137
i
Project Completion Report
Project Name : Smallholder Livelihood Development in Eastern Indonesia
Loan Number : L-I-835-ID
Grant Number : G-I-C-835-ID
Date : December 2018
Indonesia:
SOLID - Smallholder Livelihood Development in
Eastern Indonesia
ii
Figure 1 Project Location in Maluku and North Maluku Provinces
iii
ABBREVIATION
ADD Alokasi Dana Desa/Village Fund Allocation
AJB Akte Jual Beli/Deed of Sale and Purchase
AOS Annual Outcome Survey
APBD Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Daerah/Local Government Budget
APBN Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Nasional/National Budget
AWPB Annual Work Plan and Budget
AFS Agency for Food Security
BPOM Badan Pengawas Obat dan Makanan/National Drug and Food Control
BUMDES Badan Usaha Milik Desa/Village Enterprise
CD Community Development
DPIU District Project Implementation Unit
DPMO District Project Management Office
FBS Farmer Business School
FFS Farmer Field School (SL)
FFs Farm Facilitators
FGD Focus Group Discussion
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
IT Information Technology
KK/RT/HH Kepala Keluarga/ Rumah Tangga/Household
LPA Lead Programme Agency
LVCs Long Value Chains
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MF Matching Fund
MTR Mid Term Review
MUI Majelis Ulama Indonesia/Indonesia Religious Committee
NGO Non Governmental Organization
NPMO National Project Management Office
O&M Operation and Maintenance
PCR Project Completion Report
PHLN Pinjaman dan Hibah Luar Negeri/Foreign Loan and Grant
PIM Project Implementation Manual
iv
PIRT Pangan Industri Rumah Tangga/Small Scale Industry
PPMO Provincial Project Management Office
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
RF/DB Revolving Fund/ Dana Bergulir
RIMS Result and Impact Management System
SOLID Smallholder Livelihood Development (PKPK)
SVC Short Value Chain
TA Tenaga Ahli/Expert
TTG Teknologi Tepat Guna/Appropriate Technology
UMKM/SME Usaha Mikro Kecil dan Menengah/Small and Medium Enterprises
VC (AVC) Value Chain (Agricultural Value Chain)
VCO Voluntary Commercial Officer
VCO Virgin Coconut Oil
VDP Village Development Plan
VITs Village Implementation Teams (TPD)
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATION ................................................................................................................................ iii
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ vii
LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................................................... viii
SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... ix
I. BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 1
A. SOLID DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................... 1
B. SOLID COMPONENTS ................................................................................................... 3
B.1. Component 1: Community Development and Gender ..................................................... 3
B.2. Component 2: Agriculture Production and Marketing ................................................... 5
B.3. Component 3: Support on the Development of Estate Crops Value Chain. .................. 6
B.4. Component 4: Management Support .............................................................................. 10
II. APPRECIATION FOR SOLID ............................................................................................... 12
III. ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT RELEVANCE ...................................................................... 12
IV. ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT EFFICIENCY ...................................................................... 13
V. REVIEW OF SOLID OUTPUT............................................................................................... 15
VI. ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES AND GOALS ............................................................. 21
VII. REVIEW OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS ........................................................................ 23
VIII. POTENCY FOR PROGRAM SUSTAINABILITY ............................................................... 28
IX. IMPACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................... 30
X. REVIEW OF PROJECT PARTNERS ................................................................................... 39
XI. INNOVATION, REPLICATION AND SCALING-UP PROGRAM ................................... 41
XII. LESSON LEARNED ................................................................................................................ 43
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Solid Appraisal Cost per Category ........................................................................................... xi
Table 2 Investation Conversion to Solid Beneficiaries ......................................................................... xii
Table 3 Target and Disbursement Based on Category ......................................................................... xiii
Table 4 Strategies and Approaches .......................................................................................................xiv
Table 5 The Target Set for SHGs............................................................................................................ 7
Table 6 Economic Internal Rate Return (EIRR) Calculation of SOLID Investment ............................ 26
Table 7 Financial Internal Rate Return (FIRR) pf SOLID Investment ................................................. 27
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Project Location in Maluku and North Maluku Provinces ....................................................... ii
Figure 2 Farm Road Built Using SOLID Funding ................................................................................ 15
Figure 3 Hand Tractor Facilitation in Maluku Province ....................................................................... 16
Figure 4 Ground Water Pump built using SHGs funding ..................................................................... 17
Figure 5 Planting vegetables in Polybags ............................................................................................. 18
Figure 6 Cocoa Seedlings in East Seram District ................................................................................. 18
Figure 7 SOLID Outlet and SHGs Products in one of Supermarket in Bula, East Seram .................... 19
Figure 8 Example of Labels used for SHG products ............................................................................ 20
Figure 9 Food Crops Cultivated and Processed by SHGs Member ...................................................... 25
Figure 10 Assets of SOLID Respondents ............................................................................................. 31
Figure 11 Per Capita Income and Daily Energy Consumption of SOLID HHs ................................... 32
Figure 12 Food Sufficiency Situation of SOLID HHs Over the Past 12 Months ................................. 32
Figure 13 Prevalence of Malnutrition among Children below 5 years old ........................................... 33
Figure 14 Prevalence of Stunting among Children below 5 years old .................................................. 34
Figure 15 The Proportion of SHGs Member who Adopted Knowledge and Technology .................... 35
Figure 16 The Response of SOLID respondent on the impact of SOLID program on agriculture
productivity ........................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 17 The Average production per planting season (kg/HH/season) ............................................. 36
Figure 18 The response of SOLID respondents on market stuation and the impact of SOLID program
on market access ................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 19 Proportion of SHGs members using different market channels ........................................... 38
viii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Updated Logical Framework: Progress Against Objectives, Outputs and Outcomes ...... 49
Appendix 2. Assessment of SOLID Relevance (Based on FGD in Maluku and North Maluku) ......... 53
Appendix 3. Assessment of Solid Efficiency ........................................................................................ 55
Appendix 4. Effect of Solid for Beneficiaries ....................................................................................... 57
Appendix 5. Achievement of Objectives and Goal ............................................................................... 66
Appendix 6. Assessment of Project Effectivity .................................................................................... 70
Appendix 7. Potency for Sustainability ................................................................................................ 72
Appendix 8. Assessment of Project Impact .......................................................................................... 78
Appendix 9. Assessment of Project Partners ........................................................................................ 88
Appendix 10. Innovation, Replication and Upscaling .......................................................................... 93
Appendix 11. Local Budget Contribution ............................................................................................. 98
Appendix 12. Summary of Lesson Learned ........................................................................................ 102
Appendix 13. Number of SHGs and Members ................................................................................... 122
ix
SUMMARY
A. Loan Identification
1. Country
2. Loan Number
3. Project Title
4. Borrower
5. Executing Agencies
6. Amount of Loan and Grant
7. % Disbursed
8. Project Completion Report Number
IND
L-I-835-ID
Smallholder Livelihood Development in
Eastern Indonesia
Agency for Food Security
30.300.000 SDR (IFAD Loan)
675.000 SDR (IFAD Grant)
96,05 % (Loan)
93,41 % (Grant)
PCR: INO
B. Loan Data
1. Appraisal
Date Started
Date Completed
Date Closed
2. Date of Approval IFAD Loan
Date of Loan Agreement Between IFAD
& Borrower
3. Date of Loan Effectiveness
In IFAD Loan Agreement
Actual
Number of Extensions
4. Closing Date
In Loan Agreement (IFAD Loan)
Actual
Number of Extensions
5 July 2011
31 January 2019
31 July 2019
May 2011
5 July 2011
5 July 2011
5 July 2011
0
31 July 2019
31 July 2019
0
x
1. Allocation of Loan and Grant Funds. The following table shows the appropriate expenditure
categories to be funded through loan and grant funds, the allocation of the amount of loan and
grant for each category and the percentage of expenditures for items to be financed in each
category.
Overview of SOLID Activities
Country Indonesia
Loan SDR 30.300.000
Grant SDR 675.000
Name of Project Smallholder Livelihood Development in Eastern Indonesia (SOLID)
Milestones:
Loan Approval Signing Effective Date Initial Completion
Date (original)
Realization of
Completion
5 July 2011 5 July 2011 31 January 2019 31 January 2019
Midterm Review Interim
Evaluation
Initial Closing
Date (original)
Realization of
Closing Date
4 July 2014 31 July 2019
Implementation Design
1. The target was 49,500 Households (HHs) in 330 villages across 11 districts (5 districts in
Maluku Province and 6 districts in North Maluku Province).
2. The target group was small farmers involved in the production of food and estate crops, female
head of households, indigenous people, poor people and migrant communities.
3. The ultimate goal was to improve life, in terms of income and food security, and reduced
poverty in Maluku and North Maluku Province.
4. Expected outcomes were: i) effective functioning of village institutions, groups and
federations; ii) increased group functions, sustainable production systems, improved use of
production facilities; iii) improvement of the natural resource management system; iv) SHG
and Federation operated as successful value chain (VC) of the targeted commodities; and v)
small-scale infrastructures were available in the target villages and managed by community-
based organizations.
5. The Components: i) community development with mobilized community and the formation of
self-help groups (SHGs) and Federation outputs; ii) increased production and integrated
agricultural systems with outputs of improved smallholder farmer’s capacity to increase
agricultural production; iii) VC development and marketing with the output of the availability
xi
of services to increase the income of group and Federation; iv) productive rural infrastructure
with small-scale rural infrastructure improvements; and v) institutional strengthening and
project management with efficient output management and project coordination.
Major changes in design and implementation after Mid Term Review (MTR) 2014:
1. The target of SOLID beneficiaries was lowered from 49,500 to 33,600 households and from 330
to 224 villages.
2. A re-design of the SOLID Project is considered necessary to improve its likelihood of achieving
the goal and objectives. The MTR has made a number of recommendations that will: (i)
simplify the structure of the Project; (ii) clarify what is required to implement the major
activities being funded; and (iii) revise the staffing structure (management and technical) by
focusing more resources at the district and village levels.
3. Revised the components to be 4 components; i) Component 1 – Community Development and
Gender; ii) Component 2: Support for Agriculture Production and Marketing; iii) Component 3:
Support for Estate Crops Value Chains; and component 4: Programme Management.
4. Reallocation of the loan financing agreement by category and component.
2. Appraisal and Actual Cost. There have been two revisions to the SOLID budget following
the MTR. Budget revisions did not change the total budget, but reallocated the budget between
categories of the IFAD Loans of SDR 30,300,000 and IFAD Grant of SDR 675,000.
Table 1 Solid Appraisal Cost per Category
Category
Original Appraisal (SDR) 1st Reallocation
(SDR) 2nd Realloacation (SDR)
Loan Grant Loan Grant Loan Grant
Initial Deposit
1. Civil Works 4.620.000 - 3.500.000 - 4.550.000 -
2. Vehicles, Equipments,
Materials
7.770.000 4.850.000 - 5.175.000 -
3. Capacity Building, Study,
and Workshop
8.530.000 175.000 8.000.000 485.000 8.950.000 526.000
4. Matching Fund (MF)
/Revolving Fund (RF)
4.360.000 - 6.800.000 - 7.625.000 -
5. International Consultant - 60.000 65.000 65.000
6. NGO and Local 1.990.000 375.000 4.500.000 115.000 4.000.000 84.000
xii
Category
Original Appraisal (SDR) 1st Reallocation
(SDR) 2nd Realloacation (SDR)
Loan Grant Loan Grant Loan Grant
Consultant
7. Unallocated 3.030.000 65.000 2.650.000 10.000 - -
Total 30.300.000 675.000 30.300.000 675.000 30.300.000 675.000
3. When the Government of Indonesia (GoI) budget of SDR 9,090,000 was also considered and used
to calculate the cost for empowering SOLID households (HHs), each HH needed a loan of SDR
1,126.1, grant of SDR 22.3 and GoI budget of SDR 337.8. The actual budget received directly by
the HH, however, was less than the above calculation since it was based on all the cost required to
run the SOLID program (Table 2).
Table 2 Investation Conversion to Solid Beneficiaries
Beneficiaries Number
(people)
Total Budget (Target) Cost/ Beneficiary (Target)
Component SDR SDR/people USD/people IDR/people
Direct 26,907 Loan 30,300,000 1,126.1 1,599.1 22,206,194.0
Grant 675,000 22.3 31.7 439,726.6
GoI 9,090,000 337.8 479.7 6,661,858.2
Men 12,560
Women 14,347
Other information related to the targeted beneficiaries:
1. Total beneficiaries is SHG members which represent HH unit.
2. Total beneficiaries did not reached target due to limited number of target poor population in the
village, so that target of 15 HH per each SHG can not be reached. Besides, several SHG members
(400 HH) discharged from groups due to migration and death.
3. Conversion: SDR 1 = USD 1,42 as of 5 June 2018 (IMF); USD 1 = IDR 13.887 as of 5 June 2018
(BI).
4. Up to December 2018, the loan disbursement was approximately SDR 29,102,038.54 or 96,05%
and grant disbursement was approximately SDR 630,505.52 or 93,41%. The disbursement of
GoI budget was still being processed. See Table 3.
xiii
Table 3 Target and Disbursement Based on Category
Category
Appraisal (2nd Revision) Disbursement* %
Loan
IFAD
Grant
IFAD
APBN
Pagu
Loan
IFAD
Grant
IFAD APBN
Loan
IFAD
Grant
IFAD APBN
1. Civil Works 4,550,000
4,367,926.25
96.00
2. Vehicles,
Equipments,
Materials 5,175,000
4,933,406.92
95.33
3. Capacity
Building, Study,
and Workshop 8,950,000 526,000
8,554,836.72 484,073.33
95.58 92.03
4. Matching Fund
(MF)
/Revolving
Fund (RF)
7,625,000
7,520,638.00
98.63
5. International
Consultant
65,000
64,574.22
99.35
6. NGO and Local
Consultant 4,000,000 84,000
3,725,230.65
81,857.97
93.13
97.45
7. Unallocated
Total 30,300,000 675,000 9,090,000 29,102,038.54 630,505.52 - 96.05 93.41 -
Note:
1. The SDR amount of WA 61 and 62 loan were estimated using the SDR to USD conversion rate of
WA 60
2. The SDR amount of WA013 grant was estimated using the conversion rate of WA 012
3. The total disbursement still included ineligible payment, which had been returned to IFAD
5. Strategy and Approach. The overall development approach was directed to reduce poverty and
increase family food security by strengthening the capacity of women, especially women as head
of family, local ethnicities, and those untouched by previous programs. The participatory
approach was carried out through the involvement of poor groups in program planning and
implementation as well as technology transfer through demonstration plots and farmer field
school, comparative studies, workshops, mentoring, counseling, and technical training. The
private sector and other institutions were also involved as partners, such as partnerships with PT
Olof (Cocoa), PT Olam (Nutmeg), NGOs, CIAT (development of tubers based products) and
others. The Strategies and approaches implemented for SOLID project can be seen in Table 4.
xiv
Table 4 Strategies and Approaches
Strategies Approaches
1. Overall development
approach Reducing poverty and increasing household food security
2. Target Poor people
3. Gender and other
vulnerable groups Capacity building for women especially head of household,
indigenous people, and those untouched by other program
4. Participatory approach
Involvement of poor group in program planning and implementation
5. Development/Technology
transfer Approach of demplots and field school, comparative study, farmers
visit, facilitation, extension, and technical training
6. Involvement of private
sectors and other
institutions
Partnership with PT Olof (Kakao), PT Olam (Pala), NGOs, CIAT
(development of tubers based produts) and others
7. Management 1. NPMO
2. PPMO
3. DPMO
4. Exit strategy 1. Support of Local Government Budget/ APBD II for
sustainability facilitation and other technical facilitation.
2. Support of Local Government Budget/ APBD II for SOLID
replication in other villages.
3. Sustainability of cooperation facilitation through Dinas
Koperasi and UMKM
4. Monitoring of group activities and bussiness center by district.
5. Integration of activities with village fund, VDP (Village
Development Program) and Bumdes (village enterprises).
6. Increasing marketing network through retail partners, outlets
and marketing cooperation with distributor outside the
provinces.
7. Suport of Local Government (Health Dinas) and Local
Indonesian Ulama Council (MUI) for the issuance of licences,
such as PIRT and halal certificates, needed for SHG’s and
Bussiness Center Products.
1
I. BACKGROUND
1. Background. The Project Completion Report (PCR) was prepared by the Government of
Indonesia (GoI), in this case is the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) c.q the Agency of Food
Security (AFS), during the completion phase of SOLID project. A completion mission was
conducted to review the project implementation and the PCR and to provide recommendations for
the PCR improvement.
2. The final version of PCR is delivered to the corresponding institutions (Bappenas, MoF and
IFAD) on the date specified in the loan agreement, usually six months after the completion date.
3. Objectives. The objectives of the preparation of PCR, as the borrower's accountability report to
IFAD, were:
to elaborate and evaluate the extent and impact of the program and identify the challenges and
their solutions.
to provide lesson learned for future interventions.
4. Targets. The target of PCR preparation was all activities, including the challenges and
achievements, carried out by the National Project Management Office (NPMO), the Provincial
Project Management Office (PPMO), the District Project Implementing Unit (DPIU) and
beneficiaries at village levels.
A. SOLID DESCRIPTION
5. Background. Smallholder Livelihood Development project in Eastern Indonesia (SOLID) was a
project prepared and formulated by the International Fund for Agricultural Development or IFAD
and the Government of Indonesia, with the Agency for Food Security, Ministry of Agriculture as
the executing agency. For the implementation efficiency, the National Project Management Office
(NPMO), the Provincial Project Management Office (PPMO), and the District Project
Implementing Unit (DPIU) were established at national, provincial and district levels .
6. Following the IFAD Financing Agreement of loan No LI-835-ID and grant No. GIC-835-ID the
government together with the lending institution conducted a joint Mid Term Review (MTR) in
June 2014. The MTR produced several recommendations, one of them was a proposal to change
the design of the project for the period of 2015 - 2018.
7. The new SOLID design of 2015-2018 was an improvement to the initial design drawn up during
the design mission in 2010. The new design required adaptation of the planning strategy and
implementation activities, which were adjusted to the conditions and progress of the project in the
region. Following the MTR, the NPMO conducted the Annual Outcome Survey (AOS) annually
to obtain information of SOLID progess.
8. Objectives and Results. The objective of this project was to improve livelihood (income and
food security) and reduce poverty in 224 targeted villages in Maluku and North Maluku
Provinces. The MTR proposed a revised program design to shift the focus from infrastructure
2
development and the value chain towards a more integrated approach involving Self-Help Group
(SHG) engagement in food production activities for household consumption and sales to local
markets. In addition, Long Value Chains (LVCs) for the three main commodities (Cocoa,
Coconut and Nutmeg) was also developed. The MTR also proposed to reduce the components
from five to four, namely: i) Community Development and Gender; ii) Support for Agricultural
Production and Marketing; iii) Support for Estate Crops Value Chain; and iv) Program
Management. The expected results of the project after the MTR were: i) communities with
increased household food security and agricultural income planning; ii) households with sufficient
food and crops availability for household consumption and / or sales; iii) increase in household
income from the sale of three selected estate crop commodities (coconut, cocoa and nutmeg); and
iv) effective implementation and monitoring of SOLID activities.
9. Outcomes or expected results were: i) effective functioning of village institutions, farmer groups
and federations; ii) the beneficiaries were able to increase agriculture production with greater
market access; iii) the community was able to select a more competitive product; iv) SHGs and
Federations were able to organize the production and facilitate the marketing of the targeted
commodities; v) improvement of the small-scale agriculture infrastructures and involving the
community-based organizations for the maintenance of these infrastructures; and vi) completion
of all activities on the targeted time and according to the agreed budget.
10. The Target of the Project. The target was the poor farmers in 224 villages selected in 2011,
2012 and 2014. The villages were selected based on criteria of having at least 75-80% poor
households population, including native and / or local migrants who have not been touched by the
previous development program. The local wisdom was also considered in the selection of the
targeted villages and beneficiaries in 5 districts in Maluku Province (Buru, South Buru, Central
Maluku, West Seram and East Seram) and 6 districts in North Maluku Province (West
Halmahera, South Halmahera, Central Halmahera, East Halmahera, North Halmahera and Sula
Islands).
11. The SOLID target after the MTR was in total 33,600 poor Households (HHs) in 224 villages. The
involvement of women, especially the woman as the head of the family, in the project was >30%
of the total beneficiaries.
12. The selection process was conducted using Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) method by
measuring the wealth ranking and Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with the community. The
method involved village officials, community leaders, and religious leaders, who act as key
informants for household classification. The key informant meeting and FGD were facilitated by
the extension workers (PPLs). The targeted household was later determined by the community
without the influence of community leaders, facilitators or village officials. If necessary, the
ground check was performed to verify the targeted beneficiaries.The targeted HHs were then
informed about SOLID’s vision and mission.
3
13. The facilitation and assistance for the SHGs established since 2011 were given to strengthen the
organizational and management capabilities and bookkeeping, increase production of food and /
or estate crops and develop the estate crops value chain. The targeted villages and SHGs were
listed in table 4.
B. SOLID COMPONENTS
B.1. Component 1: Community Development and Gender
14. The Component of Community Development and Gender was designed to strengthen the capacity
of SHGs member, so they were able to improve their livelihood. During the first phase of SOLID
project 2011-2014, various facilitations were provided for SHGs to improve their capacity and
managerial skill. These activities were continued in the second phase of 2015-2018.
15. SHGs and Federation. From the year of 2011 to 2015, SHGs had been formed following the
PRA approach and the members were selected based on the criteria agreed by stakeholders in the
targeted village. At the beginning of SOLID project, a SHG was required to have maximum 15
poor farmer households (both man and woman as the head of family). However, the number of
SHG member was quite varied due to, among others, lack of population number, migration,
personal conflict, and death.
16. From the year of 2011 to 2014, 224 Federations had been formed in 224 villages. However, based
on the recommendation of the Midterm Review, only 20% of them (45 Federations) would be
further facilitated to support the development of estate crops (coconut, cacao and nutmeg) value
chain. The project targeted that 50% federations (112 Federations) grew and was able to facilitate
SHGs business. Moreover, the federation was expected to: i) continue to maintain the established
infrastructure; remain functional and useful for SHGs members to; ii) continue facilitation of
savings and loans through mutually beneficial cooperation; iii) facilitate the utilization of
infrastructure and processing ; and iv) connecting SHG with markets (traders, entrepreneurs,
markets) by looking for information on prices and markets of SHG's products. The infrastructure
managed by the Federation can be used by SHG as a media of promotion and business transaction
for SHG products.
17. Every 6 months, the performance of SHG and Federation were evaluated using indicators
provided in the assessment guidelines, namely: i) the construction of vision and mission; ii)
organizational management; iii) financial management and accounting; iv) network development;
v) organizational accountability (responsibility of members and administrators); and vi) learning
and monitoring and evaluation. Based on the evaluation, the performance of SHG and Federation
were classified as "good", "moderate" and "less". This participatory evaluation was assisted by the
extension worker and village facilitator-NGO.
18. Village Implementation Team. Following the MTR recommendations, a Village Implementation
Teams (VITs) were formed in each village, consisting of 5 people, from Extension Workers
elements, Village Facilitator-NGOs, village marketing cadres or Village Commercial Officer
4
(VCO), food crop farmer contact and estate crop farmer contact or Farmer Facilitators (FFs).
Marketing cadres, food crop farmer contact as well as estate crop farmer contact were individuals
from the SHG members, administrators, federations or community leaders, who have experiences,
extensive network, entrepreneurial spirit, agriculture knowledge, and have taken a part in
providing services to community in their village.
19. The VITs played a role in managerial and technical facilitations as well as having marketing
network with the traders or entrepreneurs in their area. Before joining the SOLID teamwork, VIT
members were equipped with knowledge of SOLID project through several activities, namely: i)
introduction to the SHG organizations and their businesses; ii) training and field visits, including
business management, business networking, promotion and sales, for marketing cadres; iii)
Facilitation for food crop farmer contact and estate crop farmer contact related to production
technology, post-harvest handling and processing; and iv) refreshment training on technical skills
and increasing SHG and Federation institutional capacity for extension workers and village
facilitator-NGOs.
20. Socializations. The knowledge on SOLID approach and strategic steps was shared to SOLID
NPMO, PPMO, DPIU, the extension workers and NGO-village facilitator, so they were able in
preparing and carrying out activities in each management unit.
21. For SHG and its members, socialization was focused on improving their motivation to utilize
group organizations for social and economic activities, such as: teamwork, production learning,
post-harvest handling and processing of agricultural products.
22. Trainings. Trainings were given to SOLID Program implementers at PPMO and DPIU on
community development and gender, including knowledge on Participatory Rural Appraisal
(PRA). The trainings were conducted to improve understanding on the issues. Thus, they were
able to monitor and evaluate all activities supporting the process of community empowerment and
gender.
23. Refreshment trainings were given to extension workers and NGO facilitators to improve their
mentoring capacity. The knowledge was expected to help them in strengthening SHG institutional
capacity and in mentoring process, including assisting community to prepare their village
development plans and SHG production activities.
24. Trainings for SHG was conducted in the form of mentoring given by village facilitator and
facilitation given by the extension worker. The village facilitator assisted the SHG in building
organization and management, group bookkeeping, group leadership and savings and loan
management. The extension worker facilitated agriculture production knowledge, such as
agriculture production, pest and disease control and post harvest handling, etc. Moreover,
knowledge can also be obtained from other successful farmers, so starting in 2014 DPIU
organized an activity called farmer visit. From this farmer visit, member of SHG learned
production technology, post-harvest and processing from other successful SHG.
5
25. Distribution of SHG Saving and Loan Fund (Matching Fund). Matching fund was provided to
SHGs, each receiving maximum IDR 18 million given in twice installment of IDR 9 million each.
The matching fund was utilized according to savings and loan mechanisms and was prioritized for
consumption, education, health and possibly also for production activities. Some of the SHGs
(case of Buru District), especially those receiving the MF before the MTR used it for collective
agriculture production. Lack of experience, pest and climate were among the reasons of their
production failure, which depleted their capital.
B.2. Component 2: Agriculture Production and Marketing
26. Support for agriculture production and marketing was provided to improve production yields,
post-harvest handling and processing of agricultural products. Furthermore, the support was also
expected to increase value added through collaborative activities among members of SHG. The
given support among others were: production planning, revolving funds for agricultural
production (RF), trainings, infrastructure, equipment and marketing.
27. Production Planning. Extension worker/VITs assisted SHGs in preparing their production plan,
considering the result of village PRA. The production plan was prepared as early as possible, so it
can be used at the right for agriculture production.
28. Distribution of Revolving Funds for Productive Activity (RF). The Agriculture Revolving
Fund (ARF) had been allocated since 2015, following MTR recommendation, and was given to
SHG, which was in 2 years after its establishment and had business plans for production, post-
harvest handling and/or processing. The RF was given twice for two consecutive years, each was
IDR. 20 million. Therefore each SHG received in total IDR 40 million, which can be utilized
maximum 20% for consumptive requisites, and the remaining 80% for production, post-harvest,
processing activities.
29. This revolving fund was provided for seedling activities, purchasing agriculture inputs (seeds,
seedlings, fertilizers, pesticides) and simple equipments needed by SHG members. On average
each SHG member received a share of revolving fund of IDR. 1,5 million. For those who did not
have land, they used the funding for other productive activities such as food/estate crop
processing business. The trading business or non-agricultural processing was allowed using the
20% dedicated for consumptive requisites. Saving and loan management using the RF was
flexible according to the arrangement agreed by SHG members.
30. Training. extension workers and NGOs-Village Facilitator were provided with technical training
in production, post-harvest, and processing, including the use of machinery and equipment for
food/horticulture/estate crop commodities. The type of trainings was tailored to the business run
by the SHG members. Trainers could be asked from relevant technical agencies, including
research institutions, universities and partner companies or other non-governmental organizations
that have expertise in their fields.
6
31. Training for SHG members and administrators was prioritized for those who were ready to run
their agricultural business. The training was usually conducted in the targeted villages. The
agriculture production training was carried out in the form of farmer field school, including
technology introduction and pest and disease management. In the post-harvest training, the
participants were given theory and practice on post harvest treatments, including introduction to
post-harvest tools and marketing.
32. Equipment. The project provided 1-2 types of supporting tools for production, post-harvest or
processing that can be used for all SHG members having similar business. Procurement of these
equipments were flexible depending on the type of commodity selected by the SHG members.
33. Marketing. Marketing services were facilitated by village marketing cadres who are members of
the VITs. Marketing cadres helped each of SHG members by organizing and connecting the
members to traders or entrepreneurs. Marketing cadres provided guidance and service on product
demand and price information, including product criteria demanded by market. Moreover, the
cadre also promoted the SHG’s products by establishing extensive relationships with marketing
networks, inside and outside of the targeted villages.
34. Small Infrastructure Facilitation for SHG. The project facilitated the construction of farm
roads, drying floors, warehouses, fences, simple irrigation networks, wells, clean water storage,
etc. Community contributions were also expected in the form of additional funding, labour and
asset maintenance.
B.3. Component 3: Support on the Development of Estate Crops Value Chain.
35. In an effort to enabling SHG business to drive the rural area economy, the design of SOLID Phase
II facilitated the development of leading commodities value chain. Identification was performed
in 11 districts, resulting in three main estate crop commodities, namely Coconut, Cocoa and
Nutmeg. The project facilitated several activities supporting the development of those
commodities value chain.
36. Strengthening Federation Capacity. Federation institutions were directed to support the
activities of Component 2 (Agricultural Production and Marketing) and Component 3 (Support on
the Development of Estate Crop Value Chain). A training to strengthen the Federation
management was given to 224 Federations in 2015. The project targeted that 50% of the
federations (112 federations) would continue to grow and function in short value chain of the
SHGs production. The 112 federations were short-listed based on their performance into 45
federations (4-6 Federations per district). The 45 federations were prepared to support the
development of long value chains or to market the export-oriented estate crop commodities
(Coconut, Cocoa and Nutmeg).
