORAF


25

Projects launched CORAF

Projects implementation NARS

CSIRO Visits to Africa CSIRO

CORAF Donor Meeting AusAID CORAF

CORAF Board Meetings

CORAF CSIRO AusAID

CORAF General Assembly Meeting

CSIRO CORAF

Field Monitoring CORAF CSIRO

Partnership Management Committee Meetings

CORAF CSIRO

STC Meeting CORAF Prepare Partnership Annual Plan for 2011

CORAF CSIRO

Partnership Annual and Joint Reviews

CORAF CSIRO

Partnership Annual Report Preparation

CORAF CSIRO

CORAF Annual Report preparation

CORAF CSIRO


26

2.5 Partnership Budget

Partnership funding, totalling A$17.57 million over four years will cover two contract periods and commence at a modest level followed by a substantial increase from June 2011 to June 2013. This funding profile reflects a progressively increased engagement, allowing time for the Partnership to develop and be proven, and allowing the necessary time for research activities to be designed and commenced. Tables 2 and 3 provide the details of the total Partnership Budget.

AusAID will contribute A$15.83 million to support the implementation of the Partnership over the period October 2010 to June 2013 and CSIRO will co‐invest A$1.06million to supplement the Australian Inputs Fund (see Tables 2 and 3 for details).

The Partnership will provide a moderate level of institutional support to the CORAF/WECARD Secretariat. This will contribute to the operational and management costs of the Secretariat and to the work associated with managing and implementing the Partnership and its supported research, capacity building and communication activities, especially as these increase substantially in the 20011‐13 period. Institutional support will grow from a total of $13,636 in 2009‐2010 to $620,000 in 2012‐2013, the final year when all projects will be fully operating and the partnership will have a growing commitment across the sub‐region and the partner countries. Table 2 details the support over the four years of Partnership implementation.

The Australian Inputs Fund will be managed by CSIRO and will be used to finance Australian scientific inputs from CSIRO and other institutions in Australia or elsewhere. In the first months of implementation, these inputs mainly cover the costs of Australian experts attending priority setting workshops and subsequent meetings and workshops to design research programs addressing these priorities. The budget of the Australian Inputs Fund reflects increase in activities in 2011‐ 12 and 2012‐13, and the projected increase in commitment from participating Australian scientists as the individual research and associated activities peak.


27

Table 2: Partnership Budget Details ‐ Partnership Periods 1 and 2 (Australian Dollars)

Interim Funding Agreement (Apr '09 ‐

Sept '10) Partnership Agreement (Oct '10 ‐ June '13)

2009‐10 2010‐11 Total 2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13 Total PARTNERSHIP IMPLEMENTATION BUDGET

1. CORAF Research Projects 162,727 149,091 311,818 710,000 3,130,000 6,880,000 10,720,000

2. CORAF Institutional support 13,636 13,636 27,272 290,000 420,000 620,000 1,330,000

Institutional support general 200,000 300,000 500,000 1,000,000

Co‐ordinator Position (CORAF/WECARD) 45,000‐10,000

60,000 60,000 165,000

Communications Position (CORAF/WECARD) 45,000‐10,000

60,000 60,000 165,000

3. Australian Inputs Fund Total 65,577 113,995 179,572 865,848 1,392,625 1,489,055 3,747,528

Australian Inputs Fund AusAID contribution 48,527 84,356 132,883 649,386 1,044,469 1,116,791 2,810,646

Australian Inputs Fund CSIRO co‐investment 17,050 29,639 46,689 216,462 348,156 372,264 936,882

SUBTOTAL IMPLEMENTATION BUDGET (A) 241,940 276,722 518,662 1,865,848 4,942,625 8,989,055 15,797,528 PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT BUDGET Partnership Management (for detailed split, refer below) 92,946 68,560 161,506 288,189 337,200 345,750 971,139

CSIRO in‐kind 32,442 44,924 46,663 124,029 SUBTOTAL MANAGEMENT BUDGET (B) 92,946 68,560 161,506 320,631 382,124 392,413 1,095,168

OVERALL PARTNERSHIP BUDGET (A) + (B) 334,886 345,282 680,168 2,186,479 5,324,749 9,381,468 16,892,696 DETAILS: PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT BUDGET: Partnership Management

‐ Salary (partnership leader and coordinator) 159,539 – 35,453 220,920 229,470 609,929

‐ Travel 122,475 113,030 113,030 348,535 ‐ Operating 6,175 3,250 3,250 12,675

Formatted: Highlight


28

TOTAL PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT 92,946 68,560 161,506 288,189 337,200 345,750 971,139

Table 2 (cont.): Partnership Budget Details – Partnership Agreements 1 and 2 (Australian Dollars)

Budget Notes ‐ Implementation Budget (A) 1. Australian inputs fund will support salary and operating/travel for CSIRO and other Australian expertise and has a co‐investment ratio of 75:25 (AusAID:CSIRO).

Budget notes ‐ Management Budget (B) 2. On‐going management is salary for Partnership manager and CSIRO Partnership Coordinator plus travel costs 3. Management costs are calculated on full cost recovery 4. All items in the management budget are 50% of the total management costs for the African Food Security Research Initiative, with the other 50% being included in the CORAF budget 5. Management costs are charged to AusAID at full cost recovery without CSIRO overhead costs.

Table 3: Partnership Funding Contributions Summary – Partnership Periods 1 and 2 (Australian Dollars)

Interim Funding Agreement

(Apr '10 ‐ Sept '10) Partnership Agreement (Oct '10 ‐ June '13)

2009‐10 2010‐11 Total 2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13 Total

AusAID Contribution 271,140 305,965 577,105 1,937,575 4,931,669 8,962,541 15,831,785

CSIRO Contribution 63,747 39,318 103,065 248,904 393,080 418,927 1,060,911

OVERALL PARTNERSHIP CONTRIBUTION 334,887 345,283 680,170 2,186,479 5,324,749 9,381,468 16,892,696


29

2.6 Coordination Arrangements

Coordination with stakeholders outside CORAF/WECARD and its membership NARS will be critical to the success of the Partnership as they provide the pathways for active participation in research, extension, capacity building and adoption of new technologies and practices by farmers. All stakeholders are also critical for ensuring wider awareness of the Australian initiative. The key stakeholders are in two broad categories: Australian institutes which can influence and participate in the research and capacity building agenda, and other international, national or regional agencies which have significant partnerships in the region through CORAF/WECARD.

Australian stakeholders

The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) is a key stakeholder from a number of perspectives, including their complimentary research initiative in east and southern Africa, which is centred on a large, multi‐country maize‐based farming systems research project. That project is being carried out in partnership with NARS, CIMMYT (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre) based in Nairobi and with the strong support of ASARECA (ASARECA is a sister organisation to CORAF/WECARD based in Uganda and with East and Central Africa as their targeted sub‐region). ACIAR also has a broader portfolio of research in farming systems in Asia and in southern Africa. Coordination with the ACIAR initiatives will cover issues of research methodologies, information sharing and inputs into various reviews. CSIRO and ACIAR9have agreed that this coordination will include a number of workshops (held in Africa), attended by researchers and other key stakeholders from both the CORAF/WECARD and the ACIAR initiatives, as well as regular meetings between Australian based ACIAR staff and managers to update each other on project and partnership progress .

Both ACIAR and CSIRO will coordinate with AusAID on a range of other issues associated with the Food Security Initiative such as AusAID’s partnership with COMESA and key communication activities emanating from the research initiatives.

Other key stakeholders amongst Australian institutions will be research providers other than CSIRO. Agencies such as State Government and university agricultural and veterinary research teams have the potential to play key roles in the initiative. Ensuring that the agencies are aware of the initiative and its goals will be a major objective for CSIRO and AusAID, especially in the initial months of the partnership.

International stakeholders

Key international agencies will be the key CGIAR10 institutes and other donors. ICRISAT11, ILRI12, CIAT‐TSBF13, IITA14, AfricaRice, and ICRAF15 have major research and development programs and

9 Dr John Dixon, Principal Regional Coordinator South Asia and Africa 10 Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research 11 International Crops Research Institute for the Semi‐Arid Tropics 12 International Livestock Research Institute 13 Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical – Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility Institute 14 International Institute of Tropical Agriculture 15 International Centre for Research on Agroforestry


30

partnerships within the sub‐region. CORAF/WECARD already has significant linkages to these institutes, as does CSIRO. Partnerships with these agencies to ensure scientific input and incorporation of their networks and scientists in the program where appropriate, has the potential for significant value‐adding.

The Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA) and Biosciences East and Central Africa (BecA) are two major regional/sub‐regional major stakeholders. Ties with ASARECA, the equivalent sub‐regional organisation in east Africa, are assured through the membership of the same continental umbrella organisation, FARA, as well as through the membership of the CORAF/WECARD Executive Director on the Governing Board of ASARECA. However, more operational linkages are important to build cross‐continent partnerships in some of the research and capacity building activities. Discussions have been initiated between ASARECA and CORAF/WECARD with regards to building more operational linkages and cross‐sub‐regional partnerships in capacity strengthening and livestock research. This Partnership will provide the opportunity to enhance these linkages. BecA’s role is also paramount, especially in animal health research. AusAID and CSIRO are developing a parallel institutional partnership with BecA and will support enhanced links between CORAF/WECARD and BecA. Linkages will be incorporated into the relevant animal health initiatives, with BecA potentially hosting post‐doctoral fellowships and other staff, especially in the development of vaccines.