7
Table 5 The Target Set for SHGs
No. Province/District Targeted villages Number of SHGs
Total Year Total 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
A MALUKU
1 Buru
2011 4 12 12 16 40 40 40 40 40 40
2012 6
18 30 12 60 60 60 60 60
2014 12
36 36 48 120 120 120
Sub total
22 12 30 46 88 136 148 220 220 220
2 South Buru
2011 3 9 9 12 30 30 30 30 30 30
2012 3
9 15 6 30 30 30 30 30
2014 7
21 21 28 70 70 70
Sub total
19 12 27 41 80 120 130 190 190 190
3 Central Maluku
2011 5 15 15 20 50 50 50 50 50 50
2012 9
27 45 18 90 90 90 90 90
2014 14
42 42 56 140 140 140
Sub total
28 15 42 65 110 182 196 280 280 280
4 West Seram
2011 4 12 12 16 40 40 40 40 40 40
2012 5
15 25 10 50 50 50 50 50
2014 13
39 39 52 130 130 130
Sub total
22 12 27 41 89 129 142 220 220 220
5 East Seram
2011 4 12 12 16 40 40 40 40 40 40
2012 5
15 25 10 50 50 50 50 50
2014 10
30 30 40 100 100 100
Sub total
13 9 18 27 57 81 88 130 130 130
TOTAL MALUKU
104 60 144 220 424 648 704 1.040 1.040 1.040
8
No. Province/District
Targeted villages Number of SHGs
Total Tahun Total 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
B. MALUKU UTARA
1 West Halmahera
2011 4 12 12 16 40 40 40 40 40 40
2012 6
18 30 12 60 60 60 60 60
2014 10
30 30 40 100 100 100
Sub total
20 12 30 46 82 130 140 200 200 200
2 Central Halmahera
2011 4 12 12 16 40 40 40 40 40 40
2012 6
18 30 12 60 60 60 60 60
2014 10
30 30 40 100 100 100
Sub total
20 12 30 46 82 130 140 200 200 200
3 East Halmahera
2011 4 12 12 16 40 40 40 40 40 40
2012 6
18 30 12 60 60 60 60 60
2014 10
30 30 40 100 100 100
Sub total
20 12 30 46 82 130 140 200 200 200
4 North Halmahera
2011 4 12 12 16 40 40 40 40 40 40
2012 6
18 30 12 60 60 60 60 60
2014 10
30 30 40 100 100 100
Sub total
20 12 30 46 82 130 140 200 200 200
9
No. Province/District
Targeted villages Number of SHGs
Total Tahun Total 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
5 South Halmahera
2011 4 12 12 16 40 40 40 40 40 40
2012 6
18 30 12 60 60 60 60 60
2014 10
30 30 40 100 100 100
Sub total
20 12 30 46 82 130 140 200 200 200
6 Sula Island
2011 4 12 12 16 40 40 40 40 40 40
2012 6
18 30 12 60 60 60 60 60
2014 10
30 30 40 100 100 100
Sub total
20 12 30 46 82 130 140 200 200 200
TOTAL NORTH MALUKU
120 72 180 276 492 780 840 1.200 1.200 1.200
GRAND TOTAL
MALUKU+ NORTH MALUKU
224 132 324 496 916 1.428 1.544 2.240 2.240 2.240
10
37. The 45 federations were provided with additional fund to build federation office building, as
information and promotion units, and warehouse. Each federation was expected to manage
maximum three warehouses for coconut, cocoa and nutmeg. The management was trained in
business management, network establishment with trading partners/entrepreneurs, building
cooperative cooperation and obtaining the legal standing for cooperative.
38. Expanding Farmer Networks. Non SOLID farmers having similar business to SOLID farmers
were encouraged to join the federation.
39. Feasibility Study of three commodities. A feasibility study of three estate crops was carried out
by international value chain and marketing consultant. The feasibility study looked the potential
and market networks as well as regional policy support for the implementation of long value
chain (LVC) development in Maluku Province and North Maluku Provinces. If the feasibility
assessment was not significant, the support for the economically-oriented and export-oriented
Estate crops (long value chain) were not continued.
40. Building a Partnership Network. To ensure the sustainability of production business
partnerships with foreign or local businessmen were required. The partners were expected to
provide more capital, technology as well as logistic for the development of Coconut, Cocoa and
Nutmeg value chains. Moreover, investment in developing product derivatives of Coconut, Cocoa
or Nutmeg was needed to encourage farmers in conducting productive activities.
B.4. Component 4: Management Support
41. Management support was given to strengthen the capacity of SOLID Program implementers at
NPMO, PPMO, and DPIU, including capacity building, consultant and NGO supports, and
Technical Team support.
42. Capacity Building. Capacity building for implementers at NPMO, PPMO, and DPIU was given
in the form of various trainings/workshops and periodic consolidation meetings in accordance
with their field of expertise/responsibilities. SOLID should periodically evaluate staff
performance and encourage improvement in their respective field of expertise.
43. SOLID management performance assessment was carried out through consolidation meetings
held periodically by each management unit. The SOLID Coordinator at the central and provincial
levels and SOLID Managers at the district level should conduct overall project management
performance assessment per semester based on the planned goals and activities. project
implementing staff shall receive capacity building and formal guidance to improve their
performance. Consistently, staff who did not carry out their duties would formally receive
sanctions and, if needed, would be rotated from the SOLID implementation team.
44. Consultant Support. Since the beginning of SOLID implementation, consultants had been
recruited to assist SOLID NPMO, PPMO and DPIU. During the second phase of 2015-2018,
international and local individual consultants as well as experts recruited through consulting firm
were posted at the central, provincial and district levels.
11
45. The individual consultants were posted at central level consisting of international consultant in
management, international consultant in value chain and marketing, local consultant in
management, local consultant in the field of monitoring and evaluation and local consultant in the
procurement of goods and services. Consultants/experts recruited through consulting firms were
appointed to strengthen NPMO, PPMO and DPIU, which consisted of operational manager,
financial expert, and information and communication technology expert at NPMO; value chain
and marketing and community empowerment and training consultants at provincial level; and
food and estate crops experts at district level.
46. Support from Non-Governmental Organizations. The NGOs were invited to join SOLID
implementation team as a service provider. The NGOs had responsibility to mentor the SHGs and
federation in the area of Community Development and Gender and to provide assistance in
strengthening SHG and Federation institutional capacity. The NGOs team consisted of a
provincial coordinator, supervisors stationed in each district and village facilitators assigned to the
SOLID targeted villages.
47. Technical Team. Technical team consisted of cross sector stakeholders at district level. The role
of the technical team in SOLID project was to synchronize and integrate cross sectors or
stakeholder activities in strengthening SOLID Program investments. The technical team was
expected to orchest a synergize effort to accelerate the business of SHGs and community.
48. Study. The study was conducted periodically to provide information of SOLID implementation
progress. Some of the studies, such baseline, midterm and endline surveys, annual outcome
survey and Focus Group Discussion (FGD) among SOLID implementers at village, district,
provincial and central level, was used as inputs for PCR compilation,.
49. Benefits of the Program. SOLID implementation was expected to increase the agriculture
production and added value, resulting in more income for poor household. Moreover, the
community also received benefits of infrastructures and facilities, such as farm roads, irrigation
networks, warehouses, hand tractors, threshers, processing equipment, etc. The capacity building
also helped the community, including women, to improve their soft and hard skills, which
eventually benefited them in improving their livelihood.
50. SOLID also provided benefits for SOLID staff at NPMO, PPMO, and DPIU in managing
agricultural development programs using participatory approach. Authorities at the district and
provincial levels had experiences and skills in implementing rural poverty reduction programs in
the context of decentralized governance.
51. The description of SOLID inputs, outputs, outcomes and impact can be seen in the SOLID
Logical Redesign Framework (2014 - 2018) in Appendix 1.
12
II. APPRECIATION FOR SOLID
52. Appreciation from SOLID Beneficiaries. The beneficiaries appreciated Solid implementation
from: i) the existence, approach and implementation method, which were in accordance with the
needs of the poor; ii) physical facilities, which were supported with capacity and technical
assistances; iii) improvement of agriculture production; and iv) the growth of processing and
marketing of farmer products. Because the farmers benefited from Solid project, they were
committed to continue and improve their current achievements.
53. Government Commitments. Some district governments were committed to continuing the Solid
approach and implementation by providing funding for replication or futher supervision.
III. ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT RELEVANCE
54. SOLID objectives and activities were relevant to the needs of poor community, to the national
povety reduction strategy and to the strategy of IFAD member state.
55. The objectives and SOLID implementation strategy in the appraisal and MTR documents were
consistent with the medium-term development goals and IFAD strategies in creating employment
opportunities, increasing income and food security, and reducing the number of household below
the poverty line. Improving household food security was targeted through activities designed to
improve livelihoods, production and marketing of agricultural products. The objectives were also
in line with the national strategy in poverty alleviation. The assessment result can be seen in
Appendix 2.
56. The SOLID design was quite comprehensive because each component complements and supports
each other. The initial design was adapted in the MTR to respond the challenges and
accommodate the needs of the poor. The new design also accomodated the activities promoting
woman participation.
57. The MTR Mission considered that SOLID need to be clearly re-defined and re-directed to achieve
its expected results and impact before completion. Improving agriculture-based livelihoods for the
poor should be at the core of the SOLID strategy and the basis for activities from the MTR to
SOLID completion.
58. To put more emphasis on agriculture productive activities, the design was improved by adding
supporting activities and component, namely: i) the provision of activities to increase production
of selected commodities (Component 2); ii) infrastructure development to increase agricultural
production and added value (Component 3); and iii) facilitation and intensive capacity building to
support communities and poor farmer groups (both men and women) in planning and managing
their activities (Component 1).
59. Project Relevance to Community Development and Gender. The project was clearly relevant
to community development and gender activities since it was designed to: i) improve household
13
food security and income from agriculture business; ii) increase poor household capacity in
managing and maintaining group resources (human and financial resources); and iii) increase
member capacity in planning and implementing production and post harvest activities. The
community development component was reflected through the activities of mentoring, including
SHGs establishment and capacity building, performed by village facilitator.
60. The lesson learned from SOLID implementation before the MTR was used to assure that: (1)
technical input and project facilitation followed the logical framework; (2) the SHG establishment
and development were linked to agriculture production and economic opportunities; (3) the
guideline for saving and loan promoted group cohesion and sustainability, and (4) the project
management was equipped with a simple implementation guideline.
61. Project Relevance to the Increase of Agriculture Production and Marketing. SOLID design
was relevant to the effort in improving agriculture production and marketing, as can be seen from
SOLID aims of : i) increasing food availability, both for household consumption and sales; ii)
increasing household food security; and increasing household income as a result of increased
sales.
62. SOLID also technically contributed to the improvement of agriculture system through: i) training
on production and post harvest given to extension workers and SHGs members; ii) the provision
of facilities and equipments for SHGs, federations and business centers; iii) developing off/non
agriculture business for women groups; and (iv) providing facilitation for small scale non
agriculture business.
63. Project Relevance to the increase of estate crop value chain. The design of SOLID project
also corresponded to the effort to increase the estate crops value chain. The design was intended
to: i) increasing household income from the sales of coconut, cocoa and nutmeg in a sustainable
way; ii) improving marketing networks and market knowledge. The relevance was further
strengthened through SOLID activities in accommodating the need of the poor, such as rural
infrastructure, irrigation network, and access to clean water, drying floor, and drying machine.
64. Project Relevance to the Management Support. The design of SOLID project aimed to: i)
encourage the effective project implementation and monitoring; ii) encourage a consistent,
transparent and fungsional program management at all levels; iii) facilitate M&E system to
operate and function effectively; and iv) provide management support at national, provincial and
district levels.
IV. ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT EFFICIENCY
65. Component A: Community development and gender. The achievemet of all indicators was
more than 90% of the target. Of the 2,240 target, 2,192 SHGs were established until the year of
2015. From the year 2015 to 2018, no new group establishment was targeted, but the activities of
SOLID project were focused more on the development of the 2,192 groups. The target of SHGs
14
number and their respective member were not achieved due to limited poor household in the
targeted villages. More than 90% of the established SHGs received trainings, such as PRA,
Farmer Field School (FFS) and demonstration plot, which were followed by their representatives.
Therefore, more than 90% of the SHGs were able to formulate the production and harvest plan
through their group business plan.
66. Component B: Increase of Agriculture Production and Marketing. The outputs of the
indicators were beyond the set target for this component, namely : i) more than 75% of household
were fully food secure1; ii) more than 20% reduction of stunting prevalence in SOLID
households2; iii) more than 75% households enjoyed 30% lift of income from the sales of food
crop produce3.
67. Component C: Estate Crop Value Chain. Some indicators exceeded the target set in the log
frame, for example more than 50% farmers engaged in value chain and was able to respond to the
market. However, only 1,8% of the farmers sold their produce to federations (and SHGs), and the
rests sold their produce directly to traders. The limited role of federations in assisting marketing
of SHGs products was due to their limited capital. The funding of IDR 35 million was deemed
insufficient for performing their intended function. This funding was not provided to all
federations formed between 2011 and 2015 due to changing policies after 2015. Besides those of
federation actively supported marketing, some federations managed the facilities and equipment
provided for them and was rented to the SHGs and community. While other federations, which
were inactive, did not receive any supports, including funding, facilities and equipments, provided
by SOLID.
68. Component D: Support on the project manajement and institutions. M&E report had been
actively used by the management. Moreover, 95% of the activities were inline with the AWPB
and 100% of the budget was used for activities according to the formulated AWPB. However, the
implementation of M&E in SOLID project encountered many challenges. The dashboard and
report of the PPMO and DPIU were not submitted in time to the NPMO. Various channels, such
as e-mail, whatsapp, and simplification of reporting format, had been used by the NPMO to
reduce the reporting burden of the DPIU and PPMO, but those were not fully functioning in
accelerating the information flow.
69. The project efficiency assessment can bee seen in appendix 3.
1. Food sufficiency was measured from the household food security approach, which was calculated based on the ratio between household
food expenditure and household total expenditure. Using this approach, 80% of SOLID respondents were food secure and 20% of the
were food insecure (SOLID endline survey of 2018).
2. Endline survey SOLID. Random sampling was used in all SOLID surveys, such as AOS, baseline, midterm, the samples were selected
randomly. The calculation of stunting prevalence was based on the result of baseline and end line surveys. Stunting prevalence and other
malnutrition problem were not found during mid term survey conducted in 2015.
3. Based on baseline survey, most of farmers in Maluku province produced food crops only for household consumption. At the end of
SOLID program, most of farmers harvested the crops not only for household consumption, but also for sales.
15
V. REVIEW OF SOLID OUTPUT
70. Access to Infrastructure. The access of SHGs and their members to small infrastructures, such
as farm road, drying floor, warehouse, drying/smoking place for kopra, clean water infrastructure,
farm hut, market and capital, was improved although their access to other facilities such as SHGs
office and village fund was still limited.
Figure 2 Farm Road Built Using SOLID Funding
71. Farm road opened the access from farm to market, which increased SHGs business: increased
farm field and production. Drying floor improved the quantity and quality of dried produces, such
as paddy, maize, peanut, nutmeg, clove, copra, cashew nut, mung bean and cocoa. The
warehouses with limited space was used to keep the harvest and small agriculture devices and
equipments. Clean water facilities were managed by federation and was able to fulfil the demand
of SHGs members. The the farmer hut was used for gathering and discussion of the SHGs and
other communities.
72. The office building built for some federations had not been operated as business place and office
for SHGs and federations. Copra smoking place reduced the production cost, but the construction
was not strong, could not tolerate the heat and having less capacity, so the SHGs had to queue for
using the facility. When the SHGs had the access they would be able to manage the village fund
the way they did for matching and revolving funds. However their access to village fund was still
limited.
73. The small irrigation network increased productivity, but some of the networks were not used
optimally, while others were broken and was not functioned properly. Although improving market
access, the market was not built in all districts due to differences in demand. MF and RF
16
facilitated the SHGs to obtain the capital for their business. However, the saving and loan
mechanisms used to manage the funding had many challenges related to revolving process.
74. Access to new technology for food crops. Community access to new technology, such as simple
irrigation, superior seed, thresher, fertilizer and moisture tester, was improved. Those equipments
were useful for SHGs member in Maluku and North Maluku provinces.
Figure 3 Hand Tractor Facilitation in Maluku Province
75. The hand tractor/cultivator was used by farmer and managed by federation and business center.
The farmer, who wanted to use the equipment, paid the rent to federation and business center. The
latter used the payment for the maintenance of the equipments. However the number of
equipments and the maintenance system were still limited and less optimum. Although the use of
superior seed and fertilizer could increase agriculture productivity, their availability were
inadequate. Some of federations helped the SHGs member by providing the seed and fertilizer in
their store. Moreover, the use of fertilizer by the SHGs member in Maluku and North Maluku was
still limited, part of it because the farmer had limited knowledge on the benefit of fertilizer. In one
case the farmers did not use fertilizer because the land was still fertile, while in other cases they
did not use the fertilizer in correct amount, so the harvest was not optimum. The farmers also used
thresher, especially for paddy and corn, but the number was limited only one per 10 SHGs or
more. Moisture testers were available in all districts in Maluku, but the utilization was not
optimum. The device was also available in South Halmahera district in North Maluku.
76. Access to new technology for Horticulture. Community access to new technology in
horticulture was improved, but the access to packaging technology was inadequate and need
further improvement. The new or adapted technology introduced to the farmers were
demonstration plot, farmer field school, Simple irrigation, superior seed, fertilizer and marketing.
17
77. Demonstration plot and farmer field school improved understanding, knowledge and skill in
cultivation, from land processing to harvest. However, those knowledge were not fully adapted
and used by the farmer in their land.
78. Farmers used simple irrigation (well/pump), which was proven to increase their horticulture
production and qualities. The farmers in Hatawano village, Buru District and Aira village, Central
Maluku District used pipe irrigation from spring water, while the farmers in Karang Jaya village,
Buru District, utilized sprinkler to take water from the well and sprayed on to their plant.
Figure 4 Ground Water Pump built using SHGs funding
79. The use of pest resistence seed and fertilizer was able to increase production. The SHGs members
was able to distinguish the superior seed and performed sortation to select the good seed for
cultivation. The use of fertilizer by SOLID farmer, however, was limited due to lack of
availability at farmer level and lack of understanding on the correct amount of fertilizer.
80. Market development improved farmers’ access to closer market, which allowed them to sell their
own crops in the village. With this access, farmers were increasingly enthusiastic in carrying out
the production process, SHGs easily established partnerships with collectors or end consumers,
and at the end encouraged the economy in SOLID village.
81. Farmers also increasingly paid attention to product packaging. A beautifully design packaging
was used for processed products such as peanut, fried onion, cajuput oil, chips, VCO, sago flour,
and cocoa products.
18
Figure 5 Planting vegetables in Polybags
82. Access to new technology in estate crops. Community access or adaptation to new technology
was also improved for estate crop products. The accesses were given in the form of equipments,
facilities and trainings. The equipments, such as coconut milk presses, coconut grated machines,
and drying machines; facilities and trainings, such as access to land clearing, access to superior
seeds/seedlings, top and side grafting methods, fertilization, and seed selection, were given to all
districts and had been optimally used by farmers.
Figure 6 Cocoa Seedlings in East Seram District
19
83. Although estate crop seedlings improved productivity and resistant to pest and disease, the
availability was limited and used by limited number of farmers. Most of the farmers did not
perform selection to obtain good quality seed. Grafting method speed up production process, but
only some farmers had access to grafting seedlings. This type of seedling was used mainly by
cocoa farmers in East Seram and Central Maluku. As for food crops, the use of fertilizer for estate
crops was still limited due to availability and lack of farmer’s knowledge.
84. Access to New Technology in Livestock. Although farmer had increase access to new
technology in livestock like vaccination, but they still had limited access to
cage/pen/crate/coop/enclosure; breeding; feed; and livestock management. The facilitation
strongly depended on the extension agent since SOLID did not provide facilitation for livestock
business.
85. Access to Processing Technology. The farmers had increased access to processing technology,
such as access to sales, input/raw material, processing/production, packaging, labelling and
product certification.
Figure 7 SOLID Outlet and SHGs Products in one of Supermarket in Bula, East Seram
86. With limited capital, the SHG was able to implement marketing strategy and build partnership to
expand their market. These activities were facilitated by facilitator working at village and district
levels.
87. The raw material used for production was available, but there were issues on input continuity and
production capacity. Therefore, input continuity had to be secured to have a constant production.
20
88. Production process varied depended on demand and SHG’s creativity and initiative. The
production process in Maluku run well (6 Business centers (BC) in Central Maluku, 3 BC in
Buru, 9 BC in East Seram, 1 BC in South Buru, 5 BC in West Seram). The Business Centers had
a good and modern packaging for some of their processed products and traditional packaging,
such as leaves or plastic, for other commodities (palm sugar and banana chips). The modern
packaging was also used for processed products in North Maluku, such as Virgin Coconut Oil
(VCO), cassava, banana and jackfruit chips; peanut and cashew nut.
89. The label was also provided on the packaging of some products in Maluku. The use of label was
still limited in North Maluku.
Figure 8 Example of Labels used for SHG products
90. Halal certificate was also available for East Seram product of Kacang Botol Way Solang, Minlen,
Sago fluor and nutmeg juice. The PIRT certificates were obtained by 2 products in Central
Maluku, 8 products in East Seram, 2 products in West Seram and 2 products in North Halmahera.
To get those certificates, the producers should follow series of training conducted by Health Dinas
and MUI (for halal certificate). Although the space for training (in term of SOLID funding) was
available, some of the districts did not allocate the funding for certification.
21
91. Groups strengthening through facilitation and trainings benefited: i) organization and group
management (group regulation, meetings, finance, accountability, monev and book keeping); ii)
revolving fund management; iii) agriculture business; iv) non agriculture business; and v) saving
and loan. Most of the groups had written rules, but only some, especially those in North Maluku,
posted on their secretariat wall. The groups also had regular meetings with facilitator, PPL, and
federation, but not all member could comply with the agreement that had been made. SHG were
trained and assisted in financial management of revolving funds, including bookkeeping. Most of
SHG members were also familiar to the simple bookkeeping.
92. All SHG members obtained loan from revolving fund for their productive activity, but they rarely
repaid the loan back to the groups. The reason was because they still need the loan for the next
production, so instead of returning the initial capital, they only paid the interest (usually 15%) and
kept the loan for their next business. The revolving fund helped group member increasing their
scale of production or opening a new agriculture or non agriculture business.
93. The production scale and business expansion to a new and non agriculture business increased
SHGs member’s income and improved household food security.
94. Policies or regulations that have been made/corrected/modified supported the necessity of the
poor in the utilization and maintenance of agricultural machinery and equipment and
determination of the legality of SOLID groups.
95. Assessment of SOLID output can be seen in Appendix 4.
VI. ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES AND GOALS
96. Benefits obtained by the poor through SOLID Program. Appreciation was given to SOLID
since the project was able to: i) increase social capacity / togetherness; ii) increase ability to
organize/express opinions; iii) decrease the differences; iv) increase farming production; v)
Increase post-harvest business; vi) Increase market access; vii) Increase income; viii) increase
household ownership assets; and ix) improve living standards. However, not all beneficiaries
felt significant benefits on these indicators.
97. SHG members received various types of training and mentoring to increase social capacity /
togetherness, increasing their insight and capacity in organizing/expressing opinions and
increase self-confidence. Capacity building was also obtained from frequent meeting and
rotation of SHG administrators, so they accustomed to discussion for problem solving or
reducing differences.
98. The applied new technology improved beneficiaries farming production. Many SHG members
were also motivated to increase value added through post-harvest processing (roasted beans,
VCO, sago flour, sago flower, cassava sago, Coconut oil, soap, eucalyptus oil, foot mats, bolster
pillows, animal feed, fish floss, fried onions, cassava chips, nutmeg juice, and chocolate
powder). SHG and Federation had opened market access from villages to sub-districts, districts,
22
provinces and even between provinces. The increase in production, post-harvest business and
marketing changed the livelihood and family welfare as characterized by the increase in
household ownership assets, such as home improvement and household asset (Tables, Chairs,
Cellphone, TV, Refrigerator, etc.).
99. SOLID encouraged mutual collaboration, such as collaboration demonstrated by SHGs in their
demonstration plot and other activities. Some members of SHG who run bussiness before
SOLID project also used the MF and RF to expand or diversify their businesses.
100. Changes in the behavior of the rural poor. Solid project facilitated positive changes in the
behavior of the rural poor, such as family harmony, ways of communication, diet pattern, daily
activities, ways of thinking, work pattern, enthusiasm for work, and management of household
income and expenditure.
101. The changes in family harmony was seen from the changes in family behavior. The husband,
who used to only bring a machete while the wife carried the produce in a sack, also helped the
mother carrying the farm produce. Moreover, changes in the way of communication could be
seen from SHG members who was willing to express their opinions in public meetings (village
meetings).
102. The changes in work behavior was observed from better work and time discipline, growing
enthusiasm for work, a high sense of mutual cooperation among SHG members, and sharing
responsibilities. Furthermore, through Solid implementation, women, besides their housewife
activities, also had business activities to increase their family income.
103. The SHGs member way of thinking also transformed in positive direction, especially in
receiving information and collaboration within and between SHGs. Solid also facilitated an
increase in equality among SHG members and prioritized persuasive way to solve the problems.
104. Changes in The Behavior of Service Providers. Changes in behavior was observed from
District SOLID Staff, Extension Workers, Village Facilitators, District Supervisors, District
Consultant Experts, Community Leaders, and government officials (Village, District,
Provincial, and Central Levels). Less significant changes were also observed from federations,
village officials, food and estate crop cadres, and marketing cadre.
105. District SOLID staffs were more transparent and accountable, proactive and discipline, and had
clearer work division and responsibilities. Extension Workers and Village Facilitators
conducted more visits to the field, had intense and loyal assistance, were more open in
accepting suggestions and criticism from SHG members, and were more proactive in carrying
out the facilitation process. The district supervisor performed more coordinated work, and was
responsible for their assigned tasks and functions. The district experts had coordination with
SOLID management. They were also present at many events organize by district management
and had more field visits. The community leaders provided support and motivation to SHGs.
23
Good coordination was also seen among government officials at any levels, from village to
district, provincial and central officials.
106. Despite of varied performance of federations, their existence in the village was able to
coordinate SHGs and became a medium of information between the SHGs. However, some of
village governments were still lack of attention to SOLID activities and lack of response to help
the SHGs in managing the challeges. Although the output was not optimal, the assigned food
and estate crops and marketing cadres had helped SHGs to communicate with extension
workers and to find market price information and partnerships with traders.
107. SOLID improved the rural poor conditions in social relations, economics, human resources,
food security, and natural and environmental resources.
108. The social relations improved through the establishment of mutual cooperation and action in
community activities. Economic conditions improved because many SHG members carried out
farming activities and expanding business. Improved human resources was characterized from
the increase number of SHG members participating in training and mentoring and supporting
higher education for their children children's education. The SHGs members were also
emotionally mature since they were able to solve their problems and more resistant to
difficulties. The SHGs member were also food sufficient from their own production and from
their increase income.
109. Although the natural and environmental resources were not much affected, SHG members were
more familiar to plant ecology, so they were selective in using fertilizers and pesticides.
110. In summary, SOLID Project had a role in the following changes: i) increased
knowledge/Human Resources (HR); ii) mindset and behavior of the community (SHG
members); iii) development of village infrastructure; iv) the application of new technology; v)
good farming practices; vi) Open market access; vii) Increased production output; viii)
Increased income and livelihood; and ix) Improved household economy.
111. Achievement of Objectives and Goals can be seen in Appendix 5.
VII. REVIEW OF PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS
112. In general, SOLID activities provide great benefits in increasing agricultural production in the
target villages. The whole result of SOLID investment Activities can be seen in the coming
years with the assumption that the beneficiaries consistently carry out agricultural business
activities in accordance with the knowledge they learn from SOLID. In total, both FIRR and
EIRR have a value greater than the normal interest rate of 12%, positive NPV, and B / C ratio
greater than 1. The investment duration of 8 years was considered not feasible based on the
EIRR calculation. This happened partly due to the impact of current investment cannot be seen
in the same year, so it was excluded from calculation. The B / C ratio was 10.8 because most
24
farmers only use limited input for agricultural activities, so the sales ratio was far greater than
the input cost. See tables 6 and 7.
113. SOLID was considered effective in fulfilling most of the aims and objectives as well as results
of the program. Based on the SOLID framework, the objective of this program was to increase
food security and income in SOLID beneficiary households in 11 districts in Maluku and North
Maluku Province. Whereas SOLID's goal was to improve livelihoods (both food security and
income) and to reduce poverty.
114. The impact of SOLID on food security and income in beneficiary households was considered
moderately effective. As of December 2018 Solid was targeted to: (i) increase the household
asset ownership index of 33,600 households; and (ii) decrease the prevalence of child
malnutrition by 40%. Based on the end line survey findings in October 2018, the HH asset
ownership index improve from 0,37 in 2012 to 0,54 in 2018. The index was calculated using
PCA approach covering all surveyed assets, including land and other physical assets.
Furthermore, although the project did not have direct activities for child malnutrition reduction,
the prevalence of malnutrition from SOLID respondent decreased from 16% in 2012 to 7% in
2018. The prevalence of stunting decreased from 62% in 2012 to 6% in 2018. Care should be
taken in interpreting these results since both surveys were following random design, so there
was probability that the result was the artefact of the surveys.
115. Solid implementation upgraded the livelihood of SHGs (both food security and income). The
project was targeted that 80% of households enjoy at least 10 months of food sufficiency in
100% of the target villages by December 2018. The result of end line survey and AOS of 2018
showed that 80% of the respondent in 22 (AOS) and 30 (end line survey) sample villages were
food secured. The project was also targeted that 75% of households enjoy a 30% increase in
monthly cash income from the sale of excess related SOLID products. The result of baseline
survey indicated that the production of food crop before Solid project was only used for
household consumption, whereas by October 2018 around 40% and 23 of beneficiaries sold
food crops and horticulture products, respectively. No information, however, was available on
the degree of increase both food and horticulture sales.
116. Solid effect on household food security capacity and farming income planning was considered
effective. Solid targeted that 2,240 SHG will be oriented or trained PRA, S & L, and group
management by December 2018. Each fiscal year, Solid allocated sufficient funding for
trainings, field school, technical training and capacity development. Up to now, in total all of
2,192 SHGs were trained, although not all members received similar type of trainings.
117. Solid also demonstrated its effect on household food and cash availability. By December 2018,
Solid was targeted to have 80% of its beneficiaries (households) report at least 20% increase in
food availability for household consumption and 50% of households report regular sales to
markets for food crops. According to the results of AOS and end line survey of 2018, 80% of
25
respondents experience food sufficiency, while based on AOS 2018 89% of households already
made regular sales to market.
118. As of December 2018, the project was targeted that 50% of Estate crop producers enjoy a 20%
increase in monthly cash income from the sale of Estate related products. Although based on
AOS 2018 result, 52% of households experienced an increase in production of estate crops, the
increase could not be directly converted into the degree of increase in sales due to limited
available information.