The French agency, CIRAD, has a wide range of agricultural research initiatives in West and Central Africa and CORAF/WECARD has close ties with the CIRAD initiatives in the sub‐region, and formalised the CIRAD‐CORAF/WECARD collaboration at the end of 2009. The CSIRO‐CORAF/WECARD partnership will seek to build on existing research collaboration, especially in the farming systems and farming systems modelling research being undertaken.

Key Sectoral and Regional Meetings

There are several mechanisms for interactions with these numerous stakeholders. Participation in a wide range of key meetings such as those associated with the various African regional organisations (AU/NEPAD/FARA and CAADP), and key meetings of CORAF/WECARD itself will be amongst the most important.

CSIRO will attend CORAF/WECARD Board meetings and Scientific and Technical Committee meetings as observers. CSIRO will also establish and maintain contact with other donors providing substantive support to CORAF/WECARD: DfID, USAID and the EU. This contact will include participation in the side meeting donors hold in the margins of the CORAF/WECARD Board meeting (noting that the EU is the donor representative on the Board).

3 Risks and Risk Management

The implementation of the Partnership and the research it will support face a number of risks, which are outlined below. The management of the risks will be shared by CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD, with primary responsibility resting with the Partnership Management Committee. The annual review process (described in Section 4.2) is central to the management of risk in accordance with the risk matrix below:


31

Risk Description Significance (High,

Medium, Low)

Risk Management Strategy

Research priorities are not aligned and/or not entirely relevant to the farming systems of the food security constraints of the zone.

L • Align the research with the established priorities of CORAF/WECARD under their Program structure

• Ensure that Partnership members attend and contribute to key fora

• Seek and incorporate the views of appropriate farmer groups, agribusiness, NARS and CGIAR agencies in setting priorities and in project design.

Science quality research completion is compromised through difficulties in identifying key personnel (scientists, extension officers and students) in each country to lead and participate in the on‐the‐ground activity

L • Partner those countries (NARS) which are politically stable and which have established capability

• CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD project management teams will spend sufficient time in each country to identify and engage with national project leaders and their teams.

• The partnership aligns its research with the AusAID scholarship program to add further value to the research.

• CORAF/WECARD implements a tender process to select project leaders and participants, thereby enabling selection of the best candidates to undertake activities.


32


Medium, Low)


Difficulties translating science outputs into on‐the‐ground change constrain positive impacts on food security

M • Ensure that pathway to adoption is a key factor in project priority setting and planning

• Ensure those responsible for adoption and scale‐out are included in the design and the +capacity building and training so they are equipped to undertake these tasks.

• Provide adequate budgets for scale out activities during Concept Note development.

• CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO will work with NARS, farming communities and agribusiness during project development, planning and implementation to incorporate the views of these key stakeholders.

• Employ a range of appropriate delivery mechanisms in communication and knowledge management

Project management in participating countries is ineffective, causing delays in project implementation or compromising project quality.

M • Support CORAF/WECARD’s processes for the management of projects, and provide additional support and advice if necessary.

• Ensure sound partnership arrangements with each of the countries.

• Frequent visits by both the program managers from CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO, and Australian researchers.

• A focus on a project environment which is conducive to operating as a team


33


Medium, Low)


Project financial management in participating countries is ineffective, causing budget over‐spends, requests for additional funds, or funds diversion.

M • Support CORAF/WECARD’s existing financial supervision processes including audits and provide additional support or advice if necessary

• Only partner with CORAF/WECARD approved NARS

• Gain access to annual independent audits of NARS

• Effectively manage the risk via the Partnership Management Committee.

• Frequent visits by both the program managers from CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO, and Australian researchers.

CORAF/WECARD capacity to absorb major funding increases planned for 2011 onwards could constrain project implementation.

L • Frequent visits by the Partnership Leader and Coordinator to ensure on‐going focus on the Partnership by CORAF/WECARD

• Progressive engagement commencing with small‐scale funding will enable relationships to develop and the Partnership Management Committee to closely monitor progress.

• Flexible joint management arrangements, including annual review process, will allow the Management Committee to revise budget commitments over time if necessary.

Natural disasters such as drought, pests or extreme weather conditions could undermine agricultural research (a constant risk in most sub‐humid to semi‐arid regions).

L • The Partnership will build flexibility into the design of each project so that in failed seasons, other important research activities (capacity building, data analysis and modelling) can advance the projects

• Ensure geographic spread in the project activity to minimise the risk of experiencing drought conditions at all sites (the CORAF/WECARD model of multi‐country partnerships and engagement minimises this risk)


34


Medium, Low)


Health, safety or environment risks may endanger project or Partnership personnel

M • CSIRO will provide project staff from Australia and Africa with HSE training to ensure they are aware of risks and mitigation strategies

• Appropriate travel procedures will be followed by all project staff (African and Australian)

• The projects will be implemented in the countries with stable infrastructure.

• CORAF/WECARD has developed an environmental policy which addresses, health, safety and environmental risks. Moreover separate environmental studies have been conducted for most of these countries under on‐going World Bank and USAID funded projects with plans developed to mitigate risks.

CSIRO may struggle to secure the services of appropriately qualified and experienced scientific personnel (from within CSIRO or from other institutions)

L • The Partnership will undertake as much forward planning as possible so Australian inputs can be secured well in advance of deployment.

• CSIRO Sustainable Agriculture Flagship will promote senior support in CSIRO for Partnership activities to encourage availability of key personnel and skills

The Partnership research portfolio is not relevant to the changing circumstances of the sub‐region

L • Engage with CORAF/WECARD through their Program Leadership team and their Science and Technology Committee on a regular basis

• Ensure continuous engagement with other key sub‐regional stakeholders (NARIS, African fora, other donors), to discuss and review the changing priorities

• Ensure this risk is reflected on in the monitoring and evaluation process of the Program.


35

On the Australian side, AusAID and CSIRO share the risks associated with the Partnership. Ultimately, AusAID is accountable for the effectiveness of the funding directed to the Partnership, while CSIRO has day‐to‐day oversight of implementation through CORAF/WECARD.

4 Monitoring and Evaluation

As set out in the Partnership Description, the Partnership will be judged as successful if relevant, good quality research is being conducted in a range of countries and addressing a range of priority research questions, with inputs from both African and Australian researchers. Over the long‐term, it will ultimately be judged a success if that research leads to changes in farming practices in the sub‐humid and semi‐arid mixed crop‐livestock zone that result in increased food security.

Monitoring, especially during the first 2‐3 years of the Partnership, will focus on project level performance (in accordance with usual CORAF/WECARD M&E practice, enhanced or supported by the Partnership if necessary); and on the Partnership relationship itself. In other words, day‐to‐day monitoring will focus primarily on performance at the level of the Partnership Activity Areas. Research projects will be monitored by CORAF/WECARD in accordance with its usual processes, which include field monitoring, project reports and quarterly financial reporting. CSIRO and AusAID will participate in this monitoring activity, especially during annual review, planning and reporting (described in Section 4.2). Annual reviews (see below), will more closely consider the extent of contribution to Results, and the quality of the Partnership, and a Completion Evaluation will also examine results at the end of the Partnership in 2013.

Monitoring will use a mix of qualitative and quantitative measures. A small set of targeted indicators (see Annex 5) will contribute to the monitoring and evaluation of Partnership performance and progress in completing activities and contributing towards CORAF/WECARD results. It includes a sub‐set of the objectively verifiable indicators already specified in the CORAF/WECARD Operational Plan Logframe, in order to anchor Partnership monitoring in the broader institutional monitoring and reporting arrangements. These indicators are routinely monitored and reported by CORAF/WECARD (see indicative matrix format attached – Annex 5).

The M&E approach will be reviewed annually by the Project Management Committee with the support of the Technical Advisory Group, and adjustments made as necessary to ensure M&E and reporting best meets management and accountability requirements.

4.1 Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

Over the early months of the Partnership, the partners will work closely together to develop a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan that will provide the basis for the ongoing M&E of the Partnership and its activities. The M&E arrangements for the Partnership will build on this document, which will be designed to integrate existing CORAF/WECARD M&E arrangements, and to maximise the alignment and integration between the M&E arrangements for the Partnership and the requirements of the CAADP Mutual Accountability Framework (MAF).

The M&E Plan will be completed during the first Partnership Management Committee meeting in October 2010 and will update and expand what is already provided in this Design, including: :

• the approach to Partnership monitoring and evaluation


36

• management and reporting arrangements

• M&E roles and responsibilities

• monitoring and reporting tools – including the standard CORAF/WECARD research project monitoring and reporting tools, plus specification of the Partnership reporting tools

• the approach to Annual Reviews

• a timetable for monitoring, evaluation and reporting activities, designed to align with the planning and reporting cycle of CORAF/WECARD

• a matrix of verifiable performance indicators aligned to the agreed Partnership Logic

The CSIRO Partnership Leader and Coordinator, and the CORAF/WECARD Partnership personnel will work together to prepare the M&E Plan. They will consult AusAID, and will seek support from the Technical Advisory Group as necessary, to ensure the Plan accommodates the needs of all partners and funders for performance information and reporting.