Figure 9 Food Crops Cultivated and Processed by SHGs Member
119. Lastly, SOLID implementation and monitoring were considered effective since the M & E data
analysis and reporting were used by the Program Management, especially at central level, to
improve program outcomes & efficiency. This assessment referred to the annual routine report
of the program implementers. Detail information of the assessment on Solid effectiveness can
be seen in Appendix 6.
26
Table 6 Economic Internal Rate Return (EIRR) Calculation of SOLID Investment
EIRR-CASH FLOW OF TOTAL SOLID INVESTMENT
Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
No. of Beneficiaries 3.030 7.747 7.857 16.167 16.799 24.216 26.907 26.907 26.907 26.907 26.907 26.907
SOLID Investment 12.803.393.985 32.896.472.489 21.352.069.930 70.454.843.998 144.683.758.244 144.326.202.309 81.015.890.363 25.061.820.812 - - - -
Expenditure
Food corp and Fruit % Petani
Paddy 5,0% 162.220.065 414.758.694 420.647.871 865.548.445 899.384.445 1.296.491.669 1.440.546.299 1.440.546.299 1.440.546.299 1.440.546.299 1.440.546.299 1.440.546.299
Cassava 26,9% 126.826.985 324.266.883 328.871.163 676.703.589 703.157.270 1.013.623.871 1.126.248.745 1.126.248.745 1.126.248.745 1.126.248.745 1.126.248.745 1.126.248.745
Other bulbs 2,9% 2.043.773 5.225.448 5.299.644 10.904.842 11.331.134 16.334.195 18.149.105 18.149.105 18.149.105 18.149.105 18.149.105 18.149.105
Sweet corn 4,8% 69.852.668 178.596.905 181.132.811 372.708.941 387.278.870 558.274.975 620.305.528 620.305.528 620.305.528 620.305.528 620.305.528 620.305.528
Sago 0,7% 265.884 679.804 689.456 1.418.663 1.474.122 2.124.994 2.361.104 2.361.104 2.361.104 2.361.104 2.361.104 2.361.104
Tomatto 2,2% 67.269.005 171.991.083 174.433.192 358.923.433 372.954.460 537.625.876 597.362.085 597.362.085 597.362.085 597.362.085 597.362.085 597.362.085
Chili 2,1% 38.508.045 98.456.047 99.854.029 205.465.200 213.497.241 307.763.155 341.959.062 341.959.062 341.959.062 341.959.062 341.959.062 341.959.062
Long bean - - - - - - - - - - - -
Eggplant 0,7% 1.011.669 2.586.602 2.623.329 5.397.907 5.608.922 8.085.442 8.983.825 8.983.825 8.983.825 8.983.825 8.983.825 8.983.825
Kale 0,1% 75.124 192.074 194.802 400.835 416.504 600.404 667.116 667.116 667.116 667.116 667.116 667.116
Banana 1,7% 2.817.297 7.203.168 7.305.446 15.032.091 15.619.725 22.516.338 25.018.153 25.018.153 25.018.153 25.018.153 25.018.153 25.018.153
Manggo 1,7% 946.207 2.419.229 2.453.580 5.048.623 5.245.983 7.562.254 8.402.504 8.402.504 8.402.504 8.402.504 8.402.504 8.402.504
Estate Crop
Numteg 13,3% 77.222.896 197.440.851 200.244.323 412.033.850 428.141.068 617.179.151 685.754.612 685.754.612 685.754.612 685.754.612 685.754.612 685.754.612
Coconut 41,7% 411.627.691 1.052.435.552 1.067.379.132 2.196.298.641 2.282.156.298 3.289.801.867 3.655.335.408 3.655.335.408 3.655.335.408 3.655.335.408 3.655.335.408 3.655.335.408
Clove 5,3% 75.626.956 193.360.405 196.105.939 403.518.481 419.292.817 604.424.111 671.582.345 671.582.345 671.582.345 671.582.345 671.582.345 671.582.345
Cocoa 7,6% 87.064.580 222.603.730 225.764.490 464.545.566 482.705.571 695.835.640 773.150.711 773.150.711 773.150.711 773.150.711 773.150.711 773.150.711
Livestock
Cow 1,0% 15.150.000 38.735.000 39.285.000 80.835.000 83.995.000 121.081.500 134.535.000 134.535.000 134.535.000 134.535.000 134.535.000 134.535.000
Goat 1,0% 4.545.000 11.620.500 11.785.500 24.250.500 25.198.500 36.324.450 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500
Pork 1,0% 4.545.000 11.620.500 11.785.500 24.250.500 25.198.500 36.324.450 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500
Chicken Duck 1,0% 303.000 774.700 785.700 1.616.700 1.679.900 2.421.630 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700
Itik 1,0% 303.000 774.700 785.700 1.616.700 1.679.900 2.421.630 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700
TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1.148.224.846 2.935.741.874 2.977.426.605 6.126.518.508 6.366.016.232 9.176.817.601 10.196.464.001 10.196.464.001 10.196.464.001 10.196.464.001 10.196.464.001 10.196.464.001
Food corp and Fruit % Petani
Paddy 5,0% 1.082.385.306 2.847.979.535 2.972.872.113 6.296.780.164 6.735.920.497 9.997.742.075 11.439.251.865 12.923.362.470 12.923.362.470 12.923.362.470 12.923.362.470 12.923.362.470
Cassava 26,9% 165.890.850 436.869.546 456.430.659 967.632.011 1.036.075.312 1.539.248.213 1.762.895.229 1.984.245.516 1.984.245.516 1.984.245.516 1.984.245.516 1.984.245.516
Other bulbs 2,9% 36.375.064 95.600.385 99.675.045 210.864.016 225.289.351 333.957.503 381.608.478 433.268.635 433.268.635 433.268.635 433.268.635 433.268.635
Sweet corn 4,8% 219.067.494 575.200.761 599.128.268 1.266.184.625 1.351.399.532 2.001.105.093 2.284.120.772 2.604.155.389 2.604.155.389 2.604.155.389 2.604.155.389 2.604.155.389
Sago 0,7% 2.194.209 5.766.987 6.012.999 12.721.052 13.591.816 20.148.594 23.024.423 26.137.426 26.137.426 26.137.426 26.137.426 26.137.426
Tomatto 2,2% 226.516.143 595.159.703 620.347.945 1.311.966.896 1.401.293.004 2.076.556.219 2.372.088.779 2.696.492.450 2.696.492.450 2.696.492.450 2.696.492.450 2.696.492.450
Chili 2,1% 97.946.262 257.143.278 267.805.624 565.899.606 603.902.553 894.112.100 1.020.418.434 1.164.028.646 1.164.028.646 1.164.028.646 1.164.028.646 1.164.028.646
Long bean 0,0% - - - - - - - - - - - -
Eggplant 0,7% 5.269.510 13.844.752 14.430.024 30.516.453 32.592.600 48.296.096 55.166.692 62.723.431 62.723.431 62.723.431 62.723.431 62.723.431
Kale 0,1% 47.347 124.443 129.754 274.511 293.307 434.810 496.881 564.016 564.016 564.016 564.016 564.016
Banana 1,7% 70.472.665 185.039.600 192.738.105 407.330.968 434.747.263 643.762.640 734.814.634 837.750.719 837.750.719 837.750.719 837.750.719 837.750.719
Manggo 1,7% 22.784.661 59.918.864 62.511.914 132.330.118 141.476.513 209.860.198 239.971.659 271.736.986 271.736.986 271.736.986 271.736.986 271.736.986
Estate Crop - - - -
Numteg 13,3% 3.889.253.956 10.202.912.715 10.617.663.680 22.418.077.649 23.903.675.548 35.360.424.485 40.319.951.397 46.148.120.364 46.148.120.364 46.148.120.364 46.148.120.364 46.148.120.364
Coconut 41,7% 1.895.740.105 4.977.176.013 5.183.760.399 10.954.247.452 11.690.376.313 17.309.025.683 19.755.068.411 22.531.487.452 22.531.487.452 22.531.487.452 22.531.487.452 22.531.487.452
Clove 5,3% 2.994.827.460 8.116.496.379 8.725.647.447 19.031.639.915 20.962.161.816 32.030.689.870 37.725.034.736 59.601.973.746 59.601.973.746 59.601.973.746 59.601.973.746 59.601.973.746
Cocoa 7,6% 951.159.409 2.498.836.828 2.604.285.075 5.507.105.228 5.881.326.281 8.714.335.953 9.953.235.053 11.320.080.981 11.320.080.981 11.320.080.981 11.320.080.981 11.320.080.981
Livestock - - - -
Cow 1,0% 154.943.182 528.204.545 535.704.545 1.102.295.455 1.259.925.000 1.816.222.500 2.018.025.000 2.018.025.000 2.018.025.000 2.018.025.000 2.018.025.000 2.018.025.000
Goat 1,0% 41.318.182 140.854.545 142.854.545 293.945.455 335.980.000 484.326.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000
Pork 1,0% 41.318.182 140.854.545 142.854.545 293.945.455 335.980.000 484.326.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000
Chicken Duck 1,0% 2.065.909 7.042.727 7.142.727 14.697.273 16.799.000 24.216.300 26.907.000 26.907.000 26.907.000 26.907.000 26.907.000 26.907.000
Itik 1,0% 516.477 1.760.682 1.785.682 3.674.318 4.199.750 6.054.075 6.726.750 6.726.750 6.726.750 6.726.750 6.726.750 6.726.750
TOTAL BENEFIT 11.900.092.373 31.686.786.832 33.253.781.098 70.822.128.616 76.367.005.455 113.994.844.407 131.195.086.194 165.734.066.978 165.734.066.978 165.734.066.978 165.734.066.978 165.734.066.978
Profit before tax 10.751.867.527 28.751.044.958 30.276.354.493 64.695.610.108 70.000.989.223 104.818.026.806 120.998.622.192 155.537.602.977 155.537.602.977 155.537.602.977 155.537.602.977 155.537.602.977
Tax 10% 2.875.104.496 3.027.635.449 6.469.561.011 7.000.098.922 10.481.802.681 12.099.862.219 15.553.760.298 15.553.760.298 15.553.760.298 15.553.760.298 15.553.760.298
Profit after tax 10.751.867.527 25.875.940.462 27.248.719.044 58.226.049.097 63.000.890.301 94.336.224.125 108.898.759.973 139.983.842.679 139.983.842.679 139.983.842.679 139.983.842.679 139.983.842.679
NET PROJECT BENEFIT (2.051.526.458) (7.020.532.027) 5.896.649.114 (12.228.794.901) (81.682.867.943) (49.989.978.184) 27.882.869.610 114.922.021.867 139.983.842.679 139.983.842.679 139.983.842.679 139.983.842.679
BENEFIT ACCUMULATION (2.051.526.458) (9.072.058.484) (3.175.409.371) (15.404.204.272) (97.087.072.215) (147.077.050.399) (119.194.180.788) (4.272.158.921) 135.711.683.758 275.695.526.437 415.679.369.116 555.663.211.795
B/C Ratio 10,8
IRR up 2018 #NUM!
NPV up to 2021 Rp50.843.236.171
IRR up to 2021 27,1%
27
Table 7 Financial Internal Rate Return (FIRR) pf SOLID Investment FIRR-CASH FLOW OF TOTAL SOLID INVESTMENT
Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
No. of Beneficiaries 3.030 7.747 7.857 16.167 16.799 24.216 26.907 26.907 26.907 26.907 26.907
SOLID Investment 12.803.393.985 32.896.472.489 21.352.069.930 70.454.843.998 144.683.758.244 144.326.202.309 81.015.890.363 25.061.820.812
Expenditure
Food corp and Fruit % Petani
Paddy 5,0% 162.220.065 414.758.694 420.647.871 865.548.445 899.384.445 1.296.491.669 1.440.546.299 1.440.546.299 1.440.546.299 1.440.546.299 1.440.546.299
Cassava 26,9% 126.826.985 324.266.883 328.871.163 676.703.589 703.157.270 1.013.623.871 1.126.248.745 1.126.248.745 1.126.248.745 1.126.248.745 1.126.248.745
Other bulbs 2,9% 2.043.773 5.225.448 5.299.644 10.904.842 11.331.134 16.334.195 18.149.105 18.149.105 18.149.105 18.149.105 18.149.105
Sweet corn 4,8% 69.852.668 178.596.905 181.132.811 372.708.941 387.278.870 558.274.975 620.305.528 620.305.528 620.305.528 620.305.528 620.305.528
Sago 0,7% 265.884 679.804 689.456 1.418.663 1.474.122 2.124.994 2.361.104 2.361.104 2.361.104 2.361.104 2.361.104
Tomatto 2,2% 67.269.005 171.991.083 174.433.192 358.923.433 372.954.460 537.625.876 597.362.085 597.362.085 597.362.085 597.362.085 597.362.085
Chili 2,1% 38.508.045 98.456.047 99.854.029 205.465.200 213.497.241 307.763.155 341.959.062 341.959.062 341.959.062 341.959.062 341.959.062
Long bean 2,2% 17.357.461 44.378.960 45.009.099 92.613.224 96.233.658 138.723.921 154.137.690 154.137.690 154.137.690 154.137.690 154.137.690
Eggplant 0,7% 1.011.669 2.586.602 2.623.329 5.397.907 5.608.922 8.085.442 8.983.825 8.983.825 8.983.825 8.983.825 8.983.825
Kale 0,1% 75.124 192.074 194.802 400.835 416.504 600.404 667.116 667.116 667.116 667.116 667.116
Banana 1,7% 2.817.297 7.203.168 7.305.446 15.032.091 15.619.725 22.516.338 25.018.153 25.018.153 25.018.153 25.018.153 25.018.153
Manggo 1,7% 946.207 2.419.229 2.453.580 5.048.623 5.245.983 7.562.254 8.402.504 8.402.504 8.402.504 8.402.504 8.402.504
Estate Crop
Numteg 13,3% 77.222.896 197.440.851 200.244.323 412.033.850 428.141.068 617.179.151 685.754.612 685.754.612 685.754.612 685.754.612 685.754.612
Coconut 41,7% 411.627.691 1.052.435.552 1.067.379.132 2.196.298.641 2.282.156.298 3.289.801.867 3.655.335.408 3.655.335.408 3.655.335.408 3.655.335.408 3.655.335.408
Clove 5,3% 75.626.956 193.360.405 196.105.939 403.518.481 419.292.817 604.424.111 671.582.345 671.582.345 671.582.345 671.582.345 671.582.345
Cocoa 7,6% 87.064.580 222.603.730 225.764.490 464.545.566 482.705.571 695.835.640 773.150.711 773.150.711 773.150.711 773.150.711 773.150.711
Livestock
Cow 1,0% 15.150.000 38.735.000 39.285.000 80.835.000 83.995.000 121.081.500 134.535.000 134.535.000 134.535.000 134.535.000 134.535.000
Goat 1,0% 4.545.000 11.620.500 11.785.500 24.250.500 25.198.500 36.324.450 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500
Pork 1,0% 4.545.000 11.620.500 11.785.500 24.250.500 25.198.500 36.324.450 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500 40.360.500
Chicken Duck 1,0% 303.000 774.700 785.700 1.616.700 1.679.900 2.421.630 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700
Itik 1,0% 303.000 774.700 785.700 1.616.700 1.679.900 2.421.630 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700 2.690.700
TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1.165.582.307 2.980.120.835 3.022.435.704 6.219.131.733 6.462.249.890 9.315.541.522 10.350.601.691 10.350.601.691 10.350.601.691 10.350.601.691 10.350.601.691
Food corp and Fruit % Petani
Paddy 5,0% 1.082.385.306 2.847.979.535 2.972.872.113 6.296.780.164 6.735.920.497 9.997.742.075 11.439.251.865 12.923.362.470 12.923.362.470 12.923.362.470 12.923.362.470
Cassava 26,9% 165.890.850 436.869.546 456.430.659 967.632.011 1.036.075.312 1.539.248.213 1.762.895.229 1.984.245.516 1.984.245.516 1.984.245.516 1.984.245.516
Other bulbs 2,9% 36.375.064 95.600.385 99.675.045 210.864.016 225.289.351 333.957.503 381.608.478 433.268.635 433.268.635 433.268.635 433.268.635
Sweet corn 4,8% 219.067.494 575.200.761 599.128.268 1.266.184.625 1.351.399.532 2.001.105.093 2.284.120.772 2.604.155.389 2.604.155.389 2.604.155.389 2.604.155.389
Sago 0,7% 2.194.209 5.766.987 6.012.999 12.721.052 13.591.816 20.148.594 23.024.423 26.137.426 26.137.426 26.137.426 26.137.426
Tomatto 2,2% 226.516.143 595.159.703 620.347.945 1.311.966.896 1.401.293.004 2.076.556.219 2.372.088.779 2.696.492.450 2.696.492.450 2.696.492.450 2.696.492.450
Chili 2,1% 97.946.262 257.143.278 267.805.624 565.899.606 603.902.553 894.112.100 1.020.418.434 1.164.028.646 1.164.028.646 1.164.028.646 1.164.028.646
Long bean 2,2% 116.661.974 306.538.855 319.528.675 675.803.576 721.855.611 1.069.767.797 1.222.086.350 1.388.912.701 1.388.912.701 1.388.912.701 1.388.912.701
Eggplant 0,7% 5.269.510 13.844.752 14.430.024 30.516.453 32.592.600 48.296.096 55.166.692 62.723.431 62.723.431 62.723.431 62.723.431
Kale 0,1% 47.347 124.443 129.754 274.511 293.307 434.810 496.881 564.016 564.016 564.016 564.016
Banana 1,7% 70.472.665 185.039.600 192.738.105 407.330.968 434.747.263 643.762.640 734.814.634 837.750.719 837.750.719 837.750.719 837.750.719
Manggo 1,7% 22.784.661 59.918.864 62.511.914 132.330.118 141.476.513 209.860.198 239.971.659 271.736.986 271.736.986 271.736.986 271.736.986
Estate Crop - - -
Numteg 13,3% 3.889.253.956 10.202.912.715 10.617.663.680 22.418.077.649 23.903.675.548 35.360.424.485 40.319.951.397 46.148.120.364 46.148.120.364 46.148.120.364 46.148.120.364
Coconut 41,7% 1.895.740.105 4.977.176.013 5.183.760.399 10.954.247.452 11.690.376.313 17.309.025.683 19.755.068.411 22.531.487.452 22.531.487.452 22.531.487.452 22.531.487.452
Clove 5,3% 2.994.827.460 8.116.496.379 8.725.647.447 19.031.639.915 20.962.161.816 32.030.689.870 37.725.034.736 59.601.973.746 59.601.973.746 59.601.973.746 59.601.973.746
Cocoa 7,6% 951.159.409 2.498.836.828 2.604.285.075 5.507.105.228 5.881.326.281 8.714.335.953 9.953.235.053 11.320.080.981 11.320.080.981 11.320.080.981 11.320.080.981
Livestock - - -
Cow 1,0% 154.943.182 528.204.545 535.704.545 1.102.295.455 1.259.925.000 1.816.222.500 2.018.025.000 2.018.025.000 2.018.025.000 2.018.025.000 2.018.025.000
Goat 1,0% 41.318.182 140.854.545 142.854.545 293.945.455 335.980.000 484.326.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000
Pork 1,0% 41.318.182 140.854.545 142.854.545 293.945.455 335.980.000 484.326.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000 538.140.000
Chicken Duck 1,0% 2.065.909 7.042.727 7.142.727 14.697.273 16.799.000 24.216.300 26.907.000 26.907.000 26.907.000 26.907.000 26.907.000
Itik 1,0% 516.477 1.760.682 1.785.682 3.674.318 4.199.750 6.054.075 6.726.750 6.726.750 6.726.750 6.726.750 6.726.750
TOTAL BENEFIT 12.016.754.347 31.993.325.687 33.573.309.773 71.497.932.193 77.088.861.067 115.064.612.203 132.417.172.544 167.122.979.678 167.122.979.678 167.122.979.678 167.122.979.678
Profit before tax 10.851.172.041 29.013.204.853 30.550.874.069 65.278.800.460 70.626.611.176 105.749.070.682 122.066.570.853 156.772.377.988 156.772.377.988 156.772.377.988 156.772.377.988
Tax - - - - - - - - - -
Profit after tax 10.851.172.041 29.013.204.853 30.550.874.069 65.278.800.460 70.626.611.176 105.749.070.682 122.066.570.853 156.772.377.988 156.772.377.988 156.772.377.988 156.772.377.988
NET PROJECT BENEFIT (1.952.221.944) (3.883.267.636) 9.198.804.139 (5.176.043.538) (74.057.147.068) (38.577.131.627) 41.050.680.490 131.710.557.176 156.772.377.988 156.772.377.988 156.772.377.988
BENEFIT ACCUMULATION (1.952.221.944) (5.835.489.581) 3.363.314.558 (1.812.728.980) (75.869.876.048) (114.447.007.675) (73.396.327.185) 58.314.229.991 215.086.607.979 371.858.985.967 528.631.363.955
B/C Ratio 10,7
IRR up 2018 #NUM!
NPV up to 2021 Rp233.425.107.728
IRR up to 2021 40,3%
28
VIII. POTENCY FOR PROGRAM SUSTAINABILITY
120. In general, the potency for Solid sustainability could be seen from the following factors:
commitment, social support, sense of ownership, institution, financial and economic support
and environmental support.
121. Commitment. The potency for sustainability of Solid project in Maluku could be seen from the
commitment of the government, such as: i) the availability of regional funding (APBD II) to
support monev, assistance and trainings; ii) replication of Solid design in 13 hamlets (24 SHGs)
in East Seram District; iii) the policy of Bupati East Seram District for supporting solid product,
especially for marketing; iv) support from Bumdes for product marketing; v) the local
government facilitated mutual cooperation with private sectors; vi) the potency of using village
funding to build farm road and agriculture facilities; viii) support from other stakeholders to
build agriculture facilities such as water catchment in Solid area; ix) support from ADD to build
copra drying place and seedlings procurement; and ix) land extension.
122. The potency for sustainability of Solid project in North Maluku can be seen from the
commitment of the local government in: i) farmer knowledge sharing in North Halmahera; ii)
Solid outlet in Sula Island district; iii) community development in cooperation with private
sector (PT Roas) in North Halmahera; and iv) SHGs assistance in Central Halmahera.
123. Social Support. The support provided by the community and village government for Solid
sustainability was reflected in following actions: i) commitment to support and continue Solid
project since it fit with the necessity of farmer/SHG/village; ii) the ability of the community to
manage revolving fund; iii) the existence of federation as an organization which helped the
SHG in marketing and production; iv) the presence of cooperative in five villages; v) the
remaining revolving fund will be used for saving and loan by the SHG; vi) the fact that the
business center had been running; and vii) the established SHGs will keep running since they
were at the core of the business center operation.
124. The social support in North Maluku Di Maluku Utara could be seen from: i) the involvement of
community in the utilization and management of saving and loan funding; ii) the utilization of
federation asset for production and marketing; and iii) the existence of cooperative which
involved SHG and non SHG member.
125. Sense of Ownership. The potensi of sustainability from ownership perspective in Maluku
could be seen from the following activities: i) the agreement among member of
SHG/Federation/Business Center that the use of assets was subject to rent for operational and
maintenance cost; ii) the current unwritten rules will be made more legal and should be obeyed;
iii) the use of infrastructure was charged for specified time and iv) the rule for operational and
maintenance (O&M) of facilities and equipment will be included in the village regulation.
126. The potency of sustainability from ownership perspective in North Maluku was seen from i) the
effort to O&M equipment and facilities in village regulation; ii) the establishment of Business
29
Center Steering Committee; and iii) the agreement to have contribution for maintenance of
equipment and facilities.
127. Institutional Support. Solid sustainability was possible in Maluku province since some of the
districts has institutional support, such as: i) coordination with other institution to legalize Solid
SHGs into “kelompok tani” and federation into “Gapoktan” to allow them being registered in
Simluhtan application of the Ministry of Agriculture; ii) coordination with Dinas Koperasi to
increase the competency of SHGs to become a cooperative; iii) some of women SHGs were
included in the other program of the Ministry of Agriculture; and iv) the plan for the
establishment of 5 cooperatives.
128. The institutional support for Solid sustainability was given in the form of: i) Letter of Decision
from the Head of Dinas Pangan on the Steering Committee of the business center; ii) the letter
of decision from the Head of Dinas Pangan for legalizing SHGs in Central and North
Halmahera; iii) the availability of extension worker from Dinas Pangan; iv) the opportunity for
qualified SHGs to become cooperatives; and v) the role of Health Dinas for supervising quality
and safety of Solid product.
129. Economic and Financial supports. the potency for sustainability in Maluku could be seen
from: i) the availability of versatile crops, such as sago, cassava and sweet potato for food
reserve; ii) more than 50% of SHGs had financial reserve and therefore had possibility to
continue;; iii) some of the beneficiaries had agriculture commoditity supported by Solid; iv) the
support from village fund in the form of seed support; and v) access to financial services.
130. The support from economic and financial supports for the sustainability in North Maluku was
available from the following sources: i) the availability of food reserves due to diversified
commodities and cultivation pattern; ii) the availability of vegetables demplots as additional
food reserves; iii) the availability of livestock and small ruminants; iv) more than 30% of SHGs
had financial reserve from their saving and loan activities; and v) the support from private
sector for financial access.
131. Environmental Sustainability. the following environmentally friendy activities supported the
sustainability of Solid project: i) changes in farming pattern from shifting to more settle
agriculture practice; ii) the development of organic vegetables to meet the market demand; iii)
the effort to plant hardwood trees like fruit tree to maintain soil stability; iv) the use of natural
fertilizer from cocoa waste; v) mangrove planting to prevent sea water intrusion or erosion in
Solid targeted villages; and vi) local wisdom to change from mining to agriculture sector after
Solid was introduced in the area.
132. The environmentally friendly practices in North Maluku which could support Solid
sustainability were: i) the reduction in the use of pesticide and herbicide; ii) technical training in
making and using organic fertilizer; and iii) rejuvenation of estate crops. However, there were
also negative consequences of the practice currently implemented by the farmer to the
30
environment, such as: 1) high cost in using big volume organic fertilizer forced the farmer to
also use inorganic fertilizer and 2) cultivation in slope area had the potency to damage the
environment.
133. Output Sustainability. The potency for program output sustainability could be seen from: i)
the implementation of demplot and farmer field school was proven increasing the production
and quality of agriculture product; ii) the community was able to operate the machineries and
equipments; and iii) the development of transportation/logistic facilities eased the logistic and
marketing of Solid product.
134. Factors affecting Solid sustainability. The following factors determined the sustainability of
Solid: i) regular return of loan; ii) district government support in the form of local funding
(APBD) for assistance, monitoring and evaluation; iii) The activeness of steering committee; iv)
SHG assistance of post Solid project; v) the availability of financial access; vii) capacity
improvement and facilities support from related institution; and viii) the responsible institution
for Solid sustainability was Dinas Pangan and village government.
135. The assessment on the potency of Solid sustainability can be seen from appendix 7.
IX. IMPACT ASSESSMENT
136. For all aspects, SOLID Program was considered to have a substantial impact These substantial
impacts were assessed from several aspects, namely physical assets, food security, human
resource assets, social capital and empowerment, agricultural productivity, institutions and
services, financial assets, and markets.
137. Physical Asset. SOLID has a substantial impact on the security of land and water assets,
livestock, equipment, facilities, technology and infrastructure for the poor.
138. Based on the results of Annual Outcome Survey (AOS) 2018, most of the productive land
utilized by target communities is owned by group members as private land (93% of households
(HHs)). The remaining households utilized the land owned by the village in accordance with
customary law or borrowing (7% KK). Although the status was borrowed, the production
business on this land is guaranteed by the local government, such as in North Halmahera and
South Halmahera districts. The average land ownership area was 1.2 ha, with ownership (SHM)
status (42% HHs), cultivation right (HGU) status (5% HHs), sale and purchase agreement
(AJB) status (1% HHs), non-certified/old right (Girik) status (10% HHs) and other status (42%
HHs).
139. SOLID facilitated agricultural equipment and supplies that were sufficient to support the
adoption of technology for farming and processing activities, but have not been fully utilized
due to several reasons, such as electricity. Whereas the supporting infrastructure in SOLID
Village has been utilized by SHG members, Federations, Business Centers and some local
communities, especially agriculture road, drying floors, copra smokers, cocoa smokers, etc.
31
140. Most SOLID investment assets have been handed over (BAST) to SOLID users, except for a
few infrastructure having problematic land ownership status. Livestock was not a main focus of
SOLID program, so the ownership of livestock by SOLID HHs, such as ownership of chickens
(18.35% of households), goats (6.88% of households), and cattle (6.42% of households), did not
develop.
141. Based on the SOLID 2018 end line survey, there has been an increase in the ownership of HHs
assets, such as land and goods assets, compared to when the SOLID commenced. See the
following figure 10.
Figure 10 Assets of SOLID Respondents
142. Food Security. SOLID has a substantial impact on household food security. The poor have
adequate food security, food availability (production and sales), access to food (income, market,
and prices), and stable access (storage and marketing at the household and local level).
143. Based on the end line survey of 2018, the per capita monthly income increase from IDR
242.101 in 2012 to IDR. 285.148 in 2014 and to IDR 438.975 in 2018. The small increase of
monthly income in 2014 was mainly due to the limited progress of SOLID between the period
of 2012-2014. Only after the introduction of revolving fund and facilitation of equipment and
machineries to the SHGs after MTR 2014 that SOLID showed a good progress, see Figure 2.
The increase in per capita monthly income was in line with the increase in per capita daily
energy consumption. Compared to the situation in 2012, the average consumption of individual
HH member was 2108 kcal/capita/day, which was close to the recommended energy
consumption of 2150 kcal/capita/day (Figure 11).
144. Similar to the result of end line survey, the result of AOS 2018 showed that in the SOLID area
around 95% of households have enough food, while 5% of households still experienced food
shortages with an average duration of 2.9 weeks, over the past 12 months (see Figure 12). This
figure is smaller than that of experienced by non-SOLID respondents, in which 84% of
32
households have enough food, while 16% of households still experience food shortages with an
average duration of 3.1 weeks.
Per capita monthly income (IDR) Per capita daily energi consumption (Kcal)
Figure 11 Per Capita Income and Daily Energy Consumption of SOLID HHs
Figure 12 Food Sufficiency Situation of SOLID HHs Over the Past 12 Months
145. Every member of SHGs had a farming business to meet their own food needs and increase
income from the sales of agriculture produce. The production results, however, still fluctuated
and has not yet sustainable. Their income depended on the amount of the products sold and the
market/price condition. The selling price of certain commodities, such as Cassava, Banana and
yam/taro, was still below the price expected by farmers, due to the limited access to markets,
which requires large transport costs. However, in general, market access has been improved
compared to before SOLID was implemented in targeted area. The marketing value chain of
various commodities has also evolved, involving not only village collectors and traditional
village market, but also district and provincial markets.