4.2 Annual Review and Reporting

Partnership reporting adopts the existing reporting practices of CORAF/WECARD at the research project level, with the addition of a single brief Partnership Annual Report. The Annual Report will be prepared jointly by the Partnership Management Committee, with support and guidance from the (AusAID‐contracted) Technical Advisory Group, structured around an internal Annual Review process. Annual Reviews will include field visits to research sites by the Partnership managers and the Technical Advisory Group, as well as a two‐day workshop early in each calendar year (probably February/March). During the first day of the annual review workshop, the CORAF/WECARD program managers and the project leaders of each supported research project will present the progress and achievements of the projects to the Partnership Management Committee. On the second day the Committee will discuss, and reach conclusions on:

• research project performance;

• the effectiveness of the Partnership in supporting CORAF/WECARD to achieve its aims and in supporting enhanced relationships between Australia and Africa in agricultural science;

• the management and monitoring arrangements; and

• any other matters.

The Annual Report will be prepared by the two Partnership Coordinators on the basis of these conclusions. The Partnership Annual Report will be submitted to the CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO Boards, after it is approved by the relevant senior managers in each Partner (as shown in the management diagram). For CORAF/WECARD, this will mean the report will be submitted to the Board meeting in May of each year.

The Annual Report will also be provided to AusAID, and will contribute to its monitoring the performance of the overall Food Security Initiative, to the preparation of the AusAID Africa Program Annual Performance Report, as well as other internal reporting required by AusAID performance and Quality reporting processes.


37

4.3 Completion Evaluation

Early in 2013 (i.e towards the end of the fourth year), AusAID will commission an independent Completion Evaluation of the Partnership, in accordance with its prevailing evaluation requirements. AusAID will work with CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO and to prepare a Terms of Reference for the Evaluation. The TOR will guide the Evaluation to examine Partnership monitoring data (with particular attention to the indicators specified in the M&E matrix) and to consider the Partnership against the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) criteria for evaluations, namely:

• Relevance – to what extent is the research supported by the Partnership relevant to the needs and demands of farmers in the target areas? How did the Partnership supporting CORAF/WECARD towards achieving its own Goal, Objective and Results? Is the research portfolio still relevant to the changing circumstances of the sub‐region?

• Effectiveness – was the design appropriate? How did the Partnership progress towards achieving its objectives and results? How was the relationship between the partners?

• Efficiency – how confident can we be that the research is of good quality, and is being conducted in accordance to research plans, within budgets and timelines, with good value for money?

• Impact –what signs are there that the research is likely to have a positive impact on the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in the target areas?

• Sustainability – what is the likelihood that the benefits of the partnership will be sustained – in CORAF/WECARD and in the participating countries? How is planning for dissemination and extension work progressing and is it likely to succeed?

The evaluation will also examine the approach of the Partnership to gender equality.

5 Over‐Arching Issues

5.1 Gender Equity

Women face significant barriers in agriculture in Africa, especially inequalities in access to and control over crucial resources and inputs, such as land, labour, fertiliser and formal finance16. For example, women in Cameroon provide more than 75 percent of agricultural labour, but own only 10 percent of land. Different rights and obligations within households and societies impose restrictions on women’s time and availability, which can undermine their productivity and efficiencies in agricultural production. Women have lower levels of education too; a factor which can be significant in adopting new technology and assuming risk – a key issue for realising the potential benefits of agricultural research

Women also face barriers to membership of rural organisations and cooperatives, agricultural inputs and technology such as improved seeds, training and extension, marketing services and in becoming a member of the research community.

16 This section draws on R.Mehtra and M.Hill Rojas; Women, Food Security and Agriculture in a Global Marketplace, International Center for Research on Women (ICRW), 2008


38

CORAF/WECARD is committed to reducing the challenges and inequities faced by women in a full range of activities and roles, from farming through to research, and have prepared a first draft of its gender policy, which was submitted for Board endorsement in May 2010. This policy, and its implementation is seen by CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO as being critical given the significance of the role women play in African farming. The CORAF/WECARD Board made recommendations for improvement of the document and advised that it be validated by a wide range of stakeholders. After the policy has been endorsed by the Board later this year (December 2010) the Partnership will consider its implementation within the Partnership activities where appropriate. AusAID will resource a gender adviser to work with CSIRO to strengthen its dialogue with CORAF/WECRAD on ensuring that research and its adoption is gender sensitive and integrates best practice and that monitoring and evaluation approaches on each research project includes gender‐based M&E, incorporated at the time of developing a project design and implemented throughout. CSIRO and AusAID may also support CORAF/WECARD in the wider implementation of the policy (outside the direct partnership activities). The form of any support will be defined by the Management Committee and AusAID once the CORAF/WECARD Policy and recommendations are endorsed by the Board.

5.2 Sustainability

Institutional

CORAF/WECARD’s role in the agricultural research agenda for West and Central Africa is very sound and becoming more so through recognition and subsequent agreements both in the subregion and with international donors. CORAF/WECARD’s financial sustainability is assured through funding from member countries, regional agencies and donors. All twenty‐two member countries contribute to the core fund of CORAF/WECARD through direct cash payments (~US$200,000 per annum each.). In addition, the West African Agricultural Productivity Program (WAAPP) is also being used as a mechanism to increase the level of contribution of member countries to the core funds.

The WAAPP is a critical mechanism, whereby six member countries (Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Mali, Nigeria and Senegal) contribute a part of their budget allocation from the World Bank directly to CORAF/WECARD under the WAAPP1A and WAAPP1B agreements. As such, the WAAPP should be considered as a mechanism whereby countries are directly contributing to, and ensuring the sustainability of CORAF/WECARD. Other countries will join this mechanism in WAAPP1C. These new arrangements will enable CORAF/WECARD to access an additional US$10 million. It is intended that the WAAPP network will gradually be extended to cover all CORAF/WECARD constituent countries.

Further sub‐regional support is increasing through the four key sub‐regional Economic Communities in West and Central Africa: ECOWAS, UEMOA, ECCAS and CEMAC. All have signed an agreement with CORAF/WECARD conferring a mandate of technical research which in itself implies that these communities will support CORAF/WECARD in implementing agricultural policies. By July 2010, CORAF/WECARD will have concluded co‐operate agreements with ECOWAS and UEMOA, both of whom will provide Institutional and program support.

In addition to the funding sourced from member states and regional bodies, CORAF/WECARD has secured significant financial support from a diverse group of partners, including international


39

donors, to support the implementation of its 2008‐2013 Operational Plan. The source of these funds and their split in to either institutional support or research programs (mostly via the partnering NARS) is summarised in Annex 1. Currently, the budget outline in Annex 1 represents 70% of the required funding for the 5 year period. The addition of the Australian contribution will increase that to 85%. Importantly, the Australian contribution will have a significant impact on the program funding and NARS support given its moderate level of institutional support. The Partnership with CSIRO will also enhance the CORAF/WECARD profile and its reputation as a conduit to quality research and capacity strengthening of the NARS, built around priority sub‐regional issues using an IAR4D approach.

Sustainability of adoption of research outcomes.

The sustainability of adoption of innovations and research outcomes will be incorporated in the initial design of all the research activities. A key element in the design will be a participative approach with on‐going roles and partnerships of both the farming communities and agribusiness defined from the very beginning. This participative approach ensures that research projects explore farming systems solutions, which are appropriate for both farmers and agribusiness. It also ensures that each project considers adoption and scale‐out pathways during the design phase, and that appropriate budgets are set aside for knowledge transfer.

Knowledge transfer and scale‐out will take several forms and will include scale‐out through agribusiness in the countries participating in a particular activity. It is envisaged that all research activities will include a specific component and budget for knowledge transfer and communication to CORAF/WECARD member countries which have not been a participating member of the particular research activity. This might be through the NARS of the non‐participating country, through agribusiness or through appropriate NGOs. It has been agreed that all research projects will assign at least 30% of the total in both open call and commissioned projects

5.3 Environment and Climate Change

Agriculture is important for safeguarding the environment (MDG7). It helps preserve biodiversity and can aid in mitigating the effects of climate change. Many agricultural producers use several varieties and crops in the same field, thereby mitigating risks and achieving greater food security while making efficient use of land. There is scope to go much further. For example, the UN Commission for Sustainable Development has stressed that farming will be a major contributor to global environmental objectives, notably by meeting the need for clean fresh water through watershed management, biodiversity conservation, and mitigating and adapting to climate change.

Major adverse impacts on food production, and consequently food security and stability, in the developing world – including Africa – are expected to come from changes in temperature and more frequent droughts and floods. Warming across the continent of Africa is projected to be greater than the global average, across all seasons, and with the subtropical regions warming more than the moist tropics17. While there is a high degree of uncertainty around rainfall projections for West

17 IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva.


40

Africa, a significant rainfall reduction has been observed during the second half of the 20th century18 , and the rainy season of the semi‐arid Sahel region, where this partnership is centred, is projected to start later and become shorter than currently19. It has been suggested that the region will experience more severe droughts than seen in the last century, and that the likelihood and severity of these may be enhanced by increasing temperatures20.

The Partnership will focus on adaptation strategies that farmers can employ to address climate change. The targeted mixed crop‐livestock systems of the semi‐arid and sub‐humid tropics are expected to have some of the greatest climate change challenges. Nevertheless, the mixed systems offer opportunities for farmers to rebalance their various enterprises in line with climate change, variability and increased risks. Quantifying and communicating the challenges, the potential decisions that farmers might make, and the costs, benefits and potential risks of those decisions (e.g. a greater dependence on livestock rather than cropping, or choice of crop species and varieties) will be a key output from the Partnerships research portfolio. While full research project proposals are yet to be finalised, the open call for farming systems projects will include a request that the research teams specifically address issues of climate change in their project plans, and it is expected that project initiatives would include questions on the perception of risk by farmers, agribusiness and policy makers, and changes in both input and output markets. Helping farmers, agribusiness and policy makers understand production and economic risk and providing all stakeholders with options for managing that risk in production, marketing and infrastructure are crucial if food security is to be improved in the coming decade and beyond. It is an issue that each project will need to address in its development and analyses.

18 Paeth H, Hense A (2004) SST versus climate change signals in West African rainfall: 20th‐century variations and future projections. Climatic change 65, 179‐208.

19 Biasutti M, Sobel AH (2009) Delayed Sahel rainfall and global seasonal cycle in a warmer climate. Geophysical Research Letters 36, 5.

20 Shanahan TM, Overpeck JT, Anchukaitis KJ, Beck JW, Cole JE, Dettman DL, Peck JA, Scholz CA, King JW (2009) Atlantic Forcing of Persistent Drought in West Africa. Science 324, 377‐380


Annexes

41

Annex 1: CORAF/WECARD Budget Details

Table 1: CORAF/WECARD Budget 2009 and 2010 Projection

"000" US$ Approved Budget 2009 Projection

budget 2010

Programme 1 : Livestock, fisheries & Aquaculture 95 1 250

Programme 2 : Staple Crops 1 690 2 500

Programme 3 : Non staple crops 0 480

Programme 4 : Policy ,Trade & Markets 95 1 250

Programme 5 : Biotechnology & Biosecurity 2 142 3 560

Programme 6 : Natural Resources Management 480 1 690

Programme 7 : Knowledge management 241 1 650

Programme 8 : Strengthening Capacity 2 254 2 250

Support to programmes 322 985

Total of Programmes (1) 7 319 15 615

Governance & statutory Organs 536 550

Administration & Management 622 667

Information & Communication 532 525

Equipments 552 550

Change Management Programme 1 200 600

Total Governance & Management (2) 3 442 2 892

Total (1) + (2) 10 761 18 507


Annexes

42

Table 2: CORAF/WECARD Donor financial support (a) and separation of support in to Programme and Core Funding (b)*, 2008‐2013

a)

b)

Donor Programme Core Total DfID 9 033 410 7 500 000 16 533 410 USAID 5 000 000 2 500 000 7 500 000 WAAPP 7 500 000 1 500 000 9 000 000 AfDB/FARA 7 175 000 7 175 000 EC 11 179 933 6 019 964 17 199 897 ECOWAS 2 800 000 2 800 000 SCARDA 4 500 000 4 500 000 IDRC 1 000 000 1 000 000 CTA 275 000 275 000 Total 48 463 343 17 519 964 65 983 307

* for further detail on the application of Donor support to research (Programme) and institutional (core) support, refer Section 5.2 in text

Donor Support (USD)

DfID (Department for International Development (UK))

16,533,410

USAID (United States Agency for International Development)

7,500,000

WAAPP (West African Agricultural Productivity Program (WAAPP1.a and 1.b) and Country support through the World Bank)

9,000,000

AfDB/FARA (African Development Bank/ Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA))

7,175,000

EC (European Commission)

17,199,897

ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States)

2,800,000

CTA (Centre for Technical, Agricultural and Rural Cooperation), European Union

275,000

FARA/DfID ‐ SCARDA (Strengthening Capacity for Agricultural Research and Development in Africa)

4,500,000

IDRC (International Development and Research Centre)

1,000,000

Funding from Donors (does not include direct member country contributions of ~ $200,000 per annum each) for 2008‐2013

65,983,307

CORAF/WECARD – CSIRO Partnership Design Document

Annexes

43

Annex 2: Review of the DfID‐funded Change Management Project within CORAF/WECARD

1 ‐ 4 December 2009.

Luke Mukubvu

1. After the CORAF/WECARD Board approved its Strategic and Operational Plans, the General Assembly adopted the same in May 2007, paving the way for full implementation. A key part of the Operational Plan (OP) was the objective of fostering organisational, programmatic and structural changes in line with the mandate of CORAF. DFID agreed to provide funding for a Change Management Project (CMP). The CMP was to be integrated into the OP and run for 18 months to June 2010.

2. Specifically the CMP had the following objectives:

• Realignment of the research process using programme approach;

• Developing and adopting new corporate governance systems including effective management systems, effective organisational structures, and operational systems;

• Restructuring the composition of the Board to include a broader range of stakeholders and creating more accountable governance framework;

• Engaging new professional staff to fill the posts required to implement the programmes;

• Creating effective Monitoring and Evaluation mechanism that is coherent;

• Promoting ownership of the CORAF/WECARD Strategic and Operational Plans and mechanisms for sustainability at all levels.

3. A competitive process was followed to hire a professional team to help CORAF implement the CMP with a clear intent to expedite the change process while creating capacity for managing change within CORAF. IDL consultants from Bristol, England were hired to help CORAF implement the CMP.

4. A logframe was developed for the CMP and the work plan was fully embedded in the OP. Implementation of the CMP commenced in January 2009.

5. I visited the CORAF/WECARD offices in Dakar, Senegal to carry out a review of the Change Management Project that DFID is funding as part of preparing CORAF for the effective implementation of its Operational Plan. The project has gone 12 months out of the scheduled 18 months. The findings were used as part of the Board meeting discussions this week. The following are the main findings and results.

6. Approach used in the review included gathering all relevant documentation for the CMP, detailed review of those documents followed by structured meetings with technical and management staff and a representative of the Senegalese NARS and a member of the Science and Technical Committee. A briefing meeting was arranged at the end of my mission to report back and clarify issues with senior management.

7. Key Findings were:


Annexes

44

• Project has been fully embedded into the Operational Plan and is on course and progressing smoothly.

• Key results set in the CM logframe are being met and will most likely be fully met by end of project.

• CM Work Plan is being followed consistently.

• CM progress has created significant goodwill for CORAF.

• There is commitment within the Secretariat to successfully implement all the planned changes.

• CM has created the stage for effective implementation of the OP.

• Next 6 months – focus is expected to be on cascading & deepening the principles, tools & training to the National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) and further down the value chain

8. Key results were:

• Organisation has been strengthened, staffed and operational systems put in place. 6 Programme managers and 2 officers for planning and monitoring were recruited. Others recruited also include an Internal Auditor and an Information Manager.

• There has been significant paradigm shift in mindsets from previous network to programmatic approaches based on IAR4D. 7 out of 8 programmes have been established including the Livestock, Fisheries and Aquaculture (LFAP); Natural Resources Management (NRMP); Biotechnology and Biosafety (BBP); Policy, Markets and Trade (PMTP); Capacity strengthening and Knowledge Management (CSKMP); Staple Crop (SCP). These programmes are now fully functional and run by programme managers. Of the on‐going 12 research projects, 8 of them have been developed using the IAR4D approach. 1 is in LFAP, 3 in SCP, 3 in BBP and 1 in CSKM).

• Technical capacity has been built in CORAF (6 out of 7 programme managers were recruited to join one who was already in place). In addition, a Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Unit was created staffed by fully qualified officers.

• Strategic partnerships have been built in the region and development partners. 6 new research projects have been commissioned in BBP and SCP that were designed with participation of relevant NARS using IAR4D approaches and multi‐stakeholder participation. A project on livestock being funded by IDRC is now being implemented in 3 countries involving 2 platforms of milk production, vegetables and forage management. Working with FARA, CORAF, is leading on 12 platforms within the CSKM programme. Partnership with the EU has been renewed, new partnerships with AusAID and CIRAD are being discussed, ECOWAS and UEMOA involving WAAPP and PRIA are in place.

• Governance Framework has been strengthened with Statute and Governance Manual updated. (approved by the Board)

• M&E framework is now in place together with a unit to implement it.

• Significant training (6 workshops) has been provided across a range of stakeholders.

• Scoping studies have been carried out and a call for proposals processed for specific programmes, paving the way for actual research work to roll out as per OP. (based on Integrated Agriculture Research 4 Development ‐ IAR4D)


Annexes

45

• CM paved the way for CORAF readiness for the Multi‐donor Trust Fund (MDTF) and possible DP support.

Recommendations and Issues.

• CM needs clear accountability lines and will need to be anchored and driven from a specific office within the secretariat. Currently the process is being facilitated through IDL, working with stakeholders. By the end of the IDL contract, it will be important to keep the momentum going. The present thinking is that the CM function will be in the ED’s office.

• It is important to put baselines to Operational Plan Log Frame in place.

• It is crucial to establish formal Annual Performance Appraisal of ED by Board

• It is also best practice to send Internal Audit reports simultaneously to ED & Chair of the Finance & Audit Committee

• It would help to add an indicator in CM log frame (Result 1) on level of compliance of grants with IAR4D paradigm; proposals approved by STC under Staple Crops need to be considered in light of that indicator;

• Management of CGS ‐ key in terms of embedding IAR4D in research. CORAF/CMT to explicitly look at CGS compliance before research commissioned.