146. Environment and Natural Resource. SOLID has a substantial impact on the protection of
natural resources, especially agricultural resources. Indirectly, SOLID contributed to the
protection or rehabilitation of natural resources and the environment (especially agricultural
resources) in accordance with customary norms in Maluku that apply local wisdom "Sasi,
33
Pamali and Matakao". Sasi that is a prohibition on harvesting crops before harvest, Pamali that
is the prohibition to do something in a place that can produce something and Matakao that is a
prohibited sign on plants for environmental protection and natural resources and does not do
land burning. Farmers in general have settled and do not move around, do not burn land when
opening new land, and do not use chemical fertilizers that can damage the soil, especially
critical land.
147. Human Resource Assets. SOLID has a Substantial Impact on increasing the knowledge and
skills of SHGs members. Through training, mentoring, field schools, demonstration plots and
other activities, SHGs members had the knowledge and skills in: i) Organizing (gathering,
expressing opinions and finding solutions to the problems they faced); ii) Management
(participating in planning, implementing and controlling SHG); iii) Management of farming
land (food crop, horticulture and estate crop) and post-harvest processing; iv) Operation and
maintenance of agriculture equipment and machinery; and v) Other specific skills such as
making organic fertilizers, controlling pests and diseases, compiling SHG business plans
(member and group business planning), and collaboration in SHG activities. Moreover, increase
in HH income resulted in the increase in the literacy and education of HH members, such as
continuing school after having dropped out of school and even continuing their education to
higher level/college/university.
148. SOLID implementation also indirectly improved the nutrition status of HH members through
the development of farming business. The increase income received from agriculture business
and the crop diversity might improve the diversity of food consumption, resulting in better
nutritional status of children below the age of 5 years (see figures 13). However, care should be
taken in interpreting the results since the surveys were carried out using randomly selected
samples. The reduction of malnutrition and stunting prevalence might be a random result or the
artefact of the surveys since midterm survey carried out in 2014 did not find any malnutrition or
stunting cases among children below five years old.
Figure 13 Prevalence of Malnutrition among Children below 5 years old
34
Figure 14 Prevalence of Stunting among Children below 5 years old
149. Social Capital and Empowerment. SOLID had substantial impact on: i) strengthening local
non-governmental organizations and institutions and promoting gender equality; ii) increasing
the capacity of the poor to exploit potential economic opportunities and develop stronger
relationships with markets and external partners; iii) better interaction among SHGs members
and communities through community empowerment; iv) sharing knowledge with the holder of
social authority; and v) ability in effective negotiation to improve the bargaining positions.
150. SOLID had strengthened local non-governmental organizations and institutions and increased
gender equality, which can be seen from: i) membership and activity of male and female SHGs
members; ii) the existence of Women's Groups (KMW) and Mixed Groups (KMC); iii) SHG,
federations and business centers institutional structures; iv) joint decision making; and v) the
involvement of female members in agricultural businesses (production, processing and
marketing). In particular women also involved in: i) all organizational activities; ii) increased
family income; and iii) joint decision making.
151. Increased social capital could be seen from the increase of the capacity of the poor in exploiting
economic opportunity and developing stronger relationships with markets and external partners,
such as the cooperation with local and outside partners in marketing commodities of VCO, fish
abon (shredded fish), Peanuts, Red Onion, Minlen coconut oil, roasted peanut, Nutmeg juice,
Sago plate, souvenir etc.
152. The poor had better interaction through SHGs activities, including knowledge sharing, using
shared facilities and infrastructure, and participating in joint exhibitions.
153. The poor were also more willing to share knowledge with those who hold social authority, such
as PKK, BUMDES, village government, religious institutions, cooperatives, and education
institutions. The poor with the help of SOLID management also did better negotiation to
improve their bargaining position and standard of living, such as: i) submitting proposals to
local and village governments; ii) advocating the regional government policy which requires
regional government employees to buy SOLID products; iii) provision of fertilizer (Urea, TSP,
KCL and manure), superior seeds, agriculture equipment and machinery, and business capital.
35
SOLID also helped the poor to build a network/market partner for SHGs products with private
institutions, traders, supermarkets and retailers.
154. The success of the poor was partly caused by the adoption of knowledge and technology they
received during following SOLID program. The following figure 15 illustrates the proportion of
SHGs members who adopted the knowledge and technology from SOLID program.
Figure 15 The Proportion of SHGs Member who Adopted Knowledge and Technology
155. Agricultural Production. SOLID had substantial impact on agricultural productivity, the
number of planting seasons or types of crops (which can reduce food insecurity and increase
access to diverse nutrients), household income and food security (see figures 16 and 17).
156. Improvement in agricultural productivity could be seen from the change in cropping patterns,
such as: i) shifting from subsistence agriculture to crop production for sales; ii) shifting from
traditional agriculture to more modern agriculture (using equipment and machinery, spacing,
beds and mounds, superior seeds and fertilizers); iii) increasing crop intensity (planting area,
intercropping system and crop rotation); iv) increasing the number of planting seasons and or
types of plants. Previously many SHGs members only planted one type of plant, now they have
planted various types of plants with intercropping. This practice could reduce food insecurity
and increase the planting index and access to diverse types of micro nutrition.
36
Figure 16 The Response of SOLID respondent on the impact of SOLID program on
agriculture productivity
Figure 17 The Average production per planting season (kg/HH/season)
157. Although the increase in yields had not been comparable to the provided production facilities
(seeds and equipment), but the change in farming practices was considered a positive progress.
The aggregate change in agricultural productivity was achieved by the poorer farmers compared
to other farmer households. Based on the AOS Study, in general, farmers who were member
SOLID SHGs were better than non-SOLID SHGs members.
158. Institutional and Service. SOLID had a substantial impact on the formulation of regulations
for economic and social activities, including the rule for the management of revolving funds.
However, no other terms in the management of revolving fund was impelemented, except
interest rates based on collective agreement.
159. The AFS shared the responsibility with regional AFS (decentralization), which allowed decision
making to be carried out at the district and provincial levels. Some regulations affecting the
marketing of SHGs products, such as PIRT and HALAL certifications, had been easily
37
managed by East Seram, Central Maluku and Buru Districts. The process for obtaining the
similar certificates for Solid products from other districts was still on progress when this report
was drafted.
160. There were no traditional and social activities, which limited the access of women to the
benefits of SOLID activities. Moreover, no division and conflicts between ethnic groups were
observed during Solid implementation in the region. The conflict, however, occurred betweeen
members, which caused one or more of the members involved getting out of a SHG. This
conflict was normally personal, and mediated by village facilatators or the extension workers.
161. Financial Assets. SOLID had substantial impact on increasing financial resources and securing
financial services for the poor through the disbursement and management of MF and RF. They
availability of the MF and RF improved the access of the poor in obtaining funding for
agriculture investment and /or consumption.
162. Moreover, the improved access was also due to the increase in yield/production of
agriculture/business. The excess income as the result from agriculture business was used for
expanding the business, saved in groups or used for education, health, social and other
activities.
163. The effort to keep the financial services for the rural poor in several districts (East Seram,
Central Halmahera and North Halmahera) was carried out through improvement of the status of
financial institutions, such as cooperatives. In this context, the SHGs funding could be used for
the initial funding of business entities/cooperatives.
164. Market. SOLID had substantial impact on farmers' access to the market due to various
physical development of the market (in several villages), farm roads and transportation
facilities, such as 3-wheeled vehicles, 4-wheeled vehicles and long boats, which reduced the
transportation costs (see figure 18). Farmers' access to information of goods and prices was
obtained through Federation, VIT team (marketing cadres), consultants, PPL, and traders.
Figure 18 The response of SOLID respondents on market stuation and the impact of SOLID program
on market access
165. The federation was initially formed to help marketing SHGs products. Due to lack of
experiences, capital and facilities, only 17% of SHGs marketing was channeled through
38
federation and SHG (figure 19). This condition was already observed during MTR, which
recommended that further facilitation was only given to selected federations. However, the
condition persisted and some federations changed its function to only do maintaining and
renting of the equipment, machinery and transportation facilities to SHGs. Supervision mission
later suggested that federations could retain the current function when they were able to make
profit.
Figure 19 Proportion of SHGs members using different market channels
166. Factors influencing the capacity of SOLID program. SOLID implementers noted that several
factors influencing the capacity of the program to achieve its expected results (in terms of
output, goals or impacts) were competence, commitment, concern, responsibility, character,
discipline, and superiority. The description of those factors among others were: i) the
competence of agricultural extension/village facilitator and financial staff (PHLN); ii) the
commitment of district government for Solid sustainability; iii) the commitment of the central
government and its partner (Ministry of Finance, Bappenas, SOLID management, and IFAD),
other stakeholders within provincial and district governments, private sector, NGOs and the
public; iv) the concern toward better work ethic; v) the roles and responsibilities of the central,
provincial, district, NGO and consultant teams; vi) the changes toward more positive
collaboration; vii) the discipline of SHG members in attending group meetings and
implementing their duties and responsibilities; and viii) the influence of superiors in providing
direction of SOLID activities
167. The SOLID implementation guidelines had been made and applied to achieve the targets, but in
some cases it could not be used to solve certain challenges, such as i) less number of group
members due to insufficient number of poor families in SOLID villages; ii) village government
interventions in determining beneficiaries; iii) unexpected performance of the federations, etc.
39
168. The following SOLID success stories were useful for future learning: i) changes in
behavior/attitude; ii) increased knowledge and skills; iii) enhanced organizational management
and bookkeeping capabilities; iv) increased food security; v) increased production; and vi)
increased income (for education, health, house improvement); vi) increased group/individual
capacity; (ability to compile business plan, bookkeeping management, etc); vii) increased
independence; ix) improved leadership (leader rotation); x) better interaction with outside
parties; xi) improved production, xii) applied technological innovation; xiii) Increased of
processing results; etc.
169. Some challenges in dealing with SOLID sustainability included: i) level of awareness in loan
repayments; ii) utilization of agriculture equipment and machinery was not optimal; iii) effect
of climate change such as drought; and iii) maintaining the sustainability.
170. The following were changes in policy and institution during the implementation of SOLID
activities: i) the change from phase I of the Year 2011-2014 to phase II of 2015-2018; ii) the
change in procurement policy (the agriculture equipment and machinery procurement was not
permitted in the Phase I); iii) the change in the management of infrastructure funds from the
federation to SHGs; iv) recommendation that SOLID SHGs engaged with other farmer groups
in the village; v) elimination of the group's business activities in the field of animal husbandry
in Phase II; vi) reduction in the number of SOLID target villages from the planning of 330
villages to 224 villages due to insufficient number of poor HHs; vii) recommendation that only
20% of the established federations would be funded; and viii) the establishment of business
centers.
171. Other factors beyond the control of the project management, which influenced the
implementation of SOLID activities at field, were: i) natural disasters (floods and droughts /
droughts); ii) conflicts; and iii) changes in policies, including personnel rotation and
organizational structure.
172. Detailed Program Impact Assessment can be seen in Appendix 8.
X. REVIEW OF PROJECT PARTNERS
173. IFAD. As the AFS partners in developing and implementing SOLID program, IFAD
performance was considered satisfying, especially related to the ease in program and budget
adjustments in respond to shortcomings in the initial design or changes in implementation.
IFAD also provided recommendations following midterm, support and supervision missions,
which clearly gave benefits to SOLID development. However, note should also be taken that
IFAD changes policy and different approaches/measures proposed by different consultants
might confuse the partners and program implementers.
174. Following the MTR SOLID activities were adjusted in respond to deficiencies in the initial
design or changes in the implementation environment, such as: i) the change in component
40
activities from five components to four components; ii) the change in budget allocation from
infrastructure to MF and RF; iii) the change in the number of villages from the initial 30
villages to 20 villages per district; and iv) accommodating the proposed changes in SOLID
management organizational structure.
175. IFAD and program partners recognized the participation of rural poor in design activities of
SOLID program through PRA activities, supervision and program support visits, including
fiduciary review (starting from the central, provincial and district levels), to gather information
needed for formulating recommendations, which benefited the poor target communities.
176. IFAD was quite flexible in dealing with the change of SOLID activites, including adjustment in
budget utilization from infrastructure to Revolving Fund (RF). In most cases, the
recommendations provided by IFAD was easy to follow and implement by Solid implementers.
However in other cases, the recommendations were given very late, but were still considered
relevant to be followed. Moreover, the revision of loan agreement, which took a lot of time and
involving different stakeholders, could become a good lesson learned in designing a suitable
program from the beginning in the future.
177. Another interesting learning was that SOLID new design provided many opportunities for
SOLID implementers to increase their capacity and knowledge, through workshops,
comparative studies, trainings, both at the local and central levels.
178. CIAT. Collaboration with CIAT and the Indonesian Agency for Agriculture Research and
Development (IAARD) through the Foodstarts + project, which provided support in the form of
Farmer Business School (FBS) to improve nutrition sensitive value chain of local food tubers
other commodities, was considered satisfactory.
179. Although the project was limited to only five groups of 20-25 people each in two districts (East
Seram and South Halmahera), the role of CIAT and partner was important in providing
knowledge on the economic and nutrition value of tubers, such as sweet potato and cassava.
CIAT initiated FBS to improve understanding and knowledge of nutrition, value chains and
value-added tubers, through direct theories and practices involving SHGs, extension
workers/PPL and village facilitators. Knowledge transfer was provided through the
development of a whole value chain, starting from upstream (cultivation of plants in the
demplot) to downstream (marketing and consumers). The approach currently used for tubers
could later be adopted for the development of other commodities.
180. Other Service Providers. The performance of service providers, such as the role of cross-
sector and private agencies in supporting the achievement of program output, performance and
competence for group business development, was generally satisfying.
181. The services that have been received amongst others were: i) cooperation with Dinas
Perindustrian in issuing production permit (Central Maluku); ii) Baristas played an important
role in the development of VCO oil (SBB); iii) Health Office, including Agency for Food and
41
Drug Control, for product certification; iv) State-owned bank (BRI) in East Seram provided
credit for SMEs (KUR) around IDR 20-25 million per SHG; v) Private Bank Artha Graha West
Seram provided KUR to SHGs around IDR 20-25 million per SHG; vi) cooperation with sago
collectors in Pulau Geser – East Seram for marketing of sago in Surabaya domestic market; vii)
Collaboration with PT Trasindo Karya Mekar in purchasing Coconut commodities in Central
Maluku; viii) collaboration with livestock entrepreneurs to supply animal feed in Hatusua
Village – West Seram; ix) collaboration of West Seram business unit with wholesaler in
Surabaya for exporting VCO and coconut shell charcoal; and x) District budget (APBD)
support for SOLID replication programs in east Seram District and for further monitoring in
Central Halmahera and South Buru.
182. SOLID Management. The performance of SOLID management (district, provincial and central
levels) was generally satisfying although all were struggling in the beginning of SOLID
implementation due to lack of experience. Note should also be taken that the turnover rate of
SOLID staffs, especially in districts level, was high due to political changes.
183. The assessment on the SOLID management performance was based on; i) the response of the
program managers to any designs and policies changes referring to PIMs; ii) their activity in
identifying problems and providing solutions through meetings and workshops; iii) feasibility
of the M & E system in supporting planning and reporting activities; iv) the rotation of Solid
staff was usually done because of promotion and placement in accordance with the required
competencies; v) commitment and effectiveness of staff in carrying out their main duties and
functions; vi) capacity development through training, mentoring, workshops, and comparative
studies, such as English language training, IT, CD Gender workshops, integrated agriculture,
value chains at various locations; and viii) The function of the program management in carrying
out planning, monitoring, evaluation and reporting activities, following the implementation
guideline, AWPB and POK (Indonesian type of AWPB).
184. Detailed evaluation of Program Partners can be seen in Appendix 9.
XI. INNOVATION, REPLICATION AND SCALING-UP PROGRAM
185. Innovative features was introduced by SOLID through its strategy & approach, technical
aspect and leadership/managerial aspect (capacity building for program implementers).
186. Innovation strategy & approaches were conducted by Solid through the following actions: i)
participatory approach involving various stakeholders, especially SOLID beneficiaries; ii)
decentralization from central management to provincial and district management; iii)
engagement of other agencies in carrying out activities; iv) engagement of NGOs, PPLs and
consultants in the empowerment of the poor and production technology; v) involvement of
private sector in marketing; vi) cultivation of various commodities according to farmer
preferences; vii) support for infrastructure and facilities as needed; and viii) establishment of
42
community groups and federations. Innovation in technical aspect could be clearly seen from
the provision and use of superior seeds, revolving funds, agricultural equipment and machinery,
application of demonstration plots and farmer field school, and mentoring of SHGs. Moreover,
the innovation in leadership / managerial aspects was achieved through management training,
workshops, coordination meetings, comparative studies, supervision visits, etc.
187. The integration of innovation into program design, its implementions, and its results. Innovation
had been well integrated into program design, starting from appraisal, MTR, supervision
mission, support mission, PIM, and implementation guideline. Although the results varied from
district to district, program implementers have tried their best to apply innovations at the field
level, which had shown satisfying results (outputs and outcomes).
188. The preparation of appraisal design and its revision (MTR) was carried out through
identification of potential innovation in empowerment, production, post-harvest management
and marketing aspects, involving community as project design target. MTR was compiled based
on the results of supervision mission, which were then disseminated to beneficiary groups. The
supervision mission provided recommendations based on the results of field evaluation, which
need to be followed up at the management and target groups to improve SOLID performance.
189. The innovation formulated in the design, MTR and supervision had not been fully implemented
because of the following reasons: i) challenges in fostering awareness and understanding of
SHGs members; ii) the influence of strong traditional culture; iii) the introduction of innovation
was not maximal during mentoring; iv) occasional shift in production time due to a long dry
season or flooding.
190. Process for Promoting Innovation to beneficiaries. Introducing innovation, aiming to
improve the skills of group members, was conducted through several ways, such as trainings
(capacity building and technical training), farming counselings, demonstration plots and field
schools (food crops, horticulture and estate crops), comparative studies, equipment and
machinery facilitation, revolving fund as well as promotion through bulletins, leaflets,
brochures, booklets and documentaries. To promote post-harvest innovation, processing
training, such as VCO and coconut oils, tomato and chili sauces, rice milling, cocoa fluor, sago
flour, etc, was also provided.
191. Special activities or approaches that can be replicated and recommended strategies for
scaling-up. The entire SOLID’s approach and activities could be replicated, which included
participation, decentralization, involvement of related stakeholders, NGOs and the private
sector, commodity selection, provision of infrastructure and facilities, group empowerment,
flexibility, gender, and product processing and marketing.
192. The following strategies could also be replicated at the other area: i) consistent phasing between
the empowerment process and physical and financial assistance; ii) the involvement of local
governments; iii) partnerships with government and private agencies; and iv) integrating the
43
project with other programs, such as with village fund (BUMDES). At present SOLID has been
replicated in 13 hamlets and 24 SHGs using district budget (APBD).
193. The following best practices could also be replicated to other locations, especially in other
SOLID areas, namely: savings and loan activities, the federation activities of processing and
marketing of SOLID produces, mentoring and demonstration plots in communal fields,
industrial and food processing: coconut oil, VCO, cocoa powder, peanut, sagoo, coconut shell
charcoal, etc., the use of technology for food crops, horticulture and estate crops cultivation, and
farmer field school.
194. Innovation, Replication and Up-Scaling / SOLID Improvement in detail can be seen in
Appendix
XII. LESSON LEARNED
195. The most successful output as the result of Solid implementation were: i) change in mindset
and habit of beneficiaries, which was obtained trough intense assistance and development; ii)
increase in the production of food, horticulture and estate crops due to the adoption of
innovative practice and technology; and iii) increase production and added value from the
development of business center and the improvement in processing facilities.
196. Activities with the highest relevance, effectiveness and potency for sustainability among
others were: i) farming/cultivation (ground nut and cassava) dan processing (coconut oil); the
establishment of cooperatives, business centers; cooperation with CIAT; and facilities and
equipment support.
197. The most significant activities for beneficiaries were i) the improved in farming/cultivation
of local based food, horticulture and estate crops through technology application and market
expansion; the development of agricultural infrastructure; iii) revolving fund; iv) technical and
management trainings. The activities, which were considered less successful, were the
followings: i) group financial management, especially saving activities; ii) loan management
due to lack of sanction and less return; iii) some of procurement activities did not match with
local sources; iv) processing training did not accommodate all beneficiaries, so many of them
had lack of processing skill; vi) marketing due lack of certification needed to enter the market;
and vii) monitoring and evaluation activities.
198. Procurement of Goods and Services for Community. The common issues related to
procurement of good and services were as follow: i) different opinions regarding to the
procurement procedures (IFAD and GoI); ii) the product specification/type was often changed,
causing delay in procurement processes; iii) procurement could not be planned earlier due to
late arrival or budget planning document in February (DIPA); iv) the difficulty in
accommodating “what community was wanted and what was really needed according to the
extension worker”; v) the procurement was often conducted very late in the end of the year;
44
and vi) lack of identification caused ineffective procurement (the goods and services might not
be really needed by the community).
199. The followings were the recommendations, which could be adopted to improve procurement
process; i) early establishment of procurement committee; ii) intensive communication between
committee and Solid management and between solid management with extension worker to
assure that the goods suited the community condition; iii) early establishment of selection
committee, involving Solid management and extension worker and verified the community
demand; iv) assuring that the process followed GoI guideline; v) stick to the specification
required by the community; vi) less/limited revision; and v) demand didentification to improve
community welfare.
200. Revolving Fund management. the followings were the lesson learned from revolving fund
management at SHGs level: i) the lack of readiness in managing revolving fund; ii) the selection
process of revolving fund recipient was transparent, simple and easily understood by the SHGs;
iii) the consideration for granting the revolving fund was feasibility of the business based on
RUA/RUK/ RPP, SHGs had run a new or at least similar business, and willingness or ability to
return the granted fund; iv) the disbursement of the RF via bank was complex, with strict rules,
involving the availability of an ID card to open the account; v) high transportation cost and
long journey to reach the nearest bank; vi) late disbursement since the recommendation issued
by Solid management required the SHGs to submit RUK; vii) Most SHGs did not record the
transaction of revolving fund, therefore tracing its utilization was difficult; viii) high staff
turnover rate influenced the financial record; and ix) differences between business planning and
its implementation for the sake of benefit.
201. The disbursed revolving fund affect beneficiaries economic and livelihood from the following
aspects: i) improving business scale and increasing production; ii) increasing household assets,
such as livestock; electronic devices; and transportation devices; iii) enlarging labour and
creating employment; and encouraging business spirit and independence. Despites those
positive lesson learned, some aspects remained the challenges in the implementation of Solid
project, as follow : i) the beneficiaries thought the disbursed funding could be used for any
purposes; ii) the beneficiaries presumed that they were not required to return and revolve the
funding in their SHG; iii) lack of information provided by village facilitator; iv) no agreed
sanctions for beneficiaries who did not return the funding; v) some of the SHGs had failed
harvest and therefore lost their funding; vi) financial fraud performed by the facilitator ; vii) the
difficult character of beneficiaries; viii) the group committee and facilitator did not bill the loan;
ix) beneficiaries did not return the funding due to lack of income; x) no collaterals was needed
during loan/funds disbursement; xi) improper use of the funding; xii) Some of the beneficiaries
followed the step of the others for not returning the funding; dan xiii) financial transaction
record was not well organized.
45
202. The followings were the recommendations provided for future revolving fund management: i)
despite many challenges, the revolving DB was still needed for community empowerment; ii)
all involved parties, including facilitator should have similar understanding about the revolving
funds; iii) relentless socialization of revolving fund to the beneficiaries; iv) the revolving fund
should be disbursed proportionally according to the business plan; v) effort should be done to
ask the beneficiaries returning the disbursed loan to the group for their future capital; vi) the
selection for revolving fund beneficiaries should be transparent and known by all members; vii)
the selection process followed the RUA/RUK/RPP; viii) the RUA/RUK/RPP should be made a
year ahead of disbursement or in the beginning of each fiscal year; ix) the disbursement should
also consider the situation, including nature and religious affairs; x) the disbursement might be
made via federation, which was later channelled to the SHGs and their members; xi) more
flexible utilization of revolving fund: on-farm, off-farm and non-farm; xii) the transaction
should be done at the same time of the disbursement; xiii) letter of warranty was needed as a
guarantee for loan disbursement; and xiv) some alternatives for revolving fund management
were provided as follow: social sanction for member who did not return the loan at the agreed
time; continuous facilitation to improve their income; collective saving; and income share.
203. Monitoring and Evaluation. The monitoring and evaluation faced some challenges as
follows: i) the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) officers did not able to perform their function
optimally due to double job and high turn over rate; ii) some of the M&E personnels did not
fully understand the definition and the objectives of M&E, logframe and Management
Information System (MIS) and lack of experience in performing M&E tasks; iii) the PPMO and
DPIU did not present the program achievement based on logframe (input-output-outcome-goal);
iv) the M&E personnel orientation was on data collection and processing and less capacity in
data analysis and presenting the result to Solid management; v) M&E personnel did not
formulate and give feedback to Solid management and beneficiaries; vi) the result of baseline,
midterm, end line and AOS surveys did not distribute and socialize to districts and provinces, so
they were not used in the future planning; vii) challenges in report timeline: report flow
(SHG/Federation/Business Center extension worker/village facilitator district M&E
Officer provincial M&E Officer central M&E Officer); viii) feedback was not well
documented: feedback flow (central M&E Officer provincial M&E Officer district M&E
Officer extension worker/village facilitator SHG/Federation/Business Center); ix) the
M&E was not used as lesson learned for program implementation; dan x) the three monthly
(dashboard), semester and yearly reports were not formulated according to M&E guideline.
204. The followings were recommendations for future monitoring and evaluation: i) budget support
for M&E; ii) improving M&E personnel capacity; iii) formulation of technical guideline and
SOP (standard operational procedure) for each M&E activity; iv) appointment of competent
and experienced M&E personnel; v) standardization of M&E system, including format,
46
mechanism and implementation; vi) training for data processing and analysis; vii) M&E result
should be shared to Solid implementer and beneficiaries as early warning system for Solid
implementation; viii) establishing commitment and responsibility of M&E personnel and Solid
management; ix) the utilization Solid meeting to integrate M&E and other Solid activities; and
x) the M&E result was delivered to Solid management for decision making and future
improvement.
205. Implementing Program in a different and better way. If similar program would ever be
designed and implemented, the following lesson learned needs to be taken into consideration:
206. The current approach of introducing value chain was considered too advance for the community
in 11 targeted districts. Therefore, simplification of program design which can be done
following a more comprehensive pre-assessment, including risks arising from policy,
consistency between log frames and their implementation, intensifying the collaboration of
institutional partners/program actors (SKPD, NGOs, academics, budgeting models) and its
suitability to the conditions of the local community. The aims of the program should be clear,
for example whether it is income generating program or saving and loan model depending on
the condition of the targeted community found during design mission.
207. The mentoring process of the SHGs and Federation was considered less optimum partly due to
the reason that the local NGOs performing the mentoring duty was hired after the Mid Term
Review of 2014. The mentoring of SHGs, Federation and PRA-based Business Centers should
therefore be carried out more intensively and sustainably by involving champions/activists from
the community and village facilitator (PPL/extension workers or local NGOs), who are
experienced or have sufficient knowledge on community empowerment, from the beginning of
the program. The selected champion, village facilitator and PPL shall receive adequate training
prior to their deployment and received refreshment training periodically during the program
implementation. The trainings should be conducted by an experienced NGOs or institution
having the knowledge required by those mentors. Importantly, the mentors should reside in or
close to (max 1 hour travel) their post, so day to day mentoring can be performed.
208. The SHGs and Federations received financial and physical intervention at least a year after the
commencement of the empowerment process, when the SHGs was considered mature to
manage the capitals. The intervention should be adjusted to the group's development progress.
The group was formed based on the similarity of business activities / livelihoods, for example:
food cultivation, horticulture or processing, etc. Moreover, the amount of financial intervention,
like the one for federation, should be sufficient to sustain their duty in supporting the marketing
of SHGs produce. The current approach used for forming and supporting federation was
considered minimal, so only around 17% of federations were able to perform their expected
duty. The group financial management should be clear, strict and agreed by the SHGs from the
47
beginning. Therefore it would not confused group members and would teach them to be
responsible for the saving and loan management.
209. Identification of potential local resources/commodities was needed for correct support, enough
funding, suitable trainings and mentoring and market design.
210. Improvement of program management by assigning competent personnel (willing to work and
having high commitment) and never gave responsibility to failed staffs. Periodic evaluation of
each personnel needs to be taken and the result should be followed up by changing the
underperformed personnel.
211. Enough support from the local government should be secured and monitored. At the beginning
of SOLID program, MoUs were created between the local government and the Agency for Food
Security, but the local government support in terms of local funding and stakeholder
coordination in most areas were still limited. This situation occurred partly due to
decentralization. Renewal of the MoUs was needed to accommodate the changes in regional
political situation. Therefore every local government will have continous support and ownership
of the program.
212. Monitoring and evaluation should be conducted in a simple way using simple platform, which
can be easily used and accessed by local staffs. Although challenges on the report timeline
persisted, the use of dashboard was considered effective.
213. During SOLID implementation, no reward and punishment, except in the last year, was
implemented. The introduction of reward and punishment, for example reducing budget
allocation for non-performing districts, should be considered to improve their performance.
214. Improvemen of SHGs could be done through: i) Classification of SHGs business development
to Good, Medium and Weak Groups; ii) Mentoring to increase economic capacity was focused
on improving life skills through creative efforts; iii) Simplification of the financial bookkeeping
and the creation of a revolving fund management legal umbrella; iv) Increased monitoring and
evaluation; and v) Technical assistance by one PPL for each village.
215. In general the renewed SOLID design was quite clear. However some improvements sould be
integrated in SOLID design, such as: i) include loan guarantee in SHGs loan rules in KM; ii)
identify the targeted villages, set clear criteria for group formation, identify the mentor
competency, and focus of activities on one component, for example production / cultivation
activities as well as market access; iii) Emphasizing on understanding of social capital for
implementers and target communities; iv) verfication of beneficiaries and technical training for
machineries and equipment utilization and maintenance; and v) Training and mentoring must be
given to all group members, and not only to group representatives as the current practice.
216. Recommendation for similar program: i) establishing partnerships and sinergy across programs;
ii) increasing empowerment and group legality; iii) Consistent application of design and
methodology; iv) Continuous budget allocation and no stagnation of disbursement; v)
48
Adoptation of learning and best practices; and vi) increased coordination in program
implementation.