• Strengthen gender in CM: integrate into Change Facilitators training, soft skills training and develop content under generic tools for IAR4D.

• Document case studies of progress under CAADP Country Compacts (SL; Nigeria) (francophone plus anglophone).

• Prepare to manage expectations and increasing demand from many stakeholders

• Continue integration CMT, broader capacity building and SCARDA

• Look at organising a lesson learning workshop to share experiences with FARA and other SROs.

• Review of impact of CM process, in context of SCARDA and other CB activities in May/June; develop a forward look in terms of what more needs to be done to build NARS capacity to 2013; refine workplan under Results Area 3.

• External TA role if required – needs to shift from lead to mentor role.

9. There was agreement from senior management about taking forwards the issues above.

The following people were met during the review:

Person Designation Organisation

1. Dr Paco Sereme ED CORAF/WECARD

2. Dr Harold Roy Macauley Programme Director CORAF/WECARD

3. Dr Remi Cole Special Technical Adviser to ED

CORAF/WECARD


Annexes

46

4. Mr Jean Rostand Jiadiais Kamga

Director – Admin & Finance

CORAF/WECARD

5. Mr Kone Anatole Information Manager CORAF/WECARD

6. Dr Mbene Diaye Faye Prgrm Manager CORAF/WECARD

7. Ms Julienne Kuiseu Prgrm Officer CORAF/WECARD

8. Dr Hamade Kagone Prgrm Manager CORAF/WECARD

9. Dr Sidi Sanyang Prgrm Manager CORAF/WECARD

10. Prof. A. Sangare Prgrm Manager CORAF/WECARD

11. Dr Aboulai Jalloh Prgrm Manager CORAF/WECARD

12. Dr Ernest Asiedu Prgrm Manager CORAF/WECARD

13. Dr George Muluh Planning Officer CORAF/WECARD

14. Dr Vincent Mama M&E Officer CORAF/WECARD

15. Dr F. Mbaye Member of STC CORAF/WECARD, /ISRA

16. Dr Bruce Pengelly Assistant Chief AusAid (CSIRO)

17. Ms Sara Webb Consultant AusAid

18. Ms Awa Cisse Dione Internal Auditor CORAF/WECARD

19. Ms Rachel Lambert Research Manager DFID


Annexes

47

Annex 3: Sub‐grant Agreement for CORAF/WECARD Commissioned Projects

BETWEEN

The West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development, 7 Avenue Bourguiba, BP 48 Dakar-RP (Senegal), hereafter referred to as CORAF/WECARD, represented by Dr Paco SEREME, Executive Director.

AND

[Provide Coordinates of the Lead institution], hereafter referred to as the Coordinating institution, represented by [name of the Director or Director General], Director/Director General [choose appropriate title].

• Considering the statutes of CORAF/WECARD, notably article 7 specifying the composition of its members;

• Considering the governance manual of CORAF/WECARD;

• Considering the program implementation manual of CORAF/WECARD;

• Considering the Cooperative Agreement N° …………………. signed on ………….., 2009 between AusAID and CORAF/WECARD.

The following is hereby agreed upon:

Article 1: Objective and nature of the sub‐grant agreement

The objective of the present sub-grant agreement is to provide support to the Coordinating institution for the implementation of the AusAID funded CORAF/WECARD commissioned project N° [include project reference number], entitled « [project title] », hereafter referred to as the Project.

The Project will be implemented by a consortium of partners led by the Coordinating institution and covering the following countries: [List all countries and coordinates of corresponding consortium partners]

Article 2: Sub‐grant agreement duration

The present sub-grant agreement is established for a total period of ….. ( ) years with effect from ………, 2010.

Article 3: Responsibility of CORAF/WECARD

The CORAF/WECARD commits itself to:


Annexes

48

• ensure the release of funds according to the conditions outlined in the sub-grant agreement, in order to facilitate the timely and proper implementation of the Project;

• ensure the timely review and consolidation of all reports of the Project from the Coordinating institution;

• facilitate internal monitoring, evaluation and auditing of the Project in order to guarantee efficient and effective utilization of allocated funds;

• ensure external evaluation and auditing by qualified and competent teams;

• ensure overall management of the Project by the [state the specific Project Manager e.g. CORAF/WECARD ].

Article 4: Responsibility of the Coordinating institution

The Coordinating institution commits itself to:

• nominate a Project Coordinator to oversee implementation of the Project by the consortium of partners;

• provide and ensure proper functioning of the local administrative facilities, infrastructure and logistics for the implementation of the Project;

• mobilize counterpart human and financial resources allocated to the Project;

• facilitate access to CORAF/WECARD and counterpart funds/resources received for the Project by the Project Coordinator, in order to ensure timely and proper implementation of the Project;

• ensure administrative and financial management of the Project;

• ensure timely preparation and submission to CORAF/WECARD of technical and financial reports of the Project;

• facilitate access to financial and technical documents of the Project by auditors and evaluation teams;

• inform the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat of any incident or situation that may jeopardize the proper implementation of the Project.

Article 5: Responsibility of the Project Coordinator

The Project Coordinator commits himself/herself to:

• assume responsibility to oversee implementation of the Project by the consortium of partners;

• maintain permanent contact with the CORAF/WECARD Program Manager and partners of the consortium to ensure proper implementation of the Project;

• ensure the proper implementation of research activities of the Project within indicated time-frames;


Annexes

49

• collect the necessary information for and produce financial and technical reports of the Project;

• facilitate the tasks of evaluators and auditors of the Project;

• provide information to all parties concerned on any incident or situation that may jeopardize the proper implementation of the Project.

Article 6: Allocated Funds

The total amount allocated for the implementation of the sub-grant agreement is [include total FCFA amount of contract in words and figures].

The allocated funds will be released according to the modalities described below:

1st installment: will be disbursed after signing of the contract, following a request made by the Coordinating institution to the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat for the amount corresponding to the total cost of required equipment and three months operational costs;

Successive installments: will be disbursed at 3-monthly periods following requests made by the Coordinating institution to the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat, accompanied by the technical and financial reports and justifications of transactions. Payment will depend on the validation of the technical and financial reports by the competent services of the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat. The last disbursement that corresponds to three (3) months of activities will be made only after the submission of the final technical and financial reports, validated by the competent services of the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat.

Article 7: Designated Bank Account

The Coordinating Institution is required to address an advance request to CORAF/WECARD based on the amount specified in article 6 above, and with respect to the above payment modalities.

Upon receipt of the advance request, CORAF/WECARD will proceed to settle the amount by bank transfer into the following designated project Bank Account:

Bank Name:

Bank Address:

Account name:

Account number:


Annexes

50

SWIFT code:

IBAN:

Two signatories should be also designated by the coordinating institution.

Article 8: Initiation of project implementation

Implementation of the Project will be considered as initiated on the date of transfer of the first installment of project funds by the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat.

Article 9: Reports and reporting requirements

The Coordinating institution shall submit financial and technical reports to the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat.

An initial report shall be submitted by the Coordinating institution to CORAF/WECARD Executive secretariat three (3) months after the transfer of the 1st installment of the funds allocated to the project. The report shall provide details of the conditions under which the project was initiated.

5.3.1.1.1 Quarterly reports shall be submitted by the Coordinating institution to the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat every three months. Each report should be endorsed by the Coordination institution’s signatory to the sub‐grant agreement. Quarterly reports will comprise (i) a technical component prepared by the Project Coordinator, based on information provided by the Project consortium partners, and (ii) a financial component prepared by the financial manager of the Coordinating institution also based on information provided by the Project consortium partners. These reports will provide the scope for regular monitoring and evaluation of the Project. The accuracy of the financial report shall constitute the condition for further disbursement of funds for the next quarter.

A final report on the overall implementation of the Project and administration of its budget shall be submitted by the Coordinating institution to the CORAF/WECARD Executive secretariat. The final report shall be prepared by the Project Coordinator with support from the CORAF/WECARD Program Manager. It must reach the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat not later than three (3) months after the end of the implementation period of the project, as stipulated in article 2 of the present agreement. The final report shall consist of technical and financial components, prepared in line with and following the format of the quarterly reports. At a minimum, it must contain the following information:


Annexes

51

• A comparison of actual activities and anticipated results in line with the plan established for the duration of the Project (this could be presented in tabular format);

• In the case of less-than optimal achievement of planned results, reasons why targets were not achieved, why activities were delayed or not carried and any noted deviations from the Project plans shall be established;

• Success stories if any, including examples of synergy and collaboration with partners, harmonization of activities that demonstrated benefits beyond the scope of the Project and any prototype that may be applied to subsequent phases or projects;

• A summary of progress made in achieving indicator targets during implementation of the Project based on valid data collection and analysis;

• Other relevant information, including recommendations and lessons learned, related to overall results of the Project.

Financial reporting

(a) Financial reporting shall be in accordance with the recommended format as provided by the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat.

(b) The Coordinating institution shall submit one original and one copy of the monthly financial report to the Director of Administration and Finance of CORAF/WECARD.

(c) The Coordinating institution shall submit an original and a copy of a “Request for Advance” in a format agreed upon with the CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat, for each upcoming quarter to the Director of Administration and Finance of CORAF/WECARD.

(d) The Coordinating institution shall prepare a “Financial Status Report” on an accrual basis and make quarterly submissions to the Director of Administration and Finance of CORAF/WECARD.

(e) The Coordinating institution’s financial report shall include expenditures of the Project as well as of other matching funds.

Technical reporting

The Project coordinator shall submit a detailed annual work plan with detailed cost information to the CORAF/WECARD Program Manager for approval.

Annual work plan shall include the following:

• Activities to be implemented in accordance with the Project objectives; • An indication of partners to be involved in the planning and

implementation of project activities; • The time-frame for activities specified on a quarterly basis; • The pipeline and expenditure information to date and projected

expenditures for the coming period.


Annexes

52

The first implementation plan shall cover the period from ……….., 2010 through December 31, 2010 and shall be due 15 calendar days following receipt of the 1st installment of funds allocated by CORAF/WECARD. The subsequent annual work plan, which shall cover the period January 1, through December 31, shall be due in mid-August, of the previous year.

The Project coordinator shall submit a performance report to the CORAF/WECARD Program Manager on a quarterly basis. This must contain the following information:

• A brief narrative on tasks performed in line with approved work plan;

• Any deterring factors, un-anticipated problems, delays or adverse conditions, which may have impaired the Coordinating institution’s ability to meet the objective of the Project;

• A comparison of actual results with targeted indicators set toward meeting goals and objectives of the Project;

• Any other relevant information as specific to the nature and scope of the Project;

• Performance report shall focus on anticipated results on the basis of indicators established by the Project.

Article 10: Right of Ownership of research results

The signatories to the present sub-grant agreement agree, (with the exception of special cases relative to the use of research results as contained in specific clauses of the convention between West and Central African Countries and Australian government) that results delivered from implementation of the project are public goods and may be used without any prior authorization.

Article 11: Monitoring, evaluation and audit

Unless under exceptional circumstances, CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat will provide the Coordinating institution with the terms of reference for evaluations and audits, in order to enhance their participation and involvement in the process.

CORAF/WECARD Executive Secretariat will send a copy of the evaluation and audit reports to the Coordinating institution.

Article 12: Defaults and penalties

Except in cases of force majeure, any serious default, which includes failure to produce technical and financial reports, poor project management, un-anticipated factors of hindrance, will be penalized according to the seriousness of the default. Penalties will


Annexes

53

include suspension of funds, termination of contract and decision of non-eligibility of defaulters for other calls for proposal by CORAF/WECARD.

Force majeure as evoked in this contract shall mean any unforeseeable circumstance or event beyond the control of the benefiting institutions, including war, natural disasters, and fire, which could hinder the normal implementation of the Project.

Article 13: Dispute settlement

Any disagreement that may arise from the implementation of the present sub-grant agreement will be settled amicably. Where amicable settlement fails to take effect, such differences will be referred to the competent legal authorities in Dakar, in conformity with the laws and regulations of the Republic of Senegal (Host country of CORAF/WECARD Headquarters). The law courts of Senegal are the only competent body to handle such differences.

Article 14: Environmental Impact and Sustainability

The Project Team recognizes that addressing environmental impact and sustainability issues is an absolute requirement in the design and implementation of CORAF & AusAID-funded program activities.

The project must comply with host country environmental regulations unless otherwise directed in writing by CORAF & AusAID. In case of conflict between host country and AusAID regulations, the latter shall govern.

The Coordinating Institution will use as a guide the approved environmental policy of CORAF/WECARD as they develop with the CORAF Program Manager their Environment Monitoring and Mitigation Plan.

The coordinating Institution should implement the recommendation made by the Scientific and Technical Committee to ensure the funded proposals will result in no adverse environmental impact, to develop mitigation measures, as necessary, and to specify monitoring and reporting.


Annexes

54

Article 15: Execution order on terrorism financing

The Coordinating institution is reminded that CORAF/WECARD Executive Orders and Rules prohibits transaction with, and the provision of resources and support to, individuals and organizations associated with terrorism. It is the responsibility of the Coordinating institution, therefore, to ensure compliance with these executive orders and Rules.

Article 16: Provisions and attachments

The technical and financial description of the Project, including the program of activities and budgets, as validated by the CORAF/WECARD Scientific and Technical Committee, is an integral part of this contract.

In conformity with special provisions……. in the Cooperative Agreement N° signed on ……….., 2010 between CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD, all attachment for standard provision are considered as an integral part of this sub-grant agreement.

Article 17: Final disposition

Any modification of the special clauses and the technical and administrative conditions concerning the implementation of the present sub-grant agreement must be subject to a written agreement between the contracting parties.

The present sub-grant agreement is established in three (3) copies, each of them having an original value, and enters into force on the date on which it is signed by all the concerned parties.

Signatures:

In witness whereof, the undersigned parties, acting through their duly authorized representatives, have appended their signatures,

Dakar, [Date]

Coordination institution CORAF/WECARD


Annexes

55

Annex 4: Multi Donor Trust Fund for CORAF/WECARD – Financial Management Input to PAD

Finance, Procurement and IT issues – Harry Machin

Visits to CORAF Secretariat 27 April to 8 May and to Abuja 20 to 24 May 2009

Background

1. The purpose of the my initial visit to the Secretariat was to identify what further action is required, in the areas of finance, procurement and IT, to equip CORAF/WECARD to deliver the changes required by the Strategic and Operational Plans. The main purpose of the visit to Abuja was to help facilitate the Governing Board workshop, but this visit was also used to follow up issues that were not resolved during the visit to the Secretariat.

2. The structure of the visit to the Secretariat was:

• 27/28 April: familiarisation at CORAF/WECARD headquarters

• 29/30 April: CM workshop, Saly

• 1/3 May: weekend – worked part time, mainly on presentation material for Abuja

• 4/8 May: review of systems, processes and issues at CORAF/WECARD headquarters

3. This visit coincided with visits by the external auditors, a “pre‐audit” of financial records by USAID and a visit by potential donors from Australia. Finance staff were fully occupied from 4th to 7th May inclusive and I was not able to see the TOMPRO finance system until Friday the 8th, my last day. The Director Finance was also very busy throughout my visit. These are the main reasons why some points remained to be followed up in Abuja.

Summary

4. The main points are as follows:

• The Finance function in the Secretariat is under‐resourced, even for current levels of activity. This is an urgent problem and plans are in place to address it quickly.

• There is a well designed accounting system in place, but this is not being fully utilised due to lack of external support, lack of in‐house knowledge and lack of in‐house resources. Again, plans are in place to address this.

• Actions are in hand to strengthen resources and processes in the areas of HR and Procurement.

• Actions are in hand to enhance the IT infrastructure and to improve data security and backup procedures.

• The role of the Internal Auditor (IA) needs to be clarified.

• The Secretariat needs to develop and implement a system to certify national institutions as fit to control donor funds.

• The governance manual needs to be amended so that it accurately reflects the Statutes approved by the Governing Board in June 2008.

5. A list of proposed actions and timings is at Annex 1.


Annexes

56

6. The Director Finance has asked for support from the Change Management Team (CMT) mainly in the areas of drafting terms of reference (TOR) and job descriptions, which can be done by e‐mail. Another visit to Dakar should take place around late September / early October, to assess what further strengthening of resources or processes will be required once the new staff are in place.

Finance organisation and resources

7. The main problem for the finance function is a lack of resource. During our visit, staff were working long into the evening and at weekends, and there is still be a backlog of accounting work to be cleared. The delivery of the Operational Plan will further increase the workloads on the Director Finance and accounting staff.

Current structure

8. The Director Finance is currently responsible for the following staff:

• Chief Accountant and 2 assistants. This team handles all the day to day accounting, including general ledger, fixed assets and payroll, budgetary control and financial reporting

• Purchasing Officer (one person)

• Administrative assistant

• Secretarial support

9. There is also an Internal Auditor (IA) who reports to the Executive Director (ED) but does some detailed accounting work (checking disbursements and vouchers from competitive funds projects) for the Director Finance. This role is considered further below

Future structure

10. The Director Finance is looking to increase resources as follows. Funding is in place unless otherwise stated

• Create a new post of Procurement Officer.

• Create a new post for financial planning and analysis. This depends on funding from USAID, which the Director Finance expects to secure in June.

• Fill the post of Head of Administration, already funded as part of the core Sect, reporting to the Director Finance. This role would cover, inter alia, personnel matters, administration of contracts, building / facilities issues and logistics.

• Create 2 new posts to support the Chief Accountant (already advertised).

Financial systems and procedures

11. The accounting system is based on integrated TOMPRO software (TOMPRO Windows v5.8, July 2008) which has the right functionality to automate all the standard accounting processes and has been tailored to meet CORAF/WECARD’s requirements. CORAF/WECARD also use a linked payroll module, TOMPAIE. The system is based on SunSystems architecture, adapted for project accounting. It appears to be a well designed system that is capable of meeting CORAF/WECARD’s financial requirements, but at present there are three main problems:

• Lack of dedicated support from the manufacturers ‐ the office in Dakar has two staff who support the whole of the West Africa region. This resulted in delays in amending the Analytical Plan to reflect the structure of the current Operational Plan for CORAF/WECARD. The changes were not completed until 2009 and consequently there was a backlog of data


Annexes

57

for 2008, which was still being entered on to the system at the time of this visit (April / May 2009)

• Lack of in‐house knowledge and ability to make changes to the system.