217. Additional Support. Additional support needed for future program improvement, namely
policy support or involvement of local government agencies: local governments (allocation of
regional budget/APBD); Office of Cooperatives (business and financial management of SHGs);
Office of Industry and Trade (network and promotion of SHGs products); Office of Agriculture
and Regional Research Agency (BPTP) (adoption of new innovations, knowledge &
technology); Health Office and MUI (legality of business permit, halal certification); private
partner (providing market / cooperation); NGOs (increasing SHGs capacity, micro-enterprises
and policy advocacy); and village government to support the sustainability of the project. Since
the beginning of the Program to date, the Regional Government through APBD I and APBD II
has contributed around IDR 18,400,663,900, consisting of Maluku (IDR 12,467,880,900) and
North Maluku (IDR 5,932,783,000), see Appendix 11.
49
Appendix 1. Updated Logical Framework: Progress Against Objectives, Outputs and Outcomes
Narrative Summary Key Performance Indicators Means of
Verification
Assumptions (A) /
Risks (R) Aggregate Progress/Remarks
Goal:
To enhance food security and
increase incomes in beneficiary
households (HH)
By December 2018: (i) 22,400 HHs
with improvement in HH assets
ownership index and (ii) 40%
reduction in the prevalence of child
malnutrition
HH surveys
M&E reports
Project Managers at
all levels are effective
and engaged in
SOLID
implementation
(1) The HH asset ownership index improves from 0,37 in
2012 to 0,54 in 2018. The index was calculated using
PCA approach covering all surveyed assets, including
land and other physical assets.
(2) (ii) The project does not have direct activities for child
malnutrition reduction. However, the prevalence of
malnutrition from SOLID respondent decreased from
16% in 2012 baseline to 7%in 2018 end line surveys.
Moreover, the prevalence of stunting decreased from
62% in 2012 to 6% in 2018.
Project Development Objective:
To improve livelihoods (both
food security and income)
and to reduce the incidence of
poverty.
(by providing poor farmers
with sustainable access to
appropriate technologies,
management skills and
commercial linkages) .
By December 2018: (i) 75 of HHs
enjoy at least 10 months food
security in 100% of the target
villages; and
(ii) 75% of HHs enjoy 30% lift in
monthly cash income from sale of
SOLID related surplus products.
HH surveys
M&E reports
Project Managers at all
levels are effective and
engaged in SOLID
implementation
(i) Based on the annual outcome survey of 2018, 95% of
SOLID beneficiaries did not experience food shortage
since food crops are available the whole year. Of the
5% who experienced food shortages, 75% reported the
duration of shortage between 1-3 weeks. Based on the
endline survey of 2018, 80% of the respondents were
classified having good food security status. This status
was calculated using comparison between household
food and household total expenditures.
(ii) Based on the baseline of 2012, most of the SOLID
respondents planted food crops for their own
consumption. In 2018 it was reported that 40% of the
respondents sold their food crops and 23% respondents
sold their horticulture produces. Moreover, Annual
Outcome Survey of 2018 found out that 66% of
beneficiaries reported an increase in their income as
compared to that of reported in 2017. The monthly per
capita income of SOLID respondent also increase from
IDR 242.101 in 2012 to IDR 285.148 in 2014 and to
50
Narrative Summary Key Performance Indicators Means of
Verification
Assumptions (A) /
Risks (R) Aggregate Progress/Remarks
IDR 438.975 in 2018.
Outcome 1:
Communities with enhanced
capacity for HH food security
and agriculture income
planning.
2240 SHGs re-oriented or trained in
PRA, S&L group management.
Annual
outcome survey
2,192 SHGs received trainings in the form of capacity
building trainings, technical trainings, demplots, farmer field
schools.
Output:
1.1 SHGs capable of
managing and sustaining
group resources (both
human & financial).
1.2 SHGs capable of planning
& implementing their
production and post-
harvest activities.
1428 existing SHGs re-trained
and operational by August 2015
812 new SHGs trained and
operational by August 2016
1428 existing SHGs & 812 new
SHGs implementing production
and post harvest plans
M&E reports
Interviews
with SHGs
SHG training
records
Interviews
with
production
group
members
Group
production
records
Facilitation NGO
operational by
1.11.14
VFs are respected and
effective in
facilitating the CD
process
PPLs and VFs work
together effectively
(i) 1428 existing and 796 new SHGs has been trained with
capacity building trainings, technical trainings, demplots,
farmer field schools.
(ii) 1428 existing and 796 new SHGs used the Individual
Bussines Plan (RUA) and Agriculture Production Plan
(RPP) for their productive activities.
Outcome 2:
HHs with more food available
for both home consumption
and/or sale.
By December 2018: 75% of
households reporting at least
20% increase in food available
for home consumption
75% of households reporting
regular market sales of food
crops
Annual Outcome
Surveys
Adequate support
provided by NGO,
extension staff (PPL),
traders and SOLID
Project District Staff
Favourable seasons &
growing conditions
(pest, disease, drought)
i) 66% beneficiaries reported increase in their income as
compared to the income they received in 2017.
ii) 89% of beneficiaries reported that the harvest is sold and
also used for home consumption.
51
Narrative Summary Key Performance Indicators Means of
Verification
Assumptions (A) /
Risks (R) Aggregate Progress/Remarks
Output:
2.1 Households food secure
for 80% of the season
2.2 Increase in HH income as a
result of increased sales of
agricultural products.
By Dec 2018, 75% of HHs are
fully food secure 80% of the
time
By Dec 2018, 20% reduction in
incidence of stunting in SOLID
HHs
By Dec 2018, 75% of HHs
enjoy a 20% lift in monthly
cash income from sale of food
crop related products
M&E reports
Interviews
with
production
group
members
Annual
Outcome
Surveys
PPLs actively
engaged in
implementation
PPLs equipped with
full set of skills
Farmers actively
engage in activities
S&L funds operate
transparently for all
members with
borrowers willing to
repay loans in full, on
time.
Local traders engaged
with SOLID Project
staff
i) Based on the annual outcome survey of 2018, 95% of
SOLID beneficiaries did not experience food shortage
since food crops are available the whole year. Of the 5%
who experienced food shortages, 75% reported the
duration of shortage between 1-3 weeks. Based on the
endline survey of 2018, 80% of the respondents were
classified having good food security status. This status
was calculated using comparison between household
food and household total expenditures.
ii) The prevalence of stunting decreased from 62% in 2012 to
6% in 2018. Care should be taken in intrepeting this result
since the sampling was done in randomly selected
location.
iii) Based on the baseline of 2012, most of the SOLID
respondents planted food crops for their own consumption.
In 2018 it was reported that 40% of the respondents sold
their food crops and 23% respondents sold their
horticulture produces.
Outcome 3:
Increased household incomes
from sales of 3 selected estate
crops (coconut, cacao &
nutmeg)
By Dec 2018, 50% of village crop
producers enjoy a 20% lift in
monthly cash income from sale of
estate crop related products.
Annual outcome
survey
Market stability in 3
selected VCs
More than 50% of households have given treatment to the
product before it was marketed and more than 70% of the
provision of such treatment was from SOLID’s
recommendation. The treatment is expected to improve the
price the farmer received from the buyer.
Output:
3.1 Up to 3 value chains (VC)
assessed as feasible for
sustainable increases to HH
incomes
3.2 Farmers with improved
market linkages &
understanding of market
requirements
3.3 Federations established
as sustainable business units
By Dec 2015, 3 quality VC
studies completed to
international standards.
50% of growers directly
engaged in VC with Federation
support & responding to
market requirements
By Dec 2018, 25% of
federations actively supporting
growers via link to traders and
other VC players and/or adding
Reading VC
study doc’s
M&E reports
SHG &
federation
marketing
records.
Interviews
with SHGs
M&E reports
Federation
Suitable VC team
able to be recruited
Village Commercial
Officers (VCOs)
appointed and trained
to high standards
Federations able &
willing to re-orient to
new, broader,
commercial role
(i) 3 quality VC studies were completed by Value Chain
International Consultant.
(ii)(iii) The AOS shows that 66% of SOLID households
generated improved income from selling agriculture produce
as compared with 19% of non-SOLID households. It is further
reported that 69% of SOLID households have improved
physical access to markets and 33% have established
partnerships/contracts to market their produce. However, only
17% of these partnerships are generated through federations.
52
Narrative Summary Key Performance Indicators Means of
Verification
Assumptions (A) /
Risks (R) Aggregate Progress/Remarks
with capacity to represent
farmer interests in the market
place and/or add value to any
or all of the 3 selected
products
value to 3 selected estate crops
accounts &
quarterly
reports
Outcome 4:
Effective implementation and
monitoring of SOLID
Analysis and reporting of M&E data
actively used by Project Management
to improve outcomes & efficiency.
Quarterly
review
reports &
review
meeting
minutes.
Revised Annual
Implementation
Guidelines
Project staff respond to
more effective M&E
systems and data
analysis
- The improvement in the quality of project management
with evidence of improved planning, reporting and a clearer
focus results. Nevertheless, there is a need to strengthen
coordination and communication at all levels to ensure
better quality of implementation and enhancing the
likelihood of the sustainability
Output:
4. 1 Consistent,
transparent and functional
Project management
arrangements at all levels
4.2 Functional M&E system
operating in timely manner,
with useful data analysis
giving positive changes in
management.
4.3 Timely and effective
management & implementation
support from national &
provincial levels.
Staff performance review
reports.
M&E reports being actively
used by management
90% of activities implemented
as per the AWPB
100% of the Budget utilised as
per AWPB
Staff
performance
plan
Staff
performance
review report
M&E reports
Management
Reports
Project Managers
committed to
accountability and
transparency.
Project Management
committed to
accountable
management practices
The project staff works according to their responsibility in
their SK of The DG of the Agency for Food Security
(AFS) which was drafted for yearly basis. Each of staff
has their own performance review, but it is used for the
general requirement of each AFS staff rather than solely
created for SOLID performance. Since the staffs are
appointed, there were difficulties in replacing
underperformed staff and replacing them with the new
member.
Started in 2017 M&E reports was used to some extent to
provide rewards to good performing districts. The M&E
reports were also used in designing and proposing
corrective recommendation to both PPMO dan DPIU
95% of activities was implemented according to the initial
AWPB set earlier in the beginning of the year.
95% of the budget utilized as per AWPB.
53
Appendix 2. Assessment of SOLID Relevance (Based on FGD in Maluku and North Maluku)
Component
Relevance
to the
need of
the Poor
Relevance to the
strategy of GOI
to reduce
poverty
Relevance to the
strategies of IFAD
countries
Relevance Score
Notes
1. Community Development and Gender
1) Communities with increased HH food security
capacity and farming income planning. R R R 5/5
The mindset of farmers before SOLID program is only farming to meet food needs
but not for sale.
Relevant because it can change the mindset and behavior of farmers, to try to
increase their income through a plan that fits their needs.
2) SHG is able to manage and maintain group
resources (both human and financial) R R R 5/5
SHG is able to manage and maintain human resources of group members, but still
unable to maintain the financial aspect
There are SHG rules that are binding so that SHG is able to maintain the human
resources of group members
3) SHG is able to plan and implementing
production and post-harvest activities R R R 5/5
Relevant, increased production and post-harvest planning can increase income.
2. Support for Agricultural Production and
Marketing
1) HH with more food and cash availability, both
available for household consumption and sales. R R R 5/5
Relevant, because the main needs of poor farmers are how they can meet food needs for
consumption and cash to meet their daily needs.
2) Households with 80% food security per season R R R 5/5 because there are programs that synergize with other programs that support 80% of food
security per season
3) Increased HH income as a result of increased
sales of agricultural products. R R R 6/5
The point of increasing RT income as a result of increased sales of agricultural products
is the main point in alleviating poverty.
3. Support for Estate Crop Commodity Value
Chain
1) Increase in household income from sales of 3
selected estate crops (coconut, cocoa &
nutmeg)
R R R 6/6
Very relevant because the commodity is basically a commodity that is owned by most
members of SHGs. Proposals need to be added with 4 new plants (coconut, cocoa,
nutmeg, cloves)
2) 3 value chains (VC) are considered feasible to
increase sustainable household income R R R 6/4
Number of market opportunities
3) Farmers with increased market networking &
understanding of market needs R R R 6/5
Market information plays a very important role in marketing farmers 'produce which
automatically increases farmers' income
4) Federation functions as a sustainable business
unit with the capacity to represent the
interests of farmers in the market and / or add
value to each or all of the 3 selected
R R R 5/5
The role of the Federation here is very large in order to increase the added value of all
types of business members
54
Component
Relevance
to the
need of
the Poor
Relevance to the
strategy of GOI
to reduce
poverty
Relevance to the
strategies of IFAD
countries
Relevance Score
Notes
commodities
4. Program Management
1) Effective SOLID implementation and
monitoring R R R 6/6
Effective monitoring can illustrate the impact of activities in each process
2) Program management that is consistent,
transparent and functional at all levels R R R 6/6
This is a factor supporting management performance at all levels
3) M & E systems function and operate in a
timely manner, with useful data analysis
providing positive changes in management.
R R R 5/5
Accurate and reported data according to schedule can be used as a measure of the success
of the SOLID program
4) Management & implementation of timely and
effective support from the National &
Province level.
R R R 5/5
Management at every level must work together in supporting the success of the program
Rating Category Relevance:
(6) Highly relevant. SOLID's activities and objectives are relevant and significant to the needs of the poor, and to the RI state poverty reductio n strategies and
strategies of member states of FRAD.
(5) Relevant. The activities and objectives of SOLID activities are relevant to the needs of the poor, and to poverty reduction strategies in the Republic of
Indonesia and to the strategies of IFAD member countries.
(4) Partly relevant. The activities and objectives of SOLID activities are relevant to the following two things: the needs of the poor or strategies for reducing
poverty in the Republic of Indonesia or the strategies of IFAD countries.
(3) Partly irrelevant. The activities and objectives of SOLID activities are not relevant to the following two things: the needs of the poor or the poverty reduction
strategy in the Republic of Indonesia or the strategy of IFAD countries.
(2) Irrelevant. The activities and objectives of SOLID activities are not relevant to the needs of the poor, and the strategies for reduci ng poverty in the Republic
of Indonesia and the strategies of IFAD countries.
(1) Highly irrelevant. The activities and objectives of SOLID activities are not relevant to the needs of the poor and IFAD country strategies and are not
significant in reducing rural poverty.
55
Appendix 3. Assessment of Solid Efficiency
Output Component Target Output Output Realization Score
1. Component A. Community Development and Gender
Outcome:
Communities with increased HH food security capacity and
farming income planning.
2240 SHGs were oriented or trained by PRA, S & L
group management.
2.192 SHG (98%) 5 (E)
Output:
1.1 SHG is able to manage and maintain group resources (both
human & financial).
1428 existing SHGs trained again and operational in
August 2015
1.428 SHG (100%) 5 (E)
1.2. SHG is able to plan & carry out their production and post-
harvest activities.
812 SHGs were only trained and operational in August
2016
764 SHG (94%) 5 (E)
The existing 1428 SHGs & 812 SHGs just implemented
the production & post-harvest plan
2192 SHG (98%) 5 (E)
2. Component B: Support for Agricultural Production and
Marketing
Outcome:
HH with more food and cash availability, both available for
household consumption and sales.
As of December 2018: 80% of HHs reported at least
20% increase in HH food availability for consumption
80% (are food resistant) 5 (E)
In December 2018, 50% of HH reported regular sales to
markets for food crops and plants that could be sold
89% (AOS) 6 (SE)
Output:
2.1 Households with food security 80% of the season In December 2018, 75% of HHs had food security out
of 80% of their time.
80% 6 (SE)
2.2 Increased RT income as a result of increased sales of
agricultural products.
In December 2018, 20% reduced the incidence of
stunting in SOLID HH
56% 6 (SE)
As of Dec 2018, 75% of HH enjoyed a 30% increase in
income from the sale of food crops
Before SOLID:only for consumption
After SOLID 40% sold TP; 23%
Horticulture
5 (E)
3. Component C: Support for Estate Crop Commodity Value
Chain
Outcome:
Increased household income from sales of 3 selected
plantation crops (coconut, cocoa & nutmeg)
As of December 2018, 50% of village plant producers
enjoy a 20% increase in monthly cash income from the
sale of estate crops related products.
50%
and 70%
5 and 6
56
Output Component Target Output Output Realization Score
Output:
3.1 Up to 3 value chains (VC) are considered feasible for
continuous improvement in HH income
In December 2015, 3 quality VC studies were
completed with international standards.
3 5 (E)
3.2. Farmers with increased market networking & understanding
of market needs.
50% of farmers are directly involved in VC with the
support of the Federation & respond to market needs.
81% sell directly to middlemen; kiosks and
market; 17% through SHG; 1,8% through
Federation
5 (E)
3.3. The Federation is formed as a sustainable business unit with
the capacity to represent the interests of farmers in the market
and / or add value to each or all of the 3 selected commodities
As of December 2018, 25% of the Federation actively
supports farmers through networking with traders and
other VC players and / or the value added of 3 selected
plantation crops.
1,8%. IFAD supervision no longer
recommends the Federation as a sales agent
4. Component D: Program Management
Effective SOLID implementation and monitoring Active M & E data analysis and reporting by the
Management Program to improve results & efficiency
Output:
4.1. Program management arrangements that are consistent,
transparent and functional at all levels
The M & E report is actively used by management Yes 5 (E)
4.2 Functional M & E systems are timely, with useful data
analysis providing positive changes in management.
90% of activities carried out are in accordance with
AWPB
95% 6 (SE)
4.3 Management & implementation of timely and effective
support from the national & Province level.
100% of the budget is used in accordance with AWPB 95% 5 (E)
Efficiency rating category:
(6) Highly efficient. Excellent use of resources: the cost per unit is much lower than the average or from comparative activities / projects, the rate of return (IRR) is very high.
(5) Efficient. Good use of resources: unit costs equal to or below the comparable activity / project, average yield / return (IRR).
(4) Moderately efficient. Usage of average resources: unit costs are slightly higher than comparable activities / projects, and the rate of return / return (IRR) is lower than
investment alternatives but still positive.
(3) Moderately inefficient. Poor use of resources: the cost per unit above the activity / project from the comparison, and the rate of return / return (IRR) is lower than the
investment alternative and negative.
(2) Inefficient. Inefficient use of resources: unit costs are far above the activities of comparative activities / projects, and inefficient processes result in unnecessary loss or
loss of time.
(1) Highly inefficient. Unsatisfactory use of resources: per unit costs are multiples of comparative activities / projects, and the process is wasteful of time and resources.
57
Appendix 4. Effect of Solid for Beneficiaries
A. Increase Public Access to Infrastructure, market and Financial Services
No Infrastructure/Financial
Services and Market
Increase
Access (Y/N)
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give an Example!
1 Road to farming /
production bags
Y 5/5 All districts feel the benefits.
Provide convenience for SHG members to reach agricultural / plantation locations
Open access of farmers from settlements to agricultural land,
Increased economic value from agricultural production (facilitating SHG in distributing
yields).
Facilitate marketing access
North Maluku (addition):
Not all access is built by SOLID, for example 1000 meters is needed to be built to reach
farmers' locations, but only 100 meters are built
Increased farming area
Open access between villages and facilitate access to marketing
2 Irrigation Network and
drainage of agricultural
land
N 0/4 Maluku: All districts have no irrigation development.
North Maluku:
All districts utilize irrigation networks
• Irrigation utilization is still not optimal.
• Some irrigation networks in the district are no longer functioning because they are damaged
(Sula District)
• Beneficiaries are still limited and some networks have not been used (Central Halmahera)
• Management of irrigation networks managed by SHG and Federation management (North
Halmahera)
• Increased land productivity
• Ease of control over the availability and adequacy of water on land (South Halmahera and West
Halmahera)
3 Drying Floor Y 5/5 All Districts utilize the drying floors;
Increased quantity and quality of agricultural products that require solar thermal drying in all
types of commodities (Sago, salted fish, rice, corn, peanuts, nutmeg, cloves, copra, cashew,
green beans and cocoa).
Increased farmer income
4 Waraehouses Y 5/5 Facilities have been built in all districts
It has been used well as a place to store farmers' produce and agricultural equipment but there
58
No Infrastructure/Financial
Services and Market
Increase
Access (Y/N)
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give an Example!
is limited storage space.
5 Offices Y 4/3 Facilities have been built in all districts except Sula, and only in a few villages based on the
best Federation.
Not yet utilized properly as a place of business operations and Federation organizations and
SHG, because some office buildings have not yet been completed, for example the village of
Nunialy, West Seram.
Not properly utilized as a place of business operations and Federation organizations and KM.
6 Asaran (Copra Drying
House)
Y 5/3 In Maluku, Asaran can be used well by SHG members, but capacity is limited/small, so farmers
have to wait their turn to use it. In terms of function increases the value of cost savings and the
quality of copra.
In North Maluku. Except in South Halmahera District, Sula, East Halmahera and North
Halmahera, Asaran can be used well by SHG members, building construction is not strong
enough, and does not have heat resistance when fumigating, and capacity is limited/small so
farmers have to wait their turn to use it.
7 Fresh Water Y 5/5 Managed by the Federation
The fulfillment of the need for clean water by SHG and the community outside SHG
Improve health,
Clean water directly to residential housing but only in a few districts (West Seram, Central
Maluku, Buru)
8 Farner Meeting Hut Y 5/5 Facilitated in all districts
Useful for places of deliberation both by SOLID SHGs and the community in general
There are also those owned by each group
9 Market/Sales Y 5/4 In Maluku:
• All markets have been established in several target villages
• Make it easier for farmers to market agricultural products, which has an impact on improving
the economy of farmers
• At East Seram, the Marketing Distribution Unit of the SOLID business units accommodates
products from the village business center and is sold to an outlet (Winkel / Minimarket)
• Limited Market reach because it is constrained by licensing (halal, PIRT and BPOM)
• SOLID East Seram has integrated marketing of SOLID products (MINLEN Oil, Nutmeg Juice,
and Salted Fish, chocolate candy, super sago, Waisolang bottled beans, Danaria sago flour) with
a distribution or marketing center and outlets at several minimarkets (supermarket winkel and
beta smart) in the city district.
59
No Infrastructure/Financial
Services and Market
Increase
Access (Y/N)
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give an Example!
• SOLID Central Maluku integrates marketing of SOLID products (Roasted Peanuts, Dried Jerky
Fish, Sago Flowers, VCO Oil)
• SOLID West Seram integrates marketing of SOLID products (Eucalyptus Oil, VCO oil)
In North Maluku. The district that has built are Central Halmahera and East Halmahera. The
market makes it easier for farmers to market agricultural products, which has an impact on
improving the economy of farmers.
10 Revolving Fund Y 4/4 Availability of funds in groups makes it easier for farmers to obtain business capital.
There are still many farmers who have not returned or defaulted on their loans
11 Bank credit N 0/0
12 Village Fund N 0/3 Only in South Halmahera District, in the villages of Toin and Akedabo Village Fund are
allocated to SOLID groups.
Some SHGs can use it well because they have experience managing MF and RF funds at
SOLID,
13 Cooperative N 0/4 Only in Central Halmahera District (7 cooperatives) and North Halmahera (1 cooperative) that are
legal entities
Information: 0 - no development; 1 - Highly unsatisfactory; 2 - Unsatisfactory; 3 – Moderately Unsatisfactory; 4 - Moderately Satisfactory; 5 - Satisfactory; 6 - Highly Satisfactory.
B. Increasing Community Access to New Technology
No New technology/addapted Access Increase
(Y / N)
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give a Real Example (where?)!
A New technology for corn / peanut /
cassava / sweet potato / green
beans
1 Soil processing equipment (tractor /
cultivator)
Y 5/4 Tools are available and can be utilized by farmers optimally.
Facility managers are managed by Business Centers and Federations
Lease loans and loans for fellow SHG managers and members
However, maintenance of facilities is not optimal and the number of
tools is still limited
2 Simple Irrigation Y 5/4 All Districts have the facilities
3 Superior seeds Y 5/4 Superior seeds are very significant in increasing productivity but the
availability (quantity and types) of superior seeds at the farm level is
limited.
4 Fertilization Y 4/4 There is an increase in production, but limited availability of fertilizer
60
No New technology/addapted Access Increase
(Y / N)
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give a Real Example (where?)!
at the farm level.
Understanding of fertilizer use at the farm level is still low
5 Drum / seed storage plastic N 0/4 Only in East Halmahera District
Used as a water reservoir
6 Thresher Y 5/4 All Districts have
Facilitate threshing processes and are needed by farmers, but are
limited in number
7 Moister Tester Y 4/4 All districts in Maluku have but utilization is not maximized, whereas
in North Maluku only in South Halmahera District
B New technology for cocoa /
coconut / nutmeg
1 Land Clearing Y 5/3 Maluku: Farm sanitation. Most farmers have cleared agricultural land.
North Maluku: There are still many farmers who have not
implemented it, although it is very important to increase yields and
avoid pests
2 Superior seeds ready for planting Y 4/4 Although it can increase production and not be easily attacked by pests
and diseases, but not many farmers use superior seeds because of the
limited number
3 Top Grafting Y 4/0 Even though it can speed up the production process, there are still
many farmers who have not used top seedlings
Procurement of top grafting seed systems is widely used commercially
in Rukun Jaya Village East Seram, Holo Village and Waai Central
Maluku
4 Side Graffting Y 4/0 Especially in the Central Maluku Holo Village, rejuvenation of old
plants with a side grafting system (Cocoa)
6 Fertilization Y 4/4 There is an increase in production, but limited availability of fertilizer
at the farm level
Understanding of fertilizer use at the farm level is still low
7 Seed Selection Y 4/4 To get quality seeds
Most farmers do not do seed selection
8 Coconut Milk Press Tool Y 5/5 All districts have and have been used well
9 Coconut grated machine Y 5/5 All districts have and have been used well
10 Drying Machine Y 5/5 All districts have and have been used well
61
No New technology/addapted Access Increase
(Y / N)
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give a Real Example (where?)!
C New technology for vegetables /
horti
1 Demplot Y 4/4 Improve farmers' knowledge and skills.
Increasing understanding of agricultural techniques from processing
land to harvest, but the impact on SHG members is not optimal
2 Simple Irrigation Y 4/4 Productions increase, quality increases
Farmers use well irrigation / pumps especially for horti plants.
In Hatawano Village, Buru and Aira Village, Central Maluku District,
farmers use piped irrigation from springs
Karang Jaya Village, Buru uses a sprinkle system from well water
3 Superior seeds Y 4/4 Increased production and resistance to disease pests.
SHG can distinguish between superior seeds and not.
Some SHG able to do seeds sortation to be developed for further
planting.
4 Fertilization Y 4/4 There is an increase in production, but the availability of fertilizer at
the farm level is limited, besides understanding fertilizer use at the
farm level is still low
5 Packing Y 3/4 There is an understanding of how to do the packaging even without
accompanied by supervisor
Packaging is still limited to market demand
Maluku: Especially for Buru District, packaging is only for fried onion
products from Waeura Village
North Maluku: there are some SHG products that have been packaged for
example in North Halmahera, Central Halmahera (VCO Oil), and East
Halmahera (Jackfruit Chips),
6 Marketing Y 5/4 Bring farmers closer to market access.
Make it easy for farmers to sell their crops in their own village.
Make it easier for farmers to be more enthusiastic in carrying out the
production process
Reinforce the economy in the village
SHG is able to establish partnerships with traders or end consumers
62
No New technology/addapted Access Increase
(Y / N)
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give a Real Example (where?)!
D New livestock technology
1 Cattle pen Y 4/3 Not all districts have livestock pens. If there is a cage, the utilization
is not optimal, because farmers tend to release their livestock
Increase livestock production and ensure farmer control of livestock
(feed, disease and sanitation)
2 Superior Seed Y 3/3 Still in the form of training, not yet at the stage of procurement and
implementation control.
Some raise native chickens, on the grounds that they are rather long
but the price is quite expensive, especially during holidays.
3 Animal feed Y 3/3 • Only available in Animal Feed Products Centers, Holo Village,
Central Maluku
4 Vaccination Y 4/4 The activeness of EXTENSION WORKER in the village supports
farmer groups in providing and counseling as well as applications
about vaccination against chickens, goats and cattle
5 Animal husbandry Y 3/3 Besides counseling, it is supported by practice (vaccination).
Still relying on the activist's Extension.
E New technology for post-harvest
and off-farm businesses
1 Raw material Y 5/4 Sufficiently available, but not yet maximally managed to produce
processed goods
There needs to be continuity in the procurement of raw materials so
that production runs smoothly or continuously
2 Production / processing Y 5/4 The process is still varied, depending on group initiative and
creativity.
The production process depends on demand so the production process
has not been continuously carried out
Maluku: The production process in the Business Center runs well (6
BC in Central Maluku, 3/6 BC in Buru, 9 BC in EAST SERAM, 1/3
BC in Bursel, 5/6 BC in WEST SERAM).
3 Packaging Y 5/4 Maluku: BC area already has product packaging. There are some who still
use traditional packaging (Palm Sugar, Banana Chips, etc.).
North Maluku: In several villages in all Districts, they have implemented
it, even with the provision of production labels (VCO oil, cassava chips,
63
No New technology/addapted Access Increase
(Y / N)
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give a Real Example (where?)!
bananas, jackfruit, peanuts, cashew nuts). There are some who still use
traditional packaging (palm sugar, sago)
4 Labeling Y 5/3 Maluku: BC area already has a Product Label. Labeling in the Business
Center runs well (6 BC in Central Maluku, 6 BC in Buru, 9 BC at EAST
SERAM, 3 BC in Bursel, 6 BC on WEST SERAM)
North Maluku: There are no labels, because packaging is still traditional.
SOLID district has provided labels for SHG products as above, but not yet
installed.
5 Sertification Y 4/4 Maluku:
• Not all districts already have Halal product certification, except East
Seram district (Way Solang Bottled Beans)
• Central Maluku PIRT Certification 2/6, 8/9 East Seram, ... / 6 Buru, 2/6
West Seram, ... 3 Bursel.
• Not all KM have received training from BPOM and DINKES to obtain
product certification (PIRT) Except EAST SERAM (BPOM & DINKES),
Central Maluku (DINKES).
North Maluku:
• Not all districts already have product certification except North
Halmahera District (VCO, Bath Soap)
• The marketing system began to increase by using networks outside the
village (VCO, bath soap)
• KM has received training from BPOM and DINKES to obtain product
certification (PIRT)
6 Sales Y 5/5 Maluku: All districts in Maluku have carried out the sales process. SHG
has been able to applymarketing strategies. SHG has built partnerships to
expand market access.