• Lack of human resources to implement the necessary functions with full segregation of duties

12. The Director Finance plans to address the lack of support and in‐house knowledge by sending the Chief Accountant on a TOMPRO course in Paris and then using his skills to conduct in‐house training for the accounts staff and also the IT support person. Once trained, the in‐house staff will implement a prioritised programme to update TOMPRO and use its capabilities more effectively.

13. Although the financial management system has been created for good reasons of providing control and management information, data entry is time consuming, which is one of the main reasons for strengthening the accounts team as noted above.

14. The following specific issues were noted:

• Procurement control functionality is not fully utilised, and the current lack of resources prevents full segregation of duties in this area. This will be rectified when the Procurement Officer has been appointed. TOMPRO will be asked to provide support to develop and refine the system parameters in this area.

• A cash flow report needs to be set up automatically on the system. TOMPRO will be asked to provide support for this.

• The system does not have the functionality to prepare the annual statutory accounts in OHADA format. The trial balance is exported from TOMPRO into Excel and prepared via spreadsheets. The Director Finance plans to purchase the necessary module from TOMPRO.

• The system does not automatically match balance sheet account codes to programmes and activities, so this has to be done manually. Examples include transfers of funds and allocation of mission and workshop expenses.

15. There is a finance and administration manual in place which broadly covers the necessary accounting procedures, subject to points on procurement and disbursement of funds below.

Human resources

16. The Director Finance is also responsible for HR matters, hence their inclusion in this report.

17. The need for an HR procedures manual has already been identified. The Director Finance intends to appoint a Head of Administration to take charge of all HR and administrative matters. One of the tasks of this person will be to update the existing section on HR procedures in the Finance and Administration manual.

18. The need for job descriptions for all staff was identified and targeted for completion in Q2 2009. CORAF/WECARD intend to appoint a consultant to complete this task, but this has not yet been done.

Procurement

19. A procurement specialist is currently being recruited. I was part of a panel of 4, led by the Director Finance, who interviewed two short listed candidates for this role during on 6th May and agreed unanimously on one preferred candidate. This candidate has been offered the job and is in negotiation with CORAF/WECARD about the terms and conditions.


Annexes

58

20. The first task for the procurement specialist will be to review and update the existing pages on procurement in the finance and administration manual, setting out procedures to be followed for all contracts and procurement activities throughout CORAF/WECARD. This person will also be involved in purchasing the new IT equipment described below.

21. The Director Finance has raised the question whether the system for approving expenditure is too onerous in that both he and the CEO currently have to sign every cheque, which may cause delays whenever either of them is away. The procurement specialist should review this and consider what alternative may be more appropriate.

Disbursement of project/programme funds to NARS

22. The proposed changes in the role of CORAF/WECARD will see increased amounts of funding being channelled through CORAF/WECARD and disbursed to lead institutions who will control the expenditure. This creates issues of governance and control over those funds for CORAF/WECARD as the “primary accountable person” to whom funds are disbursed by donors. The current system of control is informal, with the Director Finance ensuring that funds are disbursed mainly to NARIs whose control systems he trusts, combined with detailed scrutiny of disbursements by the Director Finance and his staff. This system is too informal and resource intensive to adequately control the increased flows of funds envisaged by the Operational Plan.

23. The Director Finance plans to implement a more formal system, based on assessment and certification of NARS / NARI systems by CORAF/WECARD according to pre‐determined criteria based on the requirements of the World Bank and USAID. To support this, the Director Finance intends to get training for himself on World Bank procurement procedures.

24. Additional resources may be needed to implement this system. If it is not put in place quickly, then either the flow of funds to projects could be delayed or CORAF/WECARD could run an increased risk of funds being misused.

IT infrastructure

25. An audit of CORAF/WECARD’s IT systems was carried out recently by a firm of independent consultants. One of its main conclusions was that the current systems are not secure enough. Particular problems include:

• The lack of a firewall between the internet and CORAF/WECARD’s internal systems. i

• The lack of dedicated servers in the system. Currently one PC in each area (Finance, Programs etc) acts as a server for the other PCs in that area, which would cause severe disruption if a server / PC were to fail.

• The need to introduce daily back up procedures for key data and documents, as routine.

26. The report also suggests improvements to the website, for example to enable technical databases to be available on the web.

27. The next steps are to develop costed proposals to resolve these issues and to obtain funding. Then the equipment can be purchased with support from the procurement specialist, and installed.

Internal Auditor role

28. During our visit, three separate but related issues emerged concerning the role of the IA within CORAF/WECARD. This is currently done by one person who reports to the ED.

29. Concerning the IA’s reporting line, the Director Finance expressed concerns that the role should be an effective, independent check on the ED and as such its current reporting line to the ED


Annexes

59

may not be appropriate. He said that the external auditors and donors had also questioned whether this reporting line was appropriate, and I have asked to see the exact wording of these questions.

30. Concerning the person who is currently in the post, the ED himself was not sure whether she was making enough of an impact. The Director Finance is also concerned that the IA has spare capacity while his accounts staff are seriously over‐stretched, and he felt that she could be better utilised in the new role that he has proposed for a financial planner and analyst, reporting directly to him, while alternative arrangements were made to fill the IA role.

31. Concerning the work that the IA carries out, I noted that a significant amount of the her time is taken up with checking of disbursements, reporting for this purpose to the Director Finance. This task is part of the finance function and is not appropriate for an IA who should be independently checking financial controls rather than performing them herself.

32. At the end of my visit to Dakar I raised these issues with the ED, who was open to proposals from the CMT as to how the role might be improved. However a further discussion in Abuja, with the ED, Director Finance and others present, was inconclusive and it was agreed that I would develop some options and present them to the ED for further consideration. The options are developed below in Annex 2.

33. Based on this analysis, the current situation does not comply with best practice and should ideally be changed. However, setting up a more effective and independent IA function will require further work by CORAF/WECARD’s senior management and also additional costs, at a time when both management time and resources are scarce. At this stage the options are presented as a basis for further discussion, before deciding how best to move forward.

External audit

34. The previous external auditors BDO have been replaced by Cabinet Mazars, who were carrying out their first annual audit of the 2008 accounts at the time of our visit.

Governance Manual

35. The governance manual (GM) repeats some but not all of the information contained in the statutes of CORAF/WECARD, but sometimes with confusing discrepancies and inconsistencies. Some sections of the statutes are omitted for no obvious reason – for example the functions and powers of the Governing Board are not repeated in the GM, although the functions and powers of other organs of governance (for example the General Assembly and Executive Secretariat) are repeated. It makes no sense to have a GM that partially overlaps material that is already in the statutes, but in an inconsistent way.

36. Other matters that could properly be addressed in the GM, such as high level policies such as conflict of interest and segregation of duties, are omitted.

37. The Director Finance has undertaken to revise the GM and I will provide a detailed list of discrepancies to include in the revision. Given the pressures on the Director Finance, this is a relatively low priority task, which could reasonably be delayed until the important recruitment and staff training issues have been resolved.

H N Machin

25 May 2001


Annexes

60

Annex 1 ‐ Next steps

Action Who When

Governing Board approve Director Finance’s proposals for NARS certification Completed

JRJK/GB May

Review TOR and job description for Internal Auditor Completed

HM June

Appoint Procurement specialist Completed JRJK June

Prepare TOR for the Head of Administration and advertise role Completed

JRJK/HM June

Prepare TOR for financial planner / analyst and advertise role Completed

JRJK/HM June

Recruit and appoint 2 additional accounts staff Completed

JRJK July

Appoint Head of Administration In Train JRJK July

Appoint financial planner / analyst Completed JRJK July

Update procurement pages in finance and administration manual Completed

Procurement specialist / JRJK/HM

July

Update HR pages in finance and administration manual Completed

Head of Administration / JRJK/HM

July

TOMPRO training for Chief Accountant Completed JRJK / Chief Accountant July / August

Director Finance training on World Bank procurement procedures Completed

JRJK August

Appoint HR consultant – Not Completed JRJK August / Sept

Appoint financial planner / analyst (needs USAID approval) Completed

JRJK Sept

In house TOMPRO training for accounts and IT staff Completed

JRJK October

Revise the governance manual Completed JRJK October

Purchase new IT equipment Completed JRJK / procurement specialist

October

Review and complete job descriptions for staff Not Completed

HR consultant November


Annexes

61

Annex 2 – Review of options for the Internal Auditor role

1. There are three different issues that affect the available options:

• What is the best organisational reporting line for the IA role (as opposed to the individual currently occupying the role)?

• What functions should be carried out as part of the IA’s remit?

• How should the current IA best be deployed?

Best organisational reporting line for the Internal Auditor role

2. The options are:

• The IA reports to the Director Finance. This is not appropriate because it is not sufficiently independent of the Finance function.

• The IA reports to the ED, as at present. This provides good independence from the Director Finance. Some independence from the ED is provided by the IA’s direct access to the Governing Board through the Finance and Audit sub‐committee. However the governance manual (Article 4.5.9 (xiii) requires the IA to “prepare and submit reports to the Executive Director”, whereas the independence of the role would be enhanced if these written reports were submitted directly to the Finance and Audit sub‐committee.