North Maluku: Groups have been trained in marketing strategies. SHG
and the extension workers have identified markets and Business Partners
for SHG products
Information: 0 - there is no introduction of new technology; 1 - Highly unsatisfactory; 2 - Unsatisfactory; 3 – Moderately Unsatisfactory; 4 - Moderately Satisfactory; 5 - Satisfactory; 6 -
Highly Satisfactory.
64
C. Benefit of SHG Strengthening
No Strengthening of SOLID SHG
Yes/No Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give a Real Example!
1 Group organization and
management (group rules,
meetings, finance, accountability,
monitoring and evaluation,
bookkeeping, etc.)
Y 4/4 Groups have written rules but are not put at the SHG secretariat
Meetings are conducted but not routinely.
Not all group members adhere to existing agreements ...
2 Management of revolving fund
finance
Y 5/4 Bookkeeping assistance has been carried out
Bookkeeping standards have been recognized by most SHG members,
not just administrators.
All SHG members get loans from revolving funds for production and
consumptive businesses
The return process has not been smooth
3 Agriculture business Y 5/4 With RF funds and assistance from EXTENSION WORKER, groups
are able to increase agricultural business in accordance with the
commodities they develop.
SHG together with EXTENSION WORKER have done SL
agriculture and plantations
SHG is able to develop agricultural businesses in their respective
plantations
4 Off / non-farm business Y 4/4 Groups are able to increase income and the level of additional
livelihoods that are managed directly by SHG members.
Improve food security in farm households.
5 Savings and loan business Y 4/4 Groups are able to manage their own funds.
There is additional funding from the savings of members of some
groups.
Some group members experience arrears on MF and RF refunds
Note: 0 - No Group Strengthening; 1 - Highly unsatisfactory; 2 - Unsatisfactory; 3 – Moderately Unsatisfactory; 4 - Moderately Satisfactory; 5 - Satisfactory; 6 - Highly Satisfactory.
65
D. Policies or Regulations that have been Made / Repaired / Modified to Support the Needs of the Poor
No Policy / Regulation Yes/No Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6)
Reasons for Giving S
core? Give a Real Example!
1 Village Regulation or Village Decree
for Infrastructure O & M
N -
2 Group Regulations for the operation
and maintenance (O & M) of
agricultural equipment and
machinery (eg hand tractors)
Y 4/0 There are group regulations regarding the use of agricultural tools and
machinery.
3 Determining the legality of SOLID
groups
Y 4/4 All districts have Decrees regarding the determination of SOLID independent
groups.
The group is legally recognized by the village government and the existing
group deserves to be encouraged to become a Cooperative in accordance with
the provisions regarding the operation.
4 Regent/Bupati Policy T 0/0
Ket: 0 - no policy or regulation;; 1 - Highly unsatisfactory; 2 - Unsatisfactory; 3 – Moderately Unsatisfactory; 4 - Moderately Satisfactory; 5 - Satisfactory; 6 - Highly Satisfactory.
E. Desired or Unwanted Environmental Impacts - Positive or Negative
No Types of Environmental
Impacts Describe the Positive and Negative Impacts That Happen!
1 Positive impact Increased support for natural resource management in the village. Especially areas that are directly adjacent to the
catchment area, protected areas, production forests, customary forests (landscape management) supported by agriculture.
Increased availability of basic community needs, such as sanitation, clean water and agriculture-based livelihoods.
Become part of the process of resilience to internal disasters such as vulnerability to hunger with food security in the vill age
and the community.
Increased awareness of farmers to use organic fertilizers and pesticides that are environmentally friendly.
2 Negative impact The lack of agreement on the sustainability of natural resource management at the village level, including neighboring
villages that are not SOLID partners. Some are managed in the village of SOLID but other villages manage SDA which has
a negative impact on the village of SOLID.
Management of agriculture-based natural resources still in an orientation to economic improvement, has not included
development planning that is oriented to disaster mitigation and has not paid attention to aspects of biodiversity, specifically
local / specific biodiversity (superior local characteristics).
Utilization of non-timber forest products (honey etc.) has not been well directed. If left unchecked it will threaten the
sustainability of forests managed by the community.
66
Appendix 5. Achievement of Objectives and Goal
A. Village Poor gets benefit from SOLID Project
No SOLID Program Benefit Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give an Example!
1 Increased capacity of social / solidarity 5 SHG members have received various types of training several times so as to increase
the insight and capacity of SHG members
SHG members are accustomed to working together in the SHG demonstration plot
2 Increased ability to organize / gather to
express opinions
5 SHG members have received organizational management training at SHG level
SHG members take turns in accordance with the agreement to become SHG
administrators
3 Increased cooperation 5/4 SHG members are used to working together in the demonstration plot and other activities
4 Reducing differences 5/5 SHG is familiar with deliberation to solve problems or differences that exist
5 Increasing economic business 5/4 Some SHG members already have businesses on a small scale with the intervention of
SOLID, the business of SHG members has increased.
Initially KM members did not have a business, but after receiving MF and RF funds loans
were used for business activities
6 Increased farming production 5/5 With the existence of SOLID activities and the application of new SHG member
technology can increase production
7 Increased post-harvest business 6/5 With SOLID activities, SHG members are partially motivated to increase added value
through post-harvest processing (roasted peanuts, VCO oil, sago flour, sago flower,
cassava sago, minlen oil, eucalyptus oil soap, eucalyptus oil, foot mat, bolster cushion ,
animal feed, shredded fish, fried onions, cassava chips, nutmeg juice, chocolate powder)
8 Increased income 5/5 With the increase in production and increase in post-harvest business so that it can
increase the income of SHG members.
9 Improvement of living standards 5/5 With the increase in SHG members' income there is a change in the standard of living and
family welfare
10 Increased household ownership assets 5/5 Home repairs, purchases of items such as Chair, Cellphone, TV, Refrigerator, etc.
11 Increased economic access 4/4 Increasingly diversified business occurs in various members of the SHG
12 Increased market access 5/5 SHG and Federation have opened market access from villages, sub-districts, regencies,
provinces and between provinces
Note: 0 - nothing is obtained; 1 - Highly unsatisfactory; 2 - Unsatisfactory; 3 – Moderately Unsatisfactory; 4 - Moderately Satisfactory; 5 - Satisfactory; 6 - Highly Satisfactory.
67
B. Changes in habits (behaviour) in the rural poor
No Change in beneficiary
behavior
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give an Example!
1 Changes in family harmony 5/5 There is a change in behavior in the household, for example when returning home from the farm, the father
had only brought a machete while the mother carried the farm produce in Saloi, but now there have been
changes where the father has helped the mother carry the farm produce.
There is a change in behavior at work, after the intervention of SOLID mothers also have business activities
so they can increase income
2 Changes in the way of
communication
5/5 Many SHG members have the courage to express their opinions in public deliberations
Most SHG members have dared to express their opinions at village meetings
3 Changes in diet 5/4 The consumption patterns of SHG members vary and regular eating patterns
4 Changes in daily activities 5/5 There is additional work besides being a housewife
Increased work ethic (work discipline and time)
There is a desire to save
5 Change in the way of thinking 5/5 Be more positive about receiving information
There is a desire to work together in groups
Dare to express opinions in public
Previously not using fertilizer now using fertilizer
There is equality between SHG members
Prioritizing persuasive ways to solve problems
6 Changes in work patterns 5/5 Scheduled and Participatory
Sharing responsibility
7 Change of work spirit 5/5 More working time
A high sense of mutual cooperation between people
More than one type of business
Focus on increasing business
8 Changes in household money
management
5/5 Planned
Not consumptive
More organized
Note: 0 – No changes; 1 - Highly unsatisfactory; 2 - Unsatisfactory; 3 – Moderately Unsatisfactory; 4 - Moderately Satisfactory; 5 - Satisfactory; 6 - Highly Satisfactory.
68
C. Changes in Behaviour of Service Provider
No Changes in the behavior
of service providers
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give an Example!
1 District SOLID Staff 5/5 More transparent and accountable
Proactive
Discipline of time
Clear division of labor and responsibility
2 Extension Workers And
Village Facilitators
5/5 More field trips
Mentoring to SHG members is more intense
Faithful in service
More open in accepting suggestions and criticism from SHG members
More proactive in carrying out the mentoring process
3 District Supervisor 5/5 Coordinated and Consolidated
Responsible for tupoksi given
4 District Experts 5/5 Mutual coordination with management
Always present during activities
More intense field visits
5 Federation 5/4 Coordinate SHG better
Become a media of information for SHG
6 Village officials 4/4 There are some Village Governments that are still lacking in attention to SOLID activities
Responsive in helping to solve problems in SHG
Still lacking coordination
7 Public figure 5/5 Provide support and motivation for SHG
8 Food Crop Contact
Farmers
5/4 Assist SHG in identifying food crops for SHG members
Providing federated food information and Extension Worker
10 Estate Crop Contact
Farmers
5/4 Helping SHG in identifying plantation of SHG members
Provide plantation information to the Federation and Extension Worker
11 Marketing Cadre 5/4 Helping SHG find market price information
Network partnerships
12 Government apparatus
(Village, District,
Province, National Level)
5/5 Good coordination
Note: 0 – No changes; 1 - Highly unsatisfactory; 2 - Unsatisfactory; 3 – Moderately Unsatisfactory; 4 - Moderately Satisfactory; 5 - Satisfactory; 6 - Highly Satisfactory.
69
D. Changes in the conditions of rural poor compared to before SOLID
No Changes in the condition of the
poor
Satisfaction Level
(0 - 6) Reasons for Giving Score? Give an Example!
1 Conditions of social relations 5/5 Establishment of cooperation and mutual cooperation
Many SHG members are pro active in community activities
2 Economic conditions 5/5 The occurrence of the economic wheel of society because many SHG members are
successful
The emergence of entrepreneurial desires
3 Condition of human resources 5/5 More SHG members have increased knowledge because they often attend training
More emphasis on children's education to a higher level
Increased knowledge and skills of SHG members regarding agricultural techniques, and
marketing
4 Condition of natural and
environmental resources
4/4 SHG members know more about plant ecology and are more selective in using fertilizers
5 Mental condition 4/4 Able to solve group and family problems
More resistant to problems / difficulties
6 Food security conditions 5/5 Fulfillment of food sources at the village level
Note: 0 – No changes; 1 - Highly unsatisfactory; 2 - Unsatisfactory; 3 – Moderately Unsatisfactory; 4 - Moderately Satisfactory; 5 - Satisfactory; 6 - Highly Satisfactory.
To what extent does the project play a role in these changes? Please Describe.
- There is a change in mindset and community behavior (SHG)
- Increase the income and standard of living of SHG members
- There is an improvement in the household economy
- Development of village infrastructure
- There are good agricultural practices
- Increased production
- Open market access
- Increased knowledge of Human Resources
- The application of integrated technology
70
Appendix 6. Assessment of Project Effectivity
No Outcome Indicator Outcome Target Outcome Realization Score
1 Increased food security and income for beneficiary
households (HH)
In December 2018: (i) 33,600 households with an
increase in HH asset ownership index and (ii) a 40%
reduction in the prevalence of child malnutrition
26,906 families and a 56% reduction
in the prevalence of stunting; a 9%
reduction in the prevalence of
malnutrition;
9% increase in obesity
4 and 5
2 Livelihood improvements (both food security and
income) and for poverty reduction.
In December 2018: 80% of households enjoy at least
10 months of food sufficiency in 100% of the target
villages; and
80% (in 30 sample villages) 6 (SE)
As of December 2018: 75% of households enjoy a 30%
increase in monthly cash income from the sale of
excess related SOLID products.
Before SOLID: consumed on
average
After SOLID 40% sell TP; 23%
Horti
4 (CE)
3 Communities with increased HH food security
capacity and farming income planning.
2240 SHG were oriented or trained by PRA, S & L,
group management.
2.192 SHG 5 (E)
4 HH with more food and cash availability, both
available for household consumption and sales.
As of December 2018: 80% of HHs reported at least
20% increase in food availability for consumption RT
80% 6 (SE)
In December 2018, 50% of HH reported regular sales 89% 6 (SE)
71
No Outcome Indicator Outcome Target Outcome Realization Score
to markets for food crops and plants that could be sold
5 Increased household income from sales of 3
selected estate crops (coconut, cocoa & nutmeg)
As of December 2018, 50% of plantation crop
producers enjoy a 20% increase in monthly cash
income from the sale of estate crops related products.
52% experienced an increase in
production
5 (E)
6 Effective SOLID implementation and
monitoring
Active M & E data analysis and reporting by the
Management Program to improve results &
efficiency.
Annual report 5 (E)
Effectivity Assesment Category:
(6) Highly effective. This activity exceeds 20% or more of the stated objectives.
(5) Effective. This activity reaches all the objectives set.
(4) Moderately effective. This activity reaches most of the objectives set.
(3) Moderately uneffective. This activity reaches some of the objectives set.
(2) Uneffective. This activity does not fulfill most of the objectives set.
(1) Highly Uneffective. This activity does not fulfill any of the stated objectives.
72
Appendix 7. Potency for Sustainability
1. Summary of Sustainability Assessment
Main Indicator Answer Score
1) Political sustainability (commitment of the government and stakeholders); Possibly Sustain 6/4
2) Social sustainability (social support and acceptance, community commitment); Possibly Sustain 5/5
3) Sustainability of ownership (continued operation and maintenance); Potentially Sustain 4/5
4) Institutional sustainability (policy and institutional implications); Potentially Sustain 4/4
5) Economic and financial sustainability (household vulnerability / risk to external shocks and food vulnerability) Possibly Sustain 5/5
6) Environmental sustainability (positive / negative contribution, resistance to external environmental shocks). Possibly Sustain 5/5
7) Sustainability of technological applications (cultivation and post-harvest). Possibly Sustain 5/5
2. Factors Supporting Sustainability
Main Indicator Question Answer Score
Sustainability Assesment
This section includes an analysis of possibilities for and constraints on: (i) sustainability of SOLID activities during IFAD 's post-funding period; and (ii) resistance to
changes and impacts caused by these activities.
Main factors to be considered are:
Political sustainability
(government commitment,
stakeholders' interests);
To what extent are the commitments of the
central and regional governments, as well as
other stakeholders in supporting political
sustainability?
a. APBN Support?
b. APBD I Support?
Maluku: i) The existence of sustainability support through APBD2
funds, even though it is limited to monitoring and evaluation
activities, guidance and training; ii) There is a new 24 SHG
replication group; iii) From the regent assisted to purchase
products; iv) For the village level, there is BUMDES support for
product marketing; v) With the private sector (companies related to
marketing the products of coconut shell charcoal derivatives,
coconut fiber); vi) Village fund support for the construction of
6/4
73
Main Indicator Question Answer Score
c. APBD II Support?
d. Private support
farm roads and agricultural equipment; vii) ADD support for
making Kopra grounding equipment, purchasing / procuring seeds;
viii) Addition of farming land
North Maluku: i) APBD II support in the implementation of the
work plan, in North Halmahera; ii) APBD II support in the form of
providing solid outlets in Sula District; iii) APBD II Support
related to empowerment funds by establishing cooperation with the
Private Sector (PT Roas) in North Halmahera District.
Social sustainability (social
support and acceptance,
community commitment);
How far is social support and acceptance, and
community commitment in supporting social
sustainability?
a. Group activities
b. Federation Activities
c. Cooperative activities
d. Business center activities
Maluku: i) Sustainability of community commitment continues
because it is related to the food needs of farmers / groups; ii) Each
village group is considered capable of remembering that the
revolving fund continues to run well; iii) Federation moves groups
to produce and market information; iv) The existence of
cooperatives in 5 villages; v) Funds in the account will be used to
be rolled out in SHG; vi) Activities of business centers that are
already running; vii) The group will continue to remember SHG as
a business center driver.
North Maluku: i) SHG Activities: community involvement in
utilizing and sinpam lending KM; ii) Federation activities: utilizing
Federation assets in the form of food storage in production and
marketing activities; and iii) Cooperative Activities: all-round
cooperatives that involve social acceptance in the form of savings
and loans and basic food stalls which then affect the community
outside SOLID SHG.
5/5
1) Sustainability of ownership
(continued operation and
maintenance);
How far is the sustainability of ownership (O
& M) of assets that have been built and
facilitated by SOLID Activities?
a. The existence of Village Decree / SK for O
& M infrastructure
b. There is an organization responsible for O
Maluku: i) For the use of assets there has been a group agreement
made to use existing assets such as an agreement there must be a
rental fee for its use, so that if there is damage used the cost of
the rental fee; ii) Some rules have not been written so many are
not obedient; iii) For infrastructure is subject to a cost of storing
a certain amount and with a time limit; iv) Village regulations
4/5
74
Main Indicator Question Answer Score
& M
c. O & M physical activity
d. O & M funding
e. There are rules for the use of machinery
and equipment
f. The application of rules for the use of
machinery and equipment
must be made for use and maintenance for sustainability.
North Maluku: i) Efforts to realize Village Regulation / SK for
Infrastructure O & M; ii) Establishment of Business Center
management has been conducted; iii) Use of business center
supporting equipment; iv) Fee fees that have been agreed upon
by KM and business center management related to operational
maintenance of business centers; v) Rules agreed upon by SHG
and Federation business center management regarding the use of
machinery and equipment; and vi) Rules that have been agreed
upon by SHG and the Federation have been implemented related
to the use of machinery and equipment.
2) Institutional sustainability
(implications of policies and
institutions);
To what extent have institutional
sustainability been established and / or grown
in SOLID Activities?
a. There is a decree on the inauguration of
group organizations
b. The establishment of cooperative
institutions or formal institutions
(incorporated) at the village level
c. There is institutional support (agriculture
department, cooperative service, dinas
..............) to continue group assistance.
d. ................................
Maluku: i) There is still coordination with other agencies as
supporters to form and confirm solid independent groups into
farmer groups and ederation into gapoktan at the village level by
adjusting names adapted to simultanan applications so that they
can be spread on the ministry of agriculture; ii) Group
competencies become cooperatives and other groups become
Gapoktan; iii) There are a large number of independent groups
assisted by SOLID, some of which have been registered with the
Ministry of Agriculture as beneficiaries; iv) Some have also joined
the KRPL, especially female farmers (Elpaputih Village); and v)
There are plans to form cooperatives in 5 districts.
North Maluku: i) In the form of a decree from the business center
management by the Head of the Food Security; ii) Some regions
already exist like Kab. Central Halmahera and North Halmahera
District; and iii) Extension Worker companion by the Agriculture
Service, the formation of cooperatives for SHG who meet the
requirements, the health office is related to food and product
safety.
4/4
3) Economic and financial
sustainability (household
To what extent is economic sustainability and Maluku: i) The most dominant reserve food in Maluku is Sago / 5/5
75
Main Indicator Question Answer Score
vulnerability / risk to
external shocks and food
vulnerability);
financial sustainability with the possibility of
household vulnerability / risk to external
shocks and food vulnerability?
a. The existence of basic food reserves (rice)
or sago / cassava
b. The existence of complementary food
reserves (vegetables and livestock)
c. Financial reserves (savings) members in the
group
d. Support for capital access (village funds,
cooperatives, banking)
e. ..........................
cassava; ii) Sago / cassava food reserves are always available
considering the plants are environmentally friendly and resistant /
able to live in all weather conditions; iii) Groups that have large
financial reserves are likely to be sustainable because of
dependence on financial needs; iv) Access to capital 50% of
groups have financial reserves; v) Farmers before being formed
farmer groups already have SOLID commodities to strengthen
farmer agricultural activities; vi) Vulnerability of vegetables and
livestock has never occurred due to the availability of vegetables in
the village; vii) Capital of village funds in the form of assistance in
the form of goods such as seeds etc.; and viii) Banking capital
(KUR funds).
North Maluku: i) Availability of staple food reserves at the farm
level due to variations in commodities and different planting
schedules in each village; ii) The existence of vegetable
demonstration plots in each of Solid villages as complementary
food reserves and livestock maintenance which have an impact on
meeting needs at the SHG level; iii) 30% SHG has financial
reserves from savings and loan activities and routine SHG funds;
and iv) There is support from the private sector in the form of
banks and cooperatives in several districts so that they become
capital access support in the event of external shocks and food
vulnerability.
4) Environmental sustainability
(positive / negative
contribution, resistance to
external environmental
shocks).v
To what extent can environmental
sustainability be maintained?
1. Positive contribution: use of artificial
organic fertilizer, planting of annual crops,
minimum land processing
2. Negative contribution: use of fertilizers and
chemical medicines, ............ sloping land
management, catchment area settlements,
Maluku: i) Movable agricultural systems are now settled using
technology; ii) Vegetables have grown organic vegetables because
there is a demand for supermarkets asking directly to organic
vegetable farmers; iii) The existence of fruit trees such as
rambutan etc. to resist landslides; iv) The realization of appeals
regarding the use of chemical fertilizers for vegetables etc; v)
Disorders of pig pest plants that are still a problem; vi)
Applications from SL activities and cocoa skin demonstration plots
are used for compost; vii) There is mangrove planting to prevent
5/5
76
Main Indicator Question Answer Score
.......
3. Resilience to external environmental
shocks: natural disasters, landslides, road
construction,
4. ..........................
seawater shocks in the village; viii) Agriculture is stuck in the
community when SOLID enters agricultural activities again; ix)
Wisdom from the people who turn to mining goes back to
agricultural activities.
North Maluku. Positive Contributions: i) Reducing the use of
pesticides and herbicides; ii) Technical training at the farm level
related to the use of organic fertilizers in the form of compost and
bocation; iii) Re-plantation of plantations and rejuvenation for
plantation crops. Negative Contributions: i) The use of organic
fertilizers with volumes that make a lot of costs so inorganic can
be used as needed; ii) Utilizing land with a slope level on land that
is considered to have the potential to carry out cultivation activities
(Tering Teras) and optimize existing farming roads.
5) Sustainability of
technological applications
(cultivation and post-
harvest).
How far can the sustainability of technology
be aExtension Workeried by the community?
1. Cultivation: tillage, planting, plant
maintenance, harvesting
2. Post-harvest: drying, clearing, processing,
packaging, transportation, etc.
Maluku: i) 70% of applications that will be carried out by the
community considering the community follows the
recommendations from SOLID; ii) The community has been able
to apply SOLID assistance tools; iii) The community can feel the
good impact by using technology seen from post-harvest increases;
iv) Product yields are better in quality and quantity; v) Transport
facilitates the transportation of commodities for marketing.
North Maluku: i) Transfer of technology originated from the SL
and training in the application of agricultural technology so that it
affected the cropping patterns carried out by farmers / SHG; and ii)
To increase production and improve the quality of results on an
ongoing basis.
5/5
6) Proposals about post-
activity responsibilities.
Identify steps and actions
that need to be taken to
continue all or part of the
activity. This section also
1. What factors might affect the
sustainability of project implementation?
2. What steps and actions need to be taken
to continue all or part of the SOLID
activities?
Maluku: i) Regular return of capital / loan funds; ii) Government
support for allocating regional funds (central, provincial, district
and village); iii) Group activeness; iv) Management cadre; v) Post-
project group assistance ends; vi) There is capital access from
banking and cooperative funds; vii) Capacity building and support
of facilities and cooperative legal entities from related institutions
6/5
77
Main Indicator Question Answer Score
contains recommendations
for post-activity
responsibilities to improve
sustainability.
3. Who is responsible for post-SOLID
activities to improve sustainability?
(agriculture, fisheries, plantations, industrial and trade services,
cooperatives); viii) Responsible for regional government and
village government; ix) Ensure business centers to keep going.
North Maluku. Factors that influence Solid sustainability: i)
Continuous assistance; ii) Local and Private Government policy
support in the form of capital for SHG / farmers; iii) Building a
partnership network. What steps and actions need to be taken to
continue all or part of SOLID activity activities: i) APBD I and II
support to facilitate assistance and implementation of monitoring
and evaluation; ii) Capital support from the Regional Government
and Private Parties; iii) Continuing the partnership pattern; iv)
Responsible post: Central Government, Local Government (Food
Security Agency), Village Government (Village Fund)
Sustainability Assessment Category:
(6) Very likely to be sustainable. Most of the supporting factors are available which will ensure the impact of the activity is sustainable. Ownership is built, can be
accepted, and there are guaranteed funds needed.
(5) Possibly Sustainable. Very important supporting factors are available.
(4) Potentialy Sustainable. Several supporting factors are available, but additional support will be needed to ensure the results of sustainable activities.
(3) Possibly Unsustainable. Several supporting factors are available, but not enough to ensure the sustainability of results / impacts.
(2) Unsustainable. There are almost no supporting factors available.
(1) Very unlikely to be sustainable. None of the supporting factors is available and resistance to activities or lack of fund s effectively weakens the sustainability of the
results of activities.
78
Appendix 8. Assessment of Project Impact
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
Analyze changes promoted by
activity activities by observing
the following impact domains:
1) Physical assets. To reduce
poverty in a sustainable
manner, the poor must
obtain legal rights to
physical assets.
Have the poor obtained legal rights
to assets:
Land (yes)
Maluku: Most of the Land in SOLID Village owned by group members are: i)
Private Land; and ii) State / Village Property in accordance with Customary
Law (Borrowing Use).
North Maluku: Yes, because: i) Land is very important in the production
activities; ii) Status of borrowed land use by farmers for production within a
certain period of time which is guaranteed by the government at certain times
(North Halmahera and South Halmahera); iii) Own ownership land;
5/6
Water (yes) Maluku: In accordance with Law Article 33 Water and natural resources are
maintained by the State. SOLID Village in Maluku in general, SHG members
have water that is intended for daily needs and for agricultural production
activities.
North Maluku: Yes, because water is the main factor in agricultural
production besides it is used for household consumption (Central Halmahera,
West Halmahera, Sula, South Halmahera, North Halmahera except East
Halmahera).
6/4
Livestock (Yes) Maluku: Most SHG Members have Livestock (poultry) and Ruminant
Livestock (Big Livestock) and Property Rights are guaranteed by Customary
Law in Local Village / Country.
North Maluku: Yes, but less developed
6/5
Equipment, (yes) Maluku: Agricultural equipment owned by SHG and Federation has been
handed over.
North Maluku: Yes, enough to support production and processing activities,
but has not been fully utilized
6/5
Tools, (yes) Maluku: Agricultural tools owned by SHG and Federation has been handed
over.
North Maluku: Yes, it can support group activities and the Federation
5/5
Infrastructure, (yes) Maluku: The existing infrastructure in SOLID Village is used by members of
SOLID SHGs and local communities, especially Farmers' Roads, Drying
Floors, Asaran (Copra Drying House), Cocoa Drying House. Some
6/5
79
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
Federation / SHG / Business Center Infrastructure (Business Center
Buildings, Outlets, Federation Warehouses) Some have Grants and Loan
Letters which are expected to be processed in the future to have a Certificate
North Maluku: Yes, it is very supporting group activities and the Federation,
in terms of storage, product processing, production and post-harvest
businesses. However, there are some infrastructures whose land ownership
status is still problematic (all SOLID implementing districts).
Technology. (yes) Maluku: The technology applied by the SOLID village is in accordance with
the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) of the Group.
North Maluku: Yes, because in terms of adopting technology and application
in their respective fields.
6/5
2) Food Security. The main
elements of food security
are availability (production
and trade) of access to food
(income, market, and
prices), and stability of
access (storage and other
marketing preparations at
the household and local
level) related to other
impact domains.
Do communities have food security
in terms of:
food availability (production
and sales)
Maluku: Yes, Every SHG Member has Farming Activities to meet the
Availability of Family Food and can increase Revenue from Sales.
North Maluku: Yes, production is available to meet household food needs.
The Production Scale is still fluctuating and not continuous. Production
fluctuations affect the size of the scale of sales.
6/5
access to food (income,
market, and prices),
Maluku: Yes, Access to the Availability of Food in SOLID Village has been
sufficient which has an impact on Revenue.
North Maluku: Yes, income depends on the size of the products sold.
Limitations in accessing clear markets. The selling price of certain
commodities (cassava, banana, taro) in all districts is still below the expected
price standard
6/5
stability of access (storage and
marketing at the household
and local level) related to other
impact domains.
Maluku: Yes, the stability of food access in SOLID village is guaranteed
North Maluku: Yes, storage facilities have been utilized properly. The
Marketing Value Chain has reached the collecting level, the village, regency
and provincial traditional markets.
6/5
3) Environment and Shared
Ownership Resource Base.
The extent to which SOLID
contributes to the protection
or rehabilitation of natural
resources and the
environment (especially
agriculture) or the extent to
Assessment:
• Do activities contribute to the
protection or rehabilitation of
natural resources and the
environment (especially
agricultural resources) (YES)
Maluku: Yes, In accordance with customary norms in Maluku, there is the
term Sasi, which is a prohibition on taking plant products before harvest.
Pamali is a ban on a place that has results, Matakao is a prohibited sign on
plants for environmental protection and natural resources and does not do
land burning. Farmers in general have settled and have not moved. There is
no land burning when opening new land. Do not use chemical fertilizers that
can damage the soil and use critical land.
North Maluku: Yes, all technical provisions are in accordance with
5/5
80
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
which SOLID contributes to
the decline in natural
resources. This domain is
strongly related to
environmental aspects under
control or influenced by the
rural poor.
procedures, maintenance and control.
Do activities have an impact on the
decreasing of natural resources.
(not)
Maluku: Very positive impact
North Maluku: There is no decrease in natural resources.
5/5
4) Human Assets. Human
assets can be optimized by
improving skills or health;
and indirectly, using
improved health, education
and nutrition can gain
access to or improve the use
of other assets that can
increase income and
consumption.
Are there increasing skills of
group members? (yes)
Maluku: Through field school activities, demonstration plots and other
training: i) Members of the SHG have skills in processing the results and
utilization of SHG’s farm land; ii) Skills in managing the operation of
agricultural equipment; iii) Skills in organizational management and
bookkeeping; and iv) able to speak in public.
North Maluku: Yes: i) The existence of trainings that have been implemented
(technical and non-technical skills training); ii) utilization of agricultural
equipment; iii) Making organic fertilizer; iv) Processing of food crops,
horticulture and plantation products; v) Technical skills of cultivation; vi)
Pest and disease control; v) Skills for arranging business planning for SHG
(Member’s Business Plan, Group’s Business Plan); vi) Management and
organizational skills (bookkeeping, leadership, savings and loans,
networking).
5/5
Is there an increase in group
member education? (yes)
Maluku: Yes, improving education is assessed through: i) SHG family
members who have continued their tertiary education; ii) From dropping out
of school continuing school again; iii) illiteracy education; and iv)
Improvement of Agricultural Technical Education.
North Maluku: Yes, namely: i) There is knowledge about utilization of
agricultural equipment; ii) There is knowledge about Making organic
fertilizers; iii) There is knowledge about the processing of food crops,
horticulture and plantation products; iv) Knowledge of cultivation techniques:
v) Knowledge of pest and disease control; vi) Knowledge about compiling
business plans for SHG (Member’s Business Plan, Group’s Business Plan); v)
The existence of knowledge about Management and organizations
(bookkeeping, leadership, savings and loans, building networks).
5/5
Are there nutritional
improvements in group
members? (yes)
Maluku: Yes, Increased nutrition of group members through: i) There is an
increase in diversity and patterns of food consumption in SHG members; and
ii) Utilization of yard for nutrition improvement for SHG members.
6/5
81
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
North Maluku: Yes, There is an increase in nutrition with indications: i)
increased production besides being sold also consumed; ii) Changes in diet
If so, has increased skills,
education and nutrition
increased the income and
consumption of group
members? (Yes)
Maluku: i) There is a sale of production which becomes household income;
ii) Enough food availability; iii) The existence of food products that are
consumed by households
North Maluku: Yes: i) Increased family income; ii) The existence of member
savings; iii) Enough food availability; iv) Fulfillment of basic needs (clothing,
food and shelter)
6/6
5) 1) Social Capital and
Empowerment. In line with
IFAD's strategic objectives
and rights-based approach to
development, community
empowerment through the
building of collective
capacity of the rural poor
(social capital) is very
important in reducing
poverty, their voices heard,
and can influence policy
makers to gain access to
social services. If social
capital does not exist,
investment in the form of
human and physical assets
will fail to obtain
sustainable benefits.
Have activities strengthened
local organizations and non-
government organizations and
increased gender equality?
(yes)
Maluku: Yes, namely: i) Gender involvement in; ii) Being involved as head
of the family; iii) Women Self Help Groups (Women SHGs) and Mixed Self
Help Groups (Mixed SHGs); iv) Institutional structure of Federation Groups
and Business Centers; v) Decision making; and vi) Access to Equipments;
and vii) There is involvement in the Agriculture business (Production and
Marketing)
North Maluku: Yes, namely: i) Women are included in all organizational
activities; ii) The role of women can increase family income; iii) Women play
a role in making decisions; iv) Women become family heads; and v) Women
can do male work.
6/6
Has there been an increase in
the capacity of the poor to
exploit potential economic
opportunities and develop
stronger relationships with
markets and external partners?
(yes)
Maluku: Yes, have cooperated with both local partners and outside partners in
the framework of marketing commodities / products (VCO, Shredded fish,
peanuts, red onions, minlen oil, sangria beans, cakalang fish jerky, nutmeg
juice, sago plates and souvenirs etc.
North Maluku: Yes, namely: i) Use of RF funds for the development of
superior Village commodities in accordance with market demand; ii)
Cooperation with local and regional trading partners; iii) The role of the VIT
team to assist marketing, even though it is not yet optimal.
6/5
Are poor people more
empowered to interact better
(yes)
Maluku: Yes. That is, with this SOLID activity, people in solid villages can
interact in groups and with other communities in general. In the village of
SOLID, they have shared the knowledge they have acquired, among others: i)
There are already interactions in terms of facilities and infrastructure between
communities in solid villages and non solid village; ii) Share experiences of
activities and knowledge related to agriculture and savings and loans; and iii)
Attending exhibition exhibitions in the Regency which included SHG
members to promote their products and processed products.
6/5
82
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
North Maluku: Yes. Namely: i) Supported by capital; ii) Cooperation between
group members and between groups is good; iii) The message delivery
structure can be well received
Can poor people share
knowledge with those who
hold social authority? (yes)
Maluku: Yes. SHG members share knowledge with existing institutions in the
village: PKK, BUMDES, Village Government, Religious Institutions,
Cooperatives, and Educational Institutions
North Maluku: Yes. Communities can play an active role in village strategic
planning decisions
6/5
Can poor people negotiate
more effectively to improve
their lives? (yes)
Maluku: Proposal to District Government and Village Government; i) District
Government Employees is required to buy SOLID SHG product; ii) Fertilizer
Assistance (Urea, TSP, KCL and organic fertilizer); iii) Seed and Seedling;
iv) Equipment's assistance; and v) Business capital assistance. Building a
Product Network / Market Partner of SHG: PT. Panca Karya, Supermarkets,
Local Government, Retailers, and Wholesalers
North Maluku: Yes, Cooperation in the field of farming, marketing and
processing of products
6/5
6) Agricultural Productivity.
Agricultural productivity is
measured in terms of: i)
cropping patterns (eg, shifts
from subsistence agriculture
to crop production to trade,
have a significant impact on
household income and food
security; ii) increase in the
number of planting seasons
or types of crops (can
reduce food insecurity and
increase access to various
types of nutrition); iii) yield
(compared to production
facilities).
Are there increases in
agricultural productivity
measured in terms of cropping
patterns (eg, shifts from
subsistence agriculture to crop
production for trade, (yes)
Maluku: Yes. Traditional farming patterns to modern agriculture such as: i)
By using beds and mounds; ii) Planting distance; iii) Using appropriate
technology (fertilizers, superior seeds and equipment).
North Maluku: Yes. Progress from subsistence farming patterns to sales,
through: i) Increased planting area; ii) Application of conventional
agricultural technology to modern agriculture; iii) Intercropping and rotation
of plants. Increased production has an effect on increasing income.
6/6
Is there an increase in the
number of planting seasons or
types of plants (can reduce
food insecurity and increase
access to various types of
nutrition); (yes)
Maluku: Yes. Previously SHG members only planted one type of plant, now
they have planted various types of plants using intercropping patterns.
North Maluku: Yes. With the increase in the number of planting seasons it
influences the increase in production so as to reduce food insecurity or
increase the crop index.
6/5
Is there an increase in yield
(compared to production
facilities), (yes)
Maluku: Yes. Equipment and production assistance but not comparable with
the increase in agricultural production; vii) North Maluku:
North Maluku: Yes. Use of superior seeds, integrated pest control and
fertilizer use
5/5
Are aggregate changes to
agricultural productivity
Maluku: Yes. With the knowledge and skills acquired by SHG members can 5/6
83
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
achieved by poorer farmers
than all other farm
households? (yes)
have an impact on aquaculture carried out mainly in increasing production
and productivity.
North Maluku: Yes. Based on AOS data, production data and monev data
7) Institution and Services.
Includes changes that occur
in sector and national
policies that affect the rural
poor, 'rules of the game',
namely laws, laws, and
regulations that are able to
create a conducive
environment for economic
and social activities. The
level of decentralization is
also a relevant thing that
allows decision making to
take place at the local level.
Are there 'game rules', namely
laws, constitutions, and regulations
that are able to create a conducive
environment for economic and
social activities. (yes)
Maluku: Yes.
North Maluku: Yes. Refer to general guidelines and guidelines for
implementing activities
5/5
Is there a decentralization policy
that allows decision making to take
place at the local level (yes / no)
Delegation of authority through Provincial and District management 5/5
Are there special 'rules of the game'
that affect SOLID activities, such
as:
• land rights (yes)
• credit rules, (no)
• interest rates based on law, (no)
• marketing rules, (Yes)
• cooperative law, (no)
• rules on user association, (Yes)
• price / subsidy for production
facilities and products / products
(yes / no).
Most of the land in SOLID Village is owned by members of the Group, and
some are owned by the Village, in accordance with the Village / State
Customary Law which is called Dusun / Petuanan (hamlet), as well as some
borrowed land. There are no credit rules, except interest rates based on law.
The rules that affect the marketing are PIRT, Badan POM and HALAL (East
Seram, Central Maluku, Buru). The West Seram and South Buru districts are
still in the process of managing. Prices / subsidies for production facilities and
products refer to the SOLID Implementation Guidelines. Yes, the price of
production facilities, especially fertilizers and seeds, is in accordance with the
subsidized price.
North Maluku: Yes.
5/5
Are there traditional and social
activities that limit the similarity of
access to the benefits of activities,
(yes / no)
No 5/5
Are there divisions between thribes
and ethnic groups (yes / no)
No 5/5
Are there social restrictions on
women's activities, (yes / no)
No 5/5
Are there traditional allocations
based on gender of village task
implementers and income from
No -
84
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
various types of plants and
livestock. (Yes No)
8) Financial Assets. To what
extent activities contribute
to increasing financial
resources and securing
financial services for the
poor.
What has been done by SOLID in
contributing to improving financial
resources and securing financial
services for the poor:
1) Increased financial resources
based on poor rural households
and individuals when
agricultural productivity
increases or income generating
activities have excess income,
which is saved in groups, (yes)
Maluku: Yes. There is an increase in income that is intended for
consumption, education, health, social, and saving
North Maluku: Yes. The participation of groups in saving exists even in small
amounts.
6/4
2) Safeguarding financial
services for the rural poor by
working through and
improving the institutional
framework that can provide
these services, such as the
formation of cooperatives (yes
/ no)
Maluku: Yes. With the availability of general group funds, it can be used for
initial funding for business entities / cooperatives.
North Maluku: Yes. Yes, cooperatives have been formed in Central
Halmahera (7 Cooperatives) and North Halmahera (1 Cooperative) and other
districts in the process of preparing for the formation of cooperatives.
6/5
9) Markets. Markets have an
important role in reducing
rural poverty because
having physical access to
markets (lines and means of
transportation) and
information about goods and
prices often affects the
ability of poor rural people
to make decisions about
marketing their products
(time of sale, determination
price, storage) to obtain fair
or profitable market prices.
What role does SOLID play in
helping poor people make
decisions about marketing their
products (sales time, prices,
storage) so as to obtain fair or
favorable market prices?
Maluku: Yes. The role of solid activities in village development with
activities supported by SOLID funds, among others;
North Maluku: Yes.
5/5
1) Construction of village roads,
(yes / no)
Maluku: None. Self-supporting SOLID member in the construction of Village
Road which is funded by village funds
North Maluku: None
-
2) Farming road construction for
/ agricultural production
centers, (yes / no)
Facilitate access from home to the farm through the construction of farm
roads.
North Maluku: None
6/-
3) Transportation equipment,
(yes / no)
As a means of transporting agricultural products of SHG members, SOLID
procured 3-wheeled vehicles and Long Boats. But community wants car.
5/6
85
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
North Maluku: Yes. Facilitate access to production and reduce transport
costs, availability of 3-wheeled vehicles, cars (sula) and long boats
4) Information about goods and
prices, (yes / no)
Information about prices is obtained from the VIT TEAM (SOLID Village
Implementation Team)
North Maluku: Yes. Sources of information obtained, namely: VIT Team
(marketing cadres), VC Consultants Province, Offce VC provinces, Offc
District VCs and Federations
5/5
10) Factors affecting the
activity capacity. Identify
and analyze the factors that
influence the capacity of
activities in achieving the
expected results (in terms
of output, goals or
impacts), then discuss the
extent to which the actual
results deviate from the
intended goals and the
reasons for those
differences.
Factors that influence the capacity
of activities to achieve the
expected results (in terms of
output, purpose or impact):
Competence
Maluku: Yes. Competence in agricultural counseling / assistance and
financial management competencies.
6/5
Politic Maluku: Yes. Local government support for the sustainability of solid
activities in each district.
North Maluku: Yes. The management of SOLID activities is influenced by
budgetary political policies (Ministry of Finance, IFAD, managers of
activities and Bank of Indonesia), as well as stakeholders of provincial,
district, private, NGO and general public governments.
6/5
Concern North Maluku: Yes. There has been a change in timeliness and a better work
ethic
6/5
Responsibility Maluku: Yes. All implementing teams from the National, Province, district,
NGOs and consultants.
North Maluku: Yes Administrative responsibility has been carried out but
there are still shortcomings
5/5
Caracter Maluku: Yes. Character changes there is cooperation in sharing, mutual
understanding, please help in a more positive direction.
North Maluku: Yes There has been a change in behavior and attitude towards
a better direction
5/5
Discipline Maluku: Yes. Discipline regarding attendance, group meetings and discipline
in carrying out the duties and responsibilities of each.
North Maluku: Yes There has been a change in timeliness and a better work
ethic
6/5
Influence of superiors Maluku: Yes. The responsibility of the supervisor for the overall
implementation of SOLID activities
6/5
86
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
North Maluku: Yes. Overall, the targeting of beneficiaries has been
determined according to the General Guidelines, however, several cases are
found that do not fit the poor and very poor criteria.
To what extent do actual results
deviate from the set targets?
(Discussion)
What are the reasons for this
deviation? (discussion).
Maluku: In general, it is in accordance with the rules, but in the
implementation of the SOLID group formation process there are still cases of
irregularities to meet the number of group members, because the Poor HH in
the local Village is not sufficient
North Maluku: Reasons: i) The number of poor and very poor in the village
does not reach the target; and ii) Village government intervention on the
determination of beneficiaries.
6/5
What stories of SOLID success
and failure are useful for learning
for future projects and for
identifying constraints?
Maluku: Success: i) Change in behavior / attitude; ii) Increased knowledge
and skills; iii) Enhancing organizational management and bookkeeping
capabilities; iv) Increased food security; v) Increased production; and vi)
Increased income (education, health, housing). Challenges: i) RF and MF
revolving refund rates have not been maximized; ii) Utilization of equipment
that is not optimal.
North Maluku. Success of Component 1: i) Group capacity building; ii)
Capacity building (ability to compile Member’s Production Plan and Group’s
Production Plan); iii) Capacity building (bookkeeping management); iv)
Increased independence; v) Leadership regeneration (rotating leadership); vi)
Can interact with outsiders. Challenges: i) Level of awareness in making loan
repayments.
Success of Component 2: i) Increased production; ii) Can innovate with
technology; iii) Increased farmer income; iv) Improved processing of results;
v) Can do equipment maintenance; vi) Can operate Equipment. Failure: puso
and natural disasters
6/5
11) Changes in policy and
institutional environment.
Analyze changes in the
policies and environment of
North Maluku. The
elements during the
implementation of the
activities, including the
What are the changes in policy
and institutional environment
during the implementation of the
activities that have been carried
out?
Maluku: i) It is not permitted in Phase I to provide equipment (Equipment);
ii) In Phase II the business activities of the Livestock Group are eliminated;
iii) The number of SOLID target villages from the planning of 150 villages to
104 villages on the grounds that the number of poor households is
insufficient; iv) MF Federation Funds can and can not be obtained; and v)
Establishment of business centers
North Maluku. Changes include: i) Changes in phase I of 2011 to 2014 to
phase II of 2015 to 2018; ii) Changes in management of infrastructure
5/6
87
Indicator Impact Indicator Narrative Answers Impact Score
impact of the proposed
changes in activities within
the institutional framework
for the rural poor.
infrastructure funds from the Federation to each independent group; and iii)
Recommended SOLID SHG is integrated with farmer groups in the village
What are the impacts of the
proposed changes in these
activities within the institutional
framework for the rural poor?
Maluku: Federation Institutions do not run maximally
North Maluku. Independent groups are more effective in managing activities
related to the management of production and infrastructure
5/6
12) Other factors. Explain other
factors beyond the control
of the activity manager that
affect the implementation
of activities (such as natural
disasters, civil chaos, armed
conflict, etc.).
What are the other factors beyond
the control of the activity manager
that affect the implementation of
activities (such as natural
disasters, conflicts, pressure of
policy makers, etc.)?
Maluku: i) Natural disasters (floods and droughts); ii) Political factors affect
the number of group members; and iii) Government policies
North Maluku: i) Natural disasters (drought); ii) Change in nomenclature; iii)
Changes in SOLID management implementers; and iv) Change of mentoring
(Extension Workers, Village Facilitators and Experts)
5/6
Impact Assessment Category:
(6) Large impact. This program produced a large positive change in the welfare of the rural poor in accordance with the objec tives of the program.
(5) Substantial impact. This program resulted in substantial changes in the livelihoods of the rural poor, although a higher impact could have been generated if
conditions were better, the external influences of the program supported.
(4) Simple impact. This program has a modest impact on the livelihoods of the rural poor.
(3) Small impact. This program only produces marginal changes in the environment of the rural poor.
(2) Neglected impacts. This program does not produce changes in the livelihoods and environmental conditions of the rural poor.
(1) Negative impact. This program resulted in negative changes in livelihoods and the environment of the rural poor.
88
Appendix 9. Assessment of Project Partners
Partner Performance
Indicators
Question Answer Satisfaction
IFAD. An assessment of the
actions taken to make
adjustments to activities in
order to respond to
weaknesses in the initial
design or changes to the
implementation environment
(policies, institutions, and
natural disaster caused by
human).
1) What actions have been taken by IFAD to
make adjustments to SOLID activities in order
to respond to weaknesses in the initial design
or changes in the implementation environment
(policy, institutions, and natural disaster
caused by human)?
Changes to the Components of Activities from 5 Components to 4
Components.
There are changes in budgeting from infrastructure to empowerment
programs and MF and RF financing
The initial design of 30 villages changes to 20 villages per district
Change in management organization structure
5/5
2) How is IFAD include the participation of
the rural poor in the design of the action?
Conduct Village PRA
The program target involves poor households in activities
5/5
3) What is the relevance and timeliness of
giving guidance and solutions (implementation
support mission)?
Response to NOL is often late
Aide memoire from the results of the visit was supervised for too long
Elaborate Loan Revision Agreement
4/5
4) What is the flexibility of IFAD in dealing
with changes in the SOLID activity
environment, including the loan agreement?
Quite flexible, adjusting to conditions in the field such as changes in the
budget from infrastructure to RF. Generally IFAD recommendations can be
implemented and on time
5/5
How is the firmness and timeliness in IFAD is quite firm 5/5
89
Partner Performance
Indicators
Question Answer Satisfaction
implementing rules / policies?
How is the responsibility of IFAD in carrying
out its role (including reviewing fiduciary
aspects)
Maluku: IFAD routinely supervises including in reviewing fiduciary
aspects (starting from National, Province and District)
North Maluku: There are many opportunities to increase knowledge
through workshops, comparative studies, training events at the district,
provincial and national levels
5/5
How does IFAD delegate its authority? The Supervision Team often changes consultants, except after the MTR 5/5
What learning can be taken from this role and
collaboration with IFAD?
There are many opportunities to increase knowledge through workshops,
comparative studies, training events at the district, provincial and central
levels
There is infrastructure development at the village level
More prioritizing the empowerment of the poor before other facilitation is
given
6/5
Knowledge transfer (CIAT).
Providing support for
training and mentoring for
improving value chains
based on the development of
tubers and nutrition
commodities.
What is the role of CIAT in increasing people's
understanding of increasing economic value
and nutrition of tubers products?
The existence of FBS (Farmer Business School) to improve understanding
and knowledge of nutrition, value chains and value-added tubers.
There is a demonstration plot / field practice at the farm level
Strengthening training at the facilitator level.
5/5
What is the role of CIAT in increasing the
productivity of community tuber products?
The formation of 5 groups related to processing tubers and local food, with
each group having at least 20-25 people
Increased cultivation of tubers
5/5
90
Partner Performance
Indicators
Question Answer Satisfaction
Borrower. Giving responses
related to Borrower's
contribution to design
activities, compliance with
agreements in loan
agreements and follow-up on
recommendations from
supervision missions and
implementation support
missions.
To what extent is the Borrower's contribution
(Food Security Agency) to the design of
SOLID activities?
To what extent is compliance with the
agreement in the loan agreement?
To what extent is the follow-up on
recommendations from the supervision
mission and implementation support mission?
To what extent do you provide matching
funds?
The extent to which government specific
policies can improve the implementation of
activities and the achievement of results.
To what extent can specific government
policies hinder the implementation of activities
and the achievement of results?
Service Provider.
Assessment of service
providers contracted by
activities. These service
providers can include:
trainers / trainers, business
development service
providers, participating
financial institutions, private
contractors or other
To what extent is the role of the trainer? Support the Achievement of Program Output 5
To what extent is the role of business
development service providers?
There is Cooperation with the Office of Industry in Licensing (Central
Maluku)
Barista plays an important role in the development of VCO oil very
satisfying (West Seram)
There are activities carried out by the health office for product certification
including involving BPOM for UMKM and SOLID
5
To what extent do the financial institutions SHG gets around 20-25 million People's Business Credit From Bank BRI 4
91
Partner Performance
Indicators
Question Answer Satisfaction
government institutions. participate? (East Seram)
SHG gets around 20-25 million People's Business Credit From Bank Artha
Graha (West Seram)
To what extent is the role of the private sector
or other government institutions?
Cooperation with middlemen / sago collectors related to the marketing of
sago plates in the Surabaya domestic market (Geser Island, East Seram)
The existence of cooperation with PT Trasindo Karya Mekar in Coconut
Commodities (Central Maluku)
There is cooperation with livestock entrepreneurs for the supply of animal
feed (Hatusua village, West Seram)
There is Local Gov Budget support for the SOLID replication program in
East Seram district
5
How are the service providers in the timely
delivery of services, value for money, and
compliance with schedules and contracts?
There is no contract with middlemen but the relationship is based on mutual
trust
There are contracts, consequences and must be on time with PT Trasindo
There is a contract and must be on time, but SHG is overwhelmed because
it cannot reach the target
DIPA for East Seram District Budget for SOLID replication is already
underway
4
What is the opinion of the community as
beneficiaries (end-user activities) for the
service provider?
There is insecurity in selling the produce of a farmer's commodity in order
to quickly get money.
There is a difference in the determination of commodity prices
4
a. Activity Manager.
Assessment of the
organization and
management of activities,
What is the response of the SOLID activity
manager to any changes in design and policy?
Accept and implement design changes and policies implemented by the
Center
5
What is the feasibility of an MIS (Management
Information System) activity (suitability of the
Tiered Information System from district to Province to the Center of Six 5
92
Partner Performance
Indicators
Question Answer Satisfaction
and the performance of the
implementing party, which
includes the activity
manager's response to
changes and feasibility of
SOLID MIS activities (with
special reference to the
suitability of the M & E
system in supporting
planning and reporting).
M & E system in supporting planning and
reporting)?
Monthly Reports, Dashboards, Quarterly Reports and Annual Reports.
Does the appointment of staff activities match
their expertise or expertise needed?
Appointment of staff are in accordance with the requirements set out in the
decree and signed by the Budget Authority
5
To what extent are staff turnover rates carried
out?
Staff changes occur due to promotion 5
How is the commitment and effectiveness of
staff in carrying out their main tasks and
functions?
Committed in carrying out the duties according to their duties 5
Have all staff developed enough capacity? Enough with the workshop and ToT in the Field
Staff Capacity Building by SOLID Program through English language
training, IT, Gender CD workshops, integrated agriculture, value chains in
central and Papua and in Maluku
5
What is the function of the activity manager in
carrying out the functions of planning,
monitoring, evaluation and reporting?
Following the Implementation Guidelines, AWPB, Operational Guidelines
for Activities, Dashboard.
93
Appendix 10. Innovation, Replication and Upscaling
Description Questionnaire Answer Satisfaction
1) Briefly discuss innovative features
introduced by SOLID activities, which
include strategies & approaches,
technical solutions and leadership /
managerial aspects.
What innovative features have been
introduced by SOLID activities?:
1. strategies & approaches
(participation, decentralization,
involvement of other agencies, NGOs
and the private sector, commodities,
infrastructure and facilities, groups, ...)
2. Technical solutions (assistance of
superior seeds / seeds, revolving funds,
tools and agricultural machinery,
............)
3. Leadership / managerial aspects
(management training, workshops,
coordination meetings, comparative
studies, supervision visits, ........)
Maluku:
1. Program support either mentoring, facilities and
infrastructure, as well as skills have been provided in the
SOLID program so that it adds to the experience in the
field directly or indirectly
2. SOLID Program Strategies are centralized starting
from the center to the regions, Participatory where the
implementation of activities involves several elements
including technical agencies related to NGOs and the
Private Sector
3. In the selection of commodities the business carried out
by SHG members is the main commodity of the target
village so that SHG members are more easily managing
the commodity that they cultivate
4. Group facilities and infrastructure built based on the
needs of each village
5. Technical solutions related to innovations carried out
by SOLID are to use superior seeds / seedlings in the
implementation of the SL demonstration plot and
assistance to independent groups by EXTENSION
WORKER including the use of agricultural equipment
and machinery facilities provided by SOLID
6. Increased leadership / managerial capacity carried out
in the form of training and workshops for management of
EXTENSION WORKER, VF and SHG
5/5
94
Description Questionnaire Answer Satisfaction
North Maluku:
The implementation of SOLID activities was
decentralized to provinces and districts and to introduce
innovations designed in SOLID activities carried out
strategies and approaches in a participatory manner which
began in the process of determining targe HH, the
formation of community institutions by involving the role
of EXTENSION WORKER, NGOs and District Experts
in assisting communities as SOLID management partners
, the role of technical services in introducing
technological innovation, infrastructure development
involving the community with assistance from the district
technical office.
1) Explain the extent to which
innovation is included in the design of
the activity, how well it is used, and
what are the results.
To what extent are innovations
included in design activities: Appraisal,
MTR and Supervision Missions?
How well it is used: i) How big is it
aExtension Workeried ?; and what are
the deviations?
What are the results: i) Are goals and
goals achieved ?; and How big is the
goal and goal not achieved?
Maluku:
1. Preparation of appraisal design is done through
identification of potential empowerment innovations,
technical production handling post-harvest and marketing
involves the role of the community as project design
material
2. MTR is prepared based on recommendations from
supervision results which are then disseminated to
beneficiary groups
3. The supervision mission provides several
recommendations based on the results of evaluations in the
field that need to be followed up at both the management
and group levels in order to improve performance
North Maluku:
4. Application of innovations formulated in design, MTR
and recommendations The supervision team has not been
fully implemented even though recommended innovation
5/5
95
Description Questionnaire Answer Satisfaction
innovations were introduced to the community through
meetings, visits, pilot training in group farms 80%.
Deviations that occur in the implementation of innovation
are recommended because awareness of the understanding
and influence of traditional culture that still occurs is
approximately 30%, among others: the intensity of
mentoring whose frequency is not maximal in guarding the
transfer of innovation, frequent shifts in production time
due to prolonged dry season, flooding due to drainage
insufficient.
5. In achieving the goal of realizing household resilience it
is estimated that 80% of the adequacy of houses and
communities is fulfilled, the development of employment
opportunities from various types of businesses that
introduce new innovation, expansion of land in aExtension
Workerying new technical innovations of vegetables, corn,
peanuts.
1) Identify each process carried out to
promote innovation to the target
groups.
What is done to promote innovation to
target groups:
Maluku: i) Conduct training - training, SL, demonstration
plots, comparative studies, internships, workshops,
exhibitions; and ii) Promotion through bulletins, leaflets,
brochures, booklets, documentaries
North Maluku: What is done in promoting innovation is the
aspect of strengthening institutional capacity through
mentoring the ability to organize, bookkeeping, savings
and loans; promotion of technical innovations in
production and post-harvest handling is carried out through
demonstration plots, SL, technical training, Equipment use,
warehouse management, distribution of brochures, leaflets,
comparative studies and workshops, technical film
screenings. To promote post-harvest innovation, post-
harvest training for making VCO oil, making tomato sauce,
6/5
96
Description Questionnaire Answer Satisfaction
chili, rice mill, sago flour processing etc.
1) Emphasize the existence of specific
activities or approaches that can be
replicated and recommended strategies
for up-scaling (eg, geographical area,
phasing, etc.)
What specific activities or approaches
can be replicated?
• Participation
• Facilitation
• Commitment
• Concern
Maluku:
1. Participatory approach (PRA), savings and loan
activities
2. Cultivation, processing and marketing of results
3. The commitment of the district government to support
the sustainability of SOLID activities
4. Support of all elements in this case the government and
the village, the private sector and the community in
facilitating the sustainability of SOLID activities
North Maluku:
5. Replicated activities include: savings and loan activities
institutionalized by groups and followed by other groups,
with participatory assistance, the Federation movement
organizes facilitation in processing and marketing of VCO
production, mentoring and demonstrations in community
plantations, processing / roasting peanuts, bean cultivation
technology , tubers, pest control by infusion through
coconut roots, pruning of nutmeg branches, cleanliness of
the garden source of cacao fruit diseases. diversification
training on the use of coconuts, technical breaking fruit
into copra, coconut shell charcoal, cacao fermentation.
5/6
What strategies are recommended for
up-scaling?
• Replication of other regions
Phasing is consistent between the
empowerment process and physical and
financial assistance
Maluku: i) SOLID activity replication strategy for non
SOLID villages; and ii) Building partnerships with both
relevant technical agencies and the private sector in order
to increase business
North Maluku:
Expansion / upscaling strategies are limited to expansion of
5/5
97
Description Questionnaire Answer Satisfaction
individual crop land (corn, peanuts, vegetables) with
Equipment utilization. pioneering to promote success to get
the support and commitment of the district government,
among others, the development of VCO-based soap
between entrepreneurs and the community by building
partnership commitment, commitment to use local products
(rice, prioritizing consumption of local cooking oil
products by seeking facilitation of IPRT permits, halal
commodity certificates Strive for regional governments to
support the continuation of SOLID village assistance with
production access roads and other physical buildings.the
support of the Regional Budget, trying to facilitate
Satisfaction Level: 1 – Very Unsatisfactory; 2 – Unsatisfactory; 3 – Moderately Unsatisfactory; 4 – Moderately Satisfactory; 5 – Satisfactory; 6 – Very Satisfactory.