• The IA reports directly to the Audit Committee. This is the best way to ensure the complete independence of the IA from the operations that he or she is auditing and is increasingly common in practice.

3. The best practice is for the IA to report directly to the Board, but the current reporting line to the ED is also acceptable provided that donors are comfortable with it and written reports are submitted directly to the Finance and audit sub‐committee.

What functions should be carried out by the Internal Auditor role?

4. To provide some context, the Institute of Internal Auditors defines internal audit as:

“An independent, objective assurance and consulting activity designed to add value and improve an organisation’s operations. It helps an organisation accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control and governance procedures”

5. This definition illustrates both the high level nature of the IA role and its need for independence from day to day operations. The governance manual, Article 4.5.9, lists 14 tasks for the IA, 13 of which are broadly compatible with this definition. The remaining task in Article 4.5.9 (viii), is that: “(the IA shall) undertake the control of vouchers from competitive funds projects”, which involves the IA directly in performing financial control as opposed to evaluating it, and hence detracts from the IA’s independence from operations.

6. The governance manual currently gives the IA a financial focus, for example by requiring the IA to regularly review and update the finance and accounting manual but not the high level governance manual. In order to properly scrutinise the performance of the Secretariat and the ED, the IA would need to evaluate the entire system of governance as well as risk management.


Annexes

62

How should the current IA best be deployed?

7. It is an operational matter for the ED as to how any particular individual should be deployed within the organisation. The CMT has not reviewed the performance of the current IA and does not have a view on the matter except that the skills and experience of the IA should match the requirements of the role.

8. Also, although it is not explicitly stated in the governance manual, it is implicit in the independence of the IA that the incumbent should not be removed or replaced without the approval of the Audit Committee.

Future options

9. There are several sub‐options which can be distilled into two broad approaches.

10. Option 1 is to maintain the status quo, with a financially based IA who broadly maintains independence from the Director Finance by reporting to the ED. This has the advantage of convenience at a time when CORAF/WECARD has other tasks and pressures that may be more important than changing the role of the IA. However the role as it currently exists does not allow for effective scrutiny of the ED in the context of CORAF/WECARD’s overall operations, governance and risk management, and donors may find this hard to accept.

11. Within Option 1 there is a sub‐option to stop using the IA to carry out the detailed control of vouchers for the competitive grant scheme. This would enhance the IA’s independence and objectivity but may leave the role more under‐utilised than at present.

12. Option 2 is to give the role a wider remit, including overall risk management and review of the entire governance framework. With such a remit it would be more appropriate for the IA to report to the Board and hence to be fully independent of the ED. However a senior individual with relevant experience would be needed, which would have cost implications at a time when CORAF/WECARD could find better uses for its scarce financial resources.

13. Within Option 2 there is a sub‐option to employ either an individual or a consulting firm on a part time basis, rather than full time. In this case the Board would need to agree both the top priorities for the IA to address and the amount of time required for each, before the required services could be procured.

Conclusion

14. The current situation (option 1) does not comply with best practice for reasons described above. However, option 2 would entail further work for CORAF/WECARD’s senior management and also additional costs, at a time when both management time and resources are scarce. At this stage the options are presented as a basis for further discussion with senior management, before deciding how best to move forward.


Annexes

63

Annex 5: Monitoring and Evaluation Matrix

(N.B.: For all indicators, the specific livestock, crops or inputs will be determined according to the research focus of the research projects, once they are identified and confirmed)

Hierarchy of Objectives Indicators Means of Verification Responsibility to Analyse

& Report Timing and Frequency

CORAF/WECARD SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Broad‐based agricultural productivity, competitiveness and markets sustainably improved in WCA

Productivity: At least 4% increase in agricultural production for priority crops, livestock and fisheries per unit of input by 2013

Competitiveness: At least 20% of commodities and products confirm to specific national, sub‐regional and/r international standards by 2013

Markets: at least 10% increase in the inter‐ and intra‐regional market share of agricultural products by 2013

(existing CORAF/WECARD Indicators)

Government statistics

Economic Commission for African statistics and reports

FAO statistics

ECOWAS and other regional organisation reports

Selected CGIAR reports and publications

External evaluation and impact assessment

Appropriate UN organisations

CORAF/WECARD Annually to CORAF/WECARD Board in May each year


Annexes

64



1.1 At least 15 appropriate technologies / innovations for crops, livestock and/or fisheries available to poor and vulnerable households by 2013


1.2 At least 10 technologies for land rehabilitation for sustainable production developed by 2013

CORAF/WECARD RESULT 1: Appropriate technologies and innovations developed

(to improve smallholder farming systems and market access in mixed crop‐livestock systems in semi‐arid and sub‐humid regions of WCA)

1.3 At least 60 new multi‐stakeholder partnerships and mechanisms for the development of appropriate technologies and innovations effectively operational by 2013

(existing CORAF/WECARD Indicators)

NARS Annual Reports

CORAF/WECARD Annual Reports

Operating Unit Annual Reports

Sub‐regional organisation annual reports

PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 1: A research portfolio that can add value to crop productivity through more efficient water and nutrient use and management

Scientific and administrative milestones achieved in research projects

Research Project Reports CORAF/WECARD Program Manager

Partnership Management Committee

In accordance with CORAF/WECARD standard practice


Annexes

65



PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 2: A research portfolio that can add value to livestock productivity through better feed and animal disease management


Research Project Reports CORAF/WECARD Program Manager



CORAF/WECARD RESULT 4: Demand for agricultural knowledge from targeted clients facilitated and met

(to improve extension/ dissemination of new technologies in mixed crop‐ livestock systems in semi‐arid and sub‐humid regions of WCA)

4.1 At least 40% increase in met demand for appropriate knowledge, information and requested technology by 2013

4.3 At least 30% increase in the numbers of users including vulnerable/ disadvantaged stakeholders able to successfully access relevant knowledge and information by 2012

(sub‐set of existing CORAF/WECARD Indicators)

NARS Annual Reports





PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 3: Current and new knowledge being disseminated at the farm and

Project plans developed with key dissemination partners

Projects implemented with in‐built

Research project designs

Project reports

CORAF/WECARD Program Managers



Annexes

66



community level dissemination/ adoption strategies

Dissemination/ adoption activities completed


Six‐monthly (March and October)

CORAF/WECARD Program Managers


PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 4: Research includes socio‐economic aspects to underpin adoption

Project designs include relevant socio‐economic aspects

Project implementation addresses socio‐economic aspects as designed

Research project designs

Project reports




Annexes

67



CORAF/WECARD RESULT 2: Strategic decision‐making options for policy, institutions and markets developed

2.1 At least 15 new and effective multi‐stakeholder partnerships and mechanisms for the development of policy, institutional and market options established and functional by 2013

2.2 At least 20 policy options have been proposed/ recommended and advocated for to decision makers at regional and national levels by 2013

2.3 At least 50% of proposed policy options are effective and operational by 2013


NARS Annual Reports






Annexes

68



CORAF/WECARD RESULT 3: Sub‐regional agricultural research system strengthened and coordinated

3.2 At least 30% increase in effective partnerships and mechanisms operating in IAR4D paradigm established, strengthened and effectively operational by 2013

3.4 At least 30% increase in the capacity of identified stakeholders to acquire information and utilise improved technologies/ innovations to produce, develop, process and market agricultural products by 2013


NARS Annual Reports







Annually to CORAF/WECARD Board in May each year

PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 5: Capacity building with institutional partners and stakeholders

CORAF/WECARD capacity to meet its institutional objectives

Partnership Annual Review Partnership Management Committee with Technical Advisory Group

Annually


Annexes

69



Completion Evaluation Evaluation Team (AusAID‐contracted)

Early 2013

CORAF/WECARD Program Manager


PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITY AREA 6: Research portfolio aimed at addressing market access and informing policy


Research Project Reports



CSIRO data

CORAF/WECARD data

CORAF/WECARD and CSIRO Partnership Coordinators

Annually, by Partnership Management Committee to CORAF/WECARD Board and CSIRO Board in May

Partnership Annual Review Partnership Management Committee with Technical Advisory Group

Annually

PARTNERSHIP: Links between African and Australian agricultural scientists established and supported

Number of joint research projects undertaken

Number of ongoing institutional links

Quality of relationship between CSIRO and CORAF/WECARD


Early 2013


Annexes

70



Project design documents

Project progress reports

Project Completion evaluations

CORAF/WECARD Coordinator, with CSIRO Coordinator

Annually

Partnership Annual Review Partnership Management Committee, with Technical Advisory Group

Annually

GENDER EQUITY: Women and men participate in the research projects and share its benefits equitably

Gender analysis completed for each project and incorporated into project design and implementation

Men and women participate equitably in project activities

Dissemination/ adoption plans support equitable access for men and women to new technologies


Early 2013

Monitoring of press and public information

Invitations recorded

CSIRO Partnership Coordinator

Annually RECOGNITION: Australia’s contribution to the agricultural innovation system in WCA recognised and acknowledged

West and Central African Nations officially acknowledge Australian support

Australian representatives invited to regional fora

Partnership Annual Review Partnership Management Committee, with Technical Advisory Group

Annually


Annexes

71




Early 2013

Date post:	06-Feb-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vuonganh
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Partnership between CORAF/WECARD · PDF filethinking to CORAF/WECARD and ... Extending the...

Documents