98
Appendix 11. Local Budget Contribution
No District Year Amount
(IDR) Utilization
1 Buru
2011 - -
2012 423,150,000 Mentoring/Assistance
2013 50,000,000 Mentoring/Assistance
2014 - -
2015 - -
2016 250,000,000 Mentoring/Assistance
2017 - -
2018 - -
2 South Buru
2011 150,000,000 Mentoring/Assistance
2012 300,000,000 Assistance for SOLID Activity
2013 300,000,000 Assistance for SOLID Activity
2014 250,000,000 Monev
2015 300,000,000 Monev
2016 250,000,000 Monev
2017
1018 200,000,000 Monev
3 Centra Maluku
2011 800,000,000
Mentoring/Assistance and operational
2012 100,000,000
2013 150,000,000
2014 250,000,000
2015 150,000,000
2016 300,000,000 Monev, operational cost, assistance
2017 107,216,500 Monev, operational cost, assistance
2018 100,000,000 Monev, operational cost, assistance
4 West Seram
2011 199,000,000 Consultation and Coordination
2012 199,450,600 Consultation and Coordination
2013 200,000,000 Consultation and Coordination
2014 160,284,000 Consultation and Coordination
2015 113,962,000 Coordination and Monev
2016 116,702,000 Consultation and Monev
2017 154,499,000 Consultation and Monev
2018 - -
5 East Seram 2011 196,630,000 Assistance and Coordination
99
No District Year Amount
(IDR) Utilization
2012 338,796,800 Assistance and Coordination
2013 233,100,000 Assistance and Coordination
2014 - -
2015 - -
2016 300,000,000 Assistance and Coordination
2017 - -
2018 5,225,090,000 Replication in 8 location in Amarsekaru
Village, Pulau Gorom
6 Maluku Province
2011 200,000,000 Coordination and Monev
2012 200,000,000 Coordination and Monev
2013 200,000,000 Coordination and Monev
2014 -
2015 -
2016 - -
2017 - -
2018 - -
TOTAL
12,467,880,900
7 West Halmahera
2011 - -
2012 67,850,000 Consultation and Coordination
2013 45,000,000 Consultation and Coordination
2014 30,000,000 Operational cost
2015 30,000,000 Monitoring
2016 30,000,000 Monitoring
2017 - -
2018
8 South Halmahera
2011 - -
2012 - -
2013 55,000,000 Consultation and Coordination
2014 150,000,000 Promosi, Consultation and Coordination
2015 67,000,000 Monev, coordination and operational
cost
2016 - -
2017 - -
100
No District Year Amount
(IDR) Utilization
2018 - -
9 Central
Halmahera
2011 150,000,000 Monitoring
2012 75,000,000 Monitoring
2013 100,000,000 Monitoring
2014 150,000,000 Monitoring
2015 50,000,000 Monitoring
2016 150,000,000 Monitoring
2017 100,000,000 Monitoring
2018 100,000,000 Monitoring
10 East Halmahera
2011 216,000,000 Field study
2012 95,000,000 Training on agriculture processing and
marketing
2013 150,000,000 Monev and data collection
2014 194,000,000 Operational cost
2015 175,000,000 Technical training for SHGs
2016 140,000,000 Monitoring and field study
2017 130,000,000 Monitoring and reporting
2018 50,000,000 Monitoring and reporting
11 North Halmahera
2011 200,000,000 Operational cost
2012 300,000,000 Operational cost
2013 352,000,000 Operational cost
2014 352,000,000 Operational cost
2015 252,600,000 Operational cost
2016 253,320,000 Operational cost
2017 397,713,000 Monev and operational cost
2018 125,300,000 Field study
12 Sula Island
2011 200,000,000 Consultation, coordination, Monev
2012 85,000,000 Consultation, coordination, Monev
2013 85,000,000 Consultation, coordination, Monev
2014 30,000,000 Consultation, coordination, Monev
2015 - -
2016 - -
2017 - -
101
No District Year Amount
(IDR) Utilization
2018 - -
7 Provinsi Malut
2011 - -
2012 300,000,000 Operational cost
2013 250,000,000 Operational cost
2014 250,000,000 Operational cost
2015 - -
2016 - -
2017 - -
2018 - -
Sub TOTAL
5,932,783,000
TOTAL 18.400.663.900
102
Appendix 12. Summary of Lesson Learned
No Questionnaire
1. Coordinator and PPK 2. CD Gender Expert &
Officer
3. Value Chain Expert &
Officer
4. Extension Workers
1 If we can carry
out this activity
again, for
example To
replicate it, what
will we do
differently?
What can we do
better? What
advice can we
give to other
program?
Intensive training and mentoring in
strengthening KM, Federation and SB
institutions especially in financial
management
The implementation of MF is better in
the form of loans
Replicate to another village
Good management cooperation,
mentoring and reporting of faculties,
Extension Worker and Experts
Enhancing community institutional
strengthening (Federation and VIT)
Correct identification in accordance
with the needs and needs of SHG for
Equipment assistance and processing,
so that it is not misdirected and can be
used properly
Group members are a mixture of
established farmers and poor farmers
with a composition of 20: 80%
To replicate SOLID, a comprehensive
study is needed, with a focus on
increasing production and marketing
activities.
Make a better RENSTRA so that the
target is reached
Assistance is in line with the potential
of the target village
Follow up on every decision that has
been formulated together
Mentoring is quite one source, with
appropriate incentives and the right
recruitment system
Referring to the results of the PRA, the
assistance was more intense by all
implementers
Monitoring and evaluation by quarterly
facilitators to solve problems /
obstacles
Increased knowledge and skills in
agricultural cultivation, processing and
marketing, including the use of
Equipment
There are not too many group
members, so that stimulant funds are
large enough for businesses
The management of savings and loans
must be more stringent and selective,
Mapping marketing partners for SHG,
encourages LG involvement in funding
and policy
It must be on target both the village to
the SHG level and increase the budget,
increase the added value and expand the
partnership network, maximize
assistance, a maximum of 3 groups per
village, assistance is sufficiently carried
out by 3 elements, namely manager,
Extension Worker and Experts
Applyactivities according to technical
guidelines
Mentoring continues to be carried out
intensively to ensure there are group
activities both in the cultivation of
food crops and horticulture,
plantations, post-harvest training, and
bookkeeping of SHG
PRA results must be a reference for
activities, activating non-individual
SHG-based production activities
Loan funds like RF cannot exist
Strengthen business units in each
center
2 What is SOLID design does not include the What is ignored in design: The design is less connected to the field Design changes must be minimized,
103
No Questionnaire
1. Coordinator and PPK 2. CD Gender Expert &
Officer
3. Value Chain Expert &
Officer
4. Extension Workers
neglected in
design? What
alternative
strategies can be
used?
loan rules in SHG in detail, for
example, there is a loan guarantee so
that members feel bound and can
easily repay the loan
Matters that need to be considered in
the sustainability strategy: 1.
Identification of the target village, 2.
Criteria for group formation, 3.
Competency of facilitating staff, 4.
The number of groups in the village is
limited, 5. The target of the activity is
focused on one component of
activities, for example production
activities or cultivation and at the
same time provide market access
Design of loan arrangements that are
not strictly regulated
understanding the behavior of local
farmers, less binding rules in savings
and loan management and changing
designs, planting / emphasizing
understanding of social capital for
implementers and program objectives
Strategy: evaluation of each activity
that has been carried out
Assistance, training, SL and
demonstration plot
The coordination line already exists
and is clear, in implementation it has
not been realized properly, obeying the
central, Province, district coordination
lines and vice versa
It needs to be improved again about
CPCL verification and technical
training on using Equipment
, The MF Federation Fund, which was
designed twice but was only given
once, there was no one who could, the
funds had to be given so that the
Federation's business activities could
be carried out
conditions
Strategy: coordinate lower level
Perubahn design to increased production
resulting capital budgeting at the
Federation level formations in 2014 was
not given
Mentoring to reduce unnecessary
budgets
therefore it is necessary to selectively
identify SHG members
The identity of the beneficiaries
should not be ignored, namely poor
farmers, In SHG there must be 30%
of advanced farmers
Group activity that is not optimal,
maximum assistance
3 What additional
support can be
useful / needed
(from whom)?
Support for budget policies from local
governments (Local Gov Budget 1/2)
and other technical agencies, private
(providing markets / cooperation),
NGOs (increasing KM capacity),
early on to support project
sustainability
Collaboration between Fasdes,
Extension Worker, Experts and the
Support from regional governments in
the form of policies, capital / regional
budget funds, human resources, and
assistance from Extension Worker,
marketing interventions, for post-
SOLID replication and sustainability
Additional increase in RF & MF funds
Additional support / sharing of funds
from the local government for program
sustainability, especially at the SHG
level
Support from the village government
Motivation, support, encouragement
to SHG
The availability of facilities and
infrastructure for business centers.
Mentoring, training, internships,
workshops, independent group
business funds
104
No Questionnaire
1. Coordinator and PPK 2. CD Gender Expert &
Officer
3. Value Chain Expert &
Officer
4. Extension Workers
local village government
Increased assistance by Extension
Worker, adoption of new innovations,
knowledge & technology from the
agricultural service, BPTP & other
technical agencies
The opening of agricultural
production land with supporting
infrastructure facilities from the
relevant technical agencies under the
coordination of the local government
(district)
Production equipment - related
agencies (perindag, cooperatives)
Village government environment
4 What activities
have the most
significant and
positive impact
on beneficiaries?
Empowerment, FS & Demonstration
Plots in changing mindset & behavior
Manage food crops and plantations as
well as processing results based on
local village potential (superior
potential)
Infrastructure development (farm
roads, storage warehouses, drying
floors, irrigation, business center
buildings) and savings and loans
MF & RF, FS, Savings and loans,
empowerment / assistance, production,
comparative studies and
Workshop and training activities
(organizational management and
bookkeeping, processing results &
technical training / FS)
Assistance with facilities and
infrastructure
Training in cultivation techniques and
processing of results
Use of technology in increasing
production of agricultural products and
expanding access to marketing
Training on cultivation and yield
processing techniques, field schools,
demonstration plots, so that KM
members can adopt technology from
upstream to downstream
5 What activities
show the highest
relevance,
effectiveness and
sustainability?
Training activities at the Province,
district, village level (TOT,
workshops, workshops),
Agricultural cultivation (peanuts,
cassava), processing (coconut oil,
chips), savings and loans
MF, RF, FS, demonstration plot,
technical training, empowerment,
agriculture and marketing
Measured and targeted monitoring and
evaluation
Plant cultivation training and business
meetings of traders / entrepreneurs at
the village, district and Province levels
Processing results
Sustainable group management
FS-Demplot, RF, cultivation technical
training, yield processing,
comparative studies of Home
industries such as business centers
105
No Questionnaire
1. Coordinator and PPK 2. CD Gender Expert &
Officer
3. Value Chain Expert &
Officer
4. Extension Workers
6 What activities
are most
unsuccessful?
Why?
community empowerment
Saving, Federation business
Savings and loans, RF because many
are stuck / not returned and lack of
sanctions
Procurement of agricultural equipment
that is not connected with field needs
Measured and targeted monitoring and
evaluation
Management of savings and loans
(congestion), use of RF funds that are
not rolled out in groups anymore
Save and borrow because people don't
do returns
Revolving funds are group savings
and loans, because there is no
guarantee
The use of Matching funds that are
not developing
7 What activities
contribute the
most to the
achievement of
goals and goals
of activities?
Farming, processing and marketing
activities
Empowerment / training activities of
SHG, FS, Demonstration Plots,
business centers
RF and MF funding
Increased production of food crops,
horticulture and plantations, through
field schools, demonstration plots,
comparative studies and farmer
internships, business meetings in
partnering with traders
Agricultural product processing
activities
Capital, supported by agricultural
products
FS activities and demonstration plots,
processing, workshops, comparative
studies so that farmers can adopt
technology from upstream to
downstream.
Construction of facilities and
infrastructure
Business center
106
No Questionnaire 1. M&E Officer 2. NGO 3. Estate Crop Expert 4. Food Crop Expert
1 If we can carry
out this activity
again, for
example To
replicate it, what
will we do
differently?
What can we do
better? What
advice can we
give to other
program?
The formation of groups is based on
the similarity of business activities /
livelihoods, for example: food
cultivation, horticulture and
processing of results etc.
The number of groups per village
should not be too much, and
assistance is provided by Extension
Workers only
Additions to workshops / technical
ToTs per component,
Periodic evaluation of the
performance of the technical team
Replicating SOLID program
activities, but most importantly the
sustainability of activities
Activities must focus more on a
desired component at the end of the
activity
Carry out activities in accordance with
the Design
Group empowerment refers to PRA,
without assistance for 1 year ago a
good group was selected, funding
assistance was adjusted to good group
development
Synergizing all components involved
in the activity
Manage all activities well, follow all
rules / procedures, open / transparent
especially related to funds, choose
people who really want to work & high
commitment, and do not give
responsibility for activities to people
who fail, then evaluate all activities.
Identification of local resource
availability, classification of business
activities, organizing SHG properly
and continuously, strong cultivation
technical training / assistance and
management of SOLID assets
Comprehensive study, simplifying
funding & HR support, assessing the
effectiveness of groups (amount
reduced)
The initial design must be done
comprehensively by involving
consultants who are competent to
review and analyze the risk factors that
arise from each policy, the process of
village identification, group formation
and project rules must be properly
enforced / implemented.
Commitment and qualified human
resources from every SOLID
Referring to PRA
Mentoring must be improved
Management must improve its
performance
The utilization of MF & RF funds is
reduced in nominal terms and managed
more effectively
Increased SHG’s capacity about
bookkeeping, farming
EXTENSION WORKER training is
further enhanced because in general
EXTENSION WORKER at the SOLID
location is not from the Bachelor of
Agriculture background
Empowerment activities with reference
to participatory village PRA,
Activate the role between related
agencies,
Understand what needs the poor want
so that they support their lives
PSME is really done and group
assessment is also truly objective and
the amount of the grant is adjusted to
the KM assessment
Reducing the number of SHG, the
allocation of MF & RF funds needs to
be increased
Addition of business centers engaged
in fisheries.
Addition of technological tools, such
as coconut shell refiner, etc. to
improve community skills.
Assistance must be tailored to the
needs of the community and
geographical conditions
Nominal MF & RF reduction, SHG
bookkeeping guidance
Training on Extension Workers
107
No Questionnaire 1. M&E Officer 2. NGO 3. Estate Crop Expert 4. Food Crop Expert
implementer at all levels
M & E on a regular basis to ensure that
problems that arise can be resolved
quickly through feedback to
beneficiaries through assistants
Reports and data must use a SIM
(application)
2 What is
neglected in
design? What
alternative
strategies can be
used?
Factors of culture / tradition and
geographical location
In addition to poor families involved
in groups there are also other
beneficiaries
Intensive assistance is needed, to
increase the interest of members
joining groups, forming cooperatives,
and strengthening partnerships
What is ignored: "risk" factors related
to the condition of the program's target
community and the potential for local /
internal conflict,
Strategy:
A more detailed assessment of "risk"
factors related to the condition of the
target community and the potential for
local / internal conflict,
The design must be thoroughly
discussed in the group, then the funds
are disbursed
Training, workshops, coaching must be
conducted at the group level as a whole
Strengthening partnership coordination
and transparency
Reducing / simplifying component
activities so that groups can be more
focused and optimal in carrying out
activities
Strategy: 1. Identification of the village
2. Criteria for group formation 3.
Activities in the field must be better
than before, Empowerment strategies
using the PRA method
Design alternative strategies / policies
Procurement of agricultural equipment
and buildings by third parties, submitted
to KM and the Federation of
Cooperation with the Village
Government
Design concept (the initial design of the
activity must end with the initial design
concept)
That is to provide a design strategy
that can be used in carrying out these
functions and tasks
The mindset of those who are still lay,
the strategy is to provide good
assistance and communication 80:20
more CDs than infrastructure
The recruitment of CPCL in the
formation of SHG was more
emphasized by the status of the
farmers, Identification of farmers in
the villages who were targeted by the
program
The design is good except that it
needs improvement in cooperation
Less focused and ineffective
trainings, Activities directly to the
field: OJT / UST
108
No Questionnaire 1. M&E Officer 2. NGO 3. Estate Crop Expert 4. Food Crop Expert
competency of facilitating staff, 4.
target focused on 1 component of
activities
Risk factors for policies that often
change. From the outset the policy
must be considered an alternative
solution to the risks that arise.
NGO involvement (empowerment
assistance) must be from the beginning
of the project
3 What additional
support can be
useful / needed
(from whom)?
Farming road support, irrigation,
market access, partner / central
government (GoI Budget)
Village government support in
providing motivation for SHG
members, continuity of assistance,
addition of sapras and capacity
building from technical agencies and
local governments
Local Governments I and II,
Associations engaged in the economy
Cooperative Dinas related to SHG
financial management, and other
services related to training.
The Government / Regent is associated
with Local Gov. Budget funds to
suExtension Workerement SHG /
Federation finance and Business
Centers
Department of Industry and Trade to
promote the results of SHG products
The village government, especially the
head of the village, district, province,
center, to finance the next activity
Private support (business partnerships)
and NGOs (Capacity Building)
Additional support from technical
agencies of agriculture, health,
industrial and MUI in the matter of
managing business permits and halal
permits from MUI
Regulation and funding (Local
Government and Private Parties)
Governments, centers, provinces,
regions and related agencies in coaching
and monitoring and evaluation and
assistance to post-SOLID SHG
members
Assistance, as well as capital by the
government to continue to support
this activity
Village government and community,
additional capital from the bank that
can provide loans with small interest
Local government & private sector in
terms of budget, regulation,
assistance, to continue SOLID
109
No Questionnaire 1. M&E Officer 2. NGO 3. Estate Crop Expert 4. Food Crop Expert
4 What activities
have the most
significant and
positive impact
on beneficiaries?
Community development,
organizational strengthening & gender
equality, so farmers are more
confident
Agricultural cultivation activities,
processing of agricultural and non-
agricultural products that can be done
to increase income
Utilization of revolving funds,
comparative study implementation,
FS & demonstration plot, other
technical training
Savings and loans (empowerment),
SHG can actively argue, direct training
at the village level, revolving savings
and loan funds
FS and demonstration plot and training
on cultivation and processing of results
Technical and non-technical training /
assistance (CD Gender), workshop, SL,
demonstration plot
Infrastructure, development of
potential partner networks,
agricultural production, SL and
demonstration plots, processing of
products, infrastructure,
5 What activities
show the highest
relevance,
effectiveness and
sustainability?
Production, training, FS,
demonstration plots, internships,
comparative studies, workshops and
savings and loans, utilization of
revolving funds, product marketing
and capacity building for business and
cooperative centers
Empowerment, savings and loans,
agricultural cultivation, processing of
plantation crops and food,
Assistance and training for FS,
demonstration plot, utilization of
revolving funds, business units /
business centers
Agricultural activities, cooperatives
(home industry), business centers (SB),
FB (CIAT) – West Seram, Machinery
support / assistance, and innovations
directed at SHG.
Machinery support and production
facilities, field technical assistance,
FS. demonstration plots and savings
and loans, agricultural production,
business centers & federations
become cooperatives
6 What activities
are most
unsuccessful?
Why?
Empowerment still lacks
understanding of group members in
managing finance
SHG savings activities, principal,
mandatory, voluntary
Savings and loans, because in
pengelolahan then running is not
optimal
Utilization of matching fund funds
(used up without any business
development / unclear reports,
generally used for consumptive
Use of equipment (because there are
still many SHG who do not understand
the operation of the tool)
Production and marketing business
activities, because business and
marketing actors have not yet
synergized
Some processed foods have not been
successfully marketed because there is
no permit from the related institution /
service
Save and borrow because there is no
Savings and loans because there is no
flow and clarity and returns are not
smooth
Management of SHG (bookkeeping)
many do not understand bookkeeping
Un-optimum pest eradication
activities
O & M, SHG bookkeeping is still
lacking
ManySHGM members do not yet
have skills in the field of post-harvest
processing and the availability of
inadequate tools
110
No Questionnaire 1. M&E Officer 2. NGO 3. Estate Crop Expert 4. Food Crop Expert
activities)
Formation of the Federation (the
problem of disconnected funds makes
functions & responsibilities fail)
guarantee
The use of matching fund funds which
have been used up without any
business development, is generally
used for consumptive activities
Monev activities by management
because there is no feedback to
Extension Worker / Utilizers
7 What activities
contribute the
most to the
achievement of
goals and goals
of activities?
Increased production and added value,
business centers and construction of
plantation processing infrastructure
(coconut)
Providing business capital is given
directly to members to be directly
managed, not to groups
Activities of business units / business
centers
Increasing SHG capacity, Federation
and business centers and forming
cooperatives
Production of results and loan funds
Savings and loans, Empowerment
(adding mindset, attitude, behavior,
bookkeeping)
Organizational management training,
savings and loans, processing of
agricultural products, the use of
Equipment, capital and infrastructure,
FS and demonstration plots, marketing
networks.
Business unit activities / business
centers, cultivation and processing of
results
HR capacity training (organizational
management, bookkeeping, savings
and loans, farming), monitoring and
evaluation
Capital and infrastructure
Production and marketing
Increased capacity of SHG capabilities
in plant cultivation
FS activities and demonstration plots
At business centers because SHG
members have been able to finance
themselves.
Demplot and FS, and production
With the help of the SOLID program
this can change people's mindsets.
Economic improvement of the family
and society in general
Production and marketing activities
Management
111
1. Procurement of Goods and Services
No Item Issue Recommendation Required supports
1. Procurement committee
(personnel availability and
competence)
The establishment of procurement committee was
late (mid year)
Different opinions related to procurement
procedures (IFAD and national)
The capacity of personnel to assess selected
equipments was insufficient
The committee should be formed earlier
(following the issue of nationa budget plan
(DIPA))
Effective communication between
committee and district manajement was
required.
NPMO should set the schedule for
procurement in the beginning of the
year
The guideline for procurement goods
and services should be made available.
Identification of the required goods and
services should be available before the
appointment of procurement committee
2. Identification of required goods
and services
The type and specification were often change
Difficulties in finding area/land for facilities, so it
hampered the procurement processes
The availability of goods and services packages
was known after the release of DIPA (in Februari),
so procurement could not be planned earlier
Different opinion between SHG, federation and
extension worker about the specification of
required equipments
The procurement in 2014 was set by solid district
management, and therefore the received
equipments did not match with SHGs requirement.
Intensive communication between
management and extension worker to select
correct equipment for SHG business;
Selection tim should be made and schedule
the identification and verification
The commitment of procurement
committee and coordination with
identification team and management
were needed.
3. Regulations Different opinion in regulation (IFAD and
national). BPKP recommended the use of national
regulation, but in practice the management used
The use of national regulation for
procurement of goods and services
NPMO should recommend the use of
national regulation for procurement of
goods and services
112
No Item Issue Recommendation Required supports
IFAD procedures.
4. Preparation of procurement
documents
The type and specification was often change The type and specification should be fixed Active communication and information
to find the information of required
products.
5. Procurement process (direct
buying)
Adapted to the available procurement package Following national regulation (Perpres)
6. Procurement process (direct
selection)
Adapted to the available procurement package Following national regulation (Perpres)
7. Procurement process through
bidding
Limitation of budget per category
Revision of equipment budget
The negligence in emiting tax component from
contract document using loan/grant payment
The district management should not revise
the allocated budget
Ensuring the availability of allocated
budget
Ensuring the omission of tax component in
any contracts using loan/grant payment
Assuring that no budget limitation per
category and the district management
did not revise the procurement plan.
8. Monitoring of procurement
implementation
The procurement was done in the end of the year,
so the handover of the equipment to SHGs and
federation was also late.
The procurement process should be started
earlier in the beginning of the year
Monitoring team, including examiner,
should be established to periodically
monitor the procurement.
9. Procurement evaluation The identification was less accurate, so some
equipments did not match the requirement of
SHGs
Improvement of identification process Ensuring that the procured equipment
was really needed by the SHGs and
Federation
113
2. Revolving Fund Management
No Item Issue Recommendation Required support
10. Lack of knowledge on revolving
fund
Some of SHGs member thought that the RF
was not returned since no information was
given from village facilitator
There was tendency to split the RF in similar
amout
At the beginning, matching fund (MF) was
agreed by the SHGs as grant and therefore no
need to return/revolve the funding.
All partys invoved in the project must have
similar understanding about revolving fund
The SHGs should be made aware on
revolving fund management
The revolving fund was given according to
their production plan
The MF could be used as a grant, but the RF
should be used according to agriculture
production plan
The arrears would be asked regularly from
the SHGs
11. Decision for Disbursement Based on Agriculture production Plan
RUA/RUK/RPP,
The Agriculture production plan should be
made by SHG member and was assisted by
extension worker or village facilitator
Each beneficiaries receiving the funding
should agree on the revolving scheme
12. Disbursement process Disbursement process via bank was
complicated: identity card requirement and far
away location
Late disbursement
Disbusement from the bank to SHG needed
recommendation from Dinas: based on APP
Disbursement process might be simplified
via federation, which was later distributed by
federation to each SHG
Disbursement should consider natural and
religious conditions
13. Assistance/Mentoring Process
(duration, etc)
3-4 times meeting per month per SHG
Some SHG had only 1-2 times of meting due to
their agriculture business
The village facilitator should be appointed
from the ones living nearby or in the village,
so empowerment could be done
114
No Item Issue Recommendation Required support
Lack of transaction record, so it was difficult to
trace the history of utilization
The turn over rate of village facilitator was
high, affecting the financial book keeping
continuously on the daily basis
14. Facilitator performance They were helpful in empowerment and
financial administration
Lack of competency
In some cases they did not live in the village
The recruitment process should consider the
educational background
Training should be given for increasing
competence
The requirement that the facilitator live in
the village or nearby (+/- 2 hours return)
should be asked during recruitment.
Pendidikan pendamping, jika menangani
pertanian, harus berlatarbelakang pertanian
Pendamping harus mempunyai kapasitas
pengelolaan keuangan
Penyegaran pelatihan dan intensitas
pendampingan kepada pendamping
15. RF utilization Some did not follow the agriculture production
plan since the alternative business provided
more profits.
The utilization of RF should be open,
accommodating not only agriculture but also
off farm and non farm business
16. Financial book keeping The format was often change
The transaction was not immediately recorded
The format should be fixed. If adjustment
was needed, the adjustment should be
minimal and informed directly to the village
facilitator. The format should also be simple
and concise.
The SHG treasurer should record the
transaction immediately, and it should be the
115
No Item Issue Recommendation Required support
task of the village facilitator to monitor and
remind the SHG.
17. Arrears of RF Most of the beneficiaries thought of single
disbursement and did not consider to revolve
the RF.
The MF and RF were used for farming business
and in some cases the harvest was lost
Reason of arrears:
No collective sanction/agreement made
prior to disbursement
Crop failure/loss
Misappropriate use of funding/fraud
Unable to restore the funding
Character
No one was active in collecting the loan
The amount was too small, covering only
fraction of the required capital
No other income, so they still need the
current loan for capital
No collateral/guarantee
The loan was used for other than business
purposes
Idea that the capital was free from the
government and therefore no need to
Agreement that the funding should be
revolved in the group should be made prior
to disbursement of RF and MF to
beneficiaries.
The funding should also be opened for off
farm and non farm business, as long as the
businesses provided profit. Below was
recommendation provided for preventing
arrears:
Social sanction (those who did not
return the loan would be publicly
announced (via mosque, church,
village office, etc)
Continuous empowerment to
improve income
Group saving (IDR 1,000-2,000 per
day per member)
Discounted share of business profit
116
No Item Issue Recommendation Required support
return to the SHG
Following the steps of the other members
who did not return/revolve the loan
No clear financial transaction record
18. RF amount IDR 40 million per group was considered small
for capital
IDR 100 million per group was considered
ideal, but monitoring and continuos
assistance for its utilization were needed (
collective assurance, family assurance,
financial assurance)
19. RF timing The SHG was established and directly received
mF and RF without proper empowerment
process
The financial facilitation should be given at
least 6 months after initial empowerment
process.
3. Monitoring and Evaluation
No Item Issue Recommendation Required Support
20. Monev personnel at central, provincial
and district offices
No full time officer. All officers, especially at
provincial and district levels, also had another
tasks
High turn over at provincial and district levels
Assign full time personnel Commitment from provincial and
district government
21. Personnel competence (knowledge,
experience, training)
Lack of personnel understanding in performing
Monev tasks
Training
Recruitment of experienced personnel
Budget commitment
117
No Item Issue Recommendation Required Support
22. Personnel capacity:
Knowledge on program,
component, objective and goal
Knowledge on the objective of
monev
Knowledge on logframe (the link
between input-output-outcome-
goal)
Knowledge on management
information system
(format/database-data collection-
processing-analysis reporting,
publicationl)
The responsibility to provide
feedback to Solid management
and beneficiaries
M&E as lesson learned system
(reflection and correction)
Lack of capacity in performing analysis of monev
data and providing feedback according to onev
result. At this moment monev personnel only
focused on data recapitulation
Some of monev personnel had little knowledge on
the project monev, logframe and Management
information system
The monev personnel did not provide feedback,
reflection and correction to the project
management and beneficiaries
Improving capacity through series of
training, meeting, and sharing
M&E training
Suitable budget allocation
23. Project achievement based on logframe
(input-output-outcome-goal)
Provincial and district management had not
reported achievement based on project logframe
Reporting the achievement of project
output at district and provincial level
using logframe instrument
Commitment of Solid management
at NPMO, PPMO and DPIU
24. Lesson learned on the management
information system (format/database
data collection-processing-analysis,
reporting, and publication)
The format changes
Different understanding of monev format
Delay in reporting from village to district
Lack of accuracy and consistency of data and
information
Format should be standard and
consistent
Continuous training and data processing
118
No Item Issue Recommendation Required Support
25. The existence and benefits of monev
survey (baseline, MTR,endline, AOS,
supervision mission)
Baseline, MTR, endline and AOS surveys result
had not shared to the provinces and districts and
did not used as a basis for future planning
The survey result needs to be shared and
used for next year planning
26. Long reporting flow
(SHG/Federation/Busisness Center
extension worker/village facilitator
District M&E Officer provincial
M&E Officer central M&E Officer
Reporting delay Stakeholders commitment
Using easy process and platform
27. Feedback flow (central M&E Officer
provincial M&E Officer district
M&E Officer extension
worker/village facilitator
SHG/Federation/Business Center
Slow feedback information Feedback should be used as a early
warning system for extension worker
and village facilitator
28. M&E for lesson learned M&E system had not utilized for feed back and
project progress
Identification for improvement and
control
29. Mechanism used for quarterly
(dashboard), semester, and yearly
reports
The reporting submission mechanism has not yet
proceeded according to the SOLID M & E
Technical Directive
Quality control had not been performed for each
report
The reporting mechanisms should be
done according to the directive.
Quality control should be performed at
every management levels
119
4. Local Government Support
No Item Issue Recommendation Required supports
30. Involvement of other stakeholders Stated in the project guideline
Stakeholders were involved in technical team of
district, province and central
Budget allocation in Solid planning
Schedule for involvement was available
The area and type of involvement should
be followed up by district management the
involvement of other stakeholders in Solid
project was authorized by mayor/regent
and governoor
31. Mechanisms for project achievement
delivery
Project achievement was delivered through
several platforms:
Report
Minutes of meeting
Photo, video and recording
Brochure/leaflet/booklet
Other documents
The report should be sent quarterly to
district technical team and to provincial
and central management
32. Media/platform for information
delivery
Meeting
Website
Correspondence
Field visit
Intensifying communication among
technical team
Used digital platform such as whatsapp
group for communication
33. The involvement of project
management in preparing the local
budget support
The project management asked local budget
support for Solid implementation
No involvement of project management in local
budget preparation
Information on progress and achievement
should be submitted periodically to
convince the local government
120
5. Financial Management
No Item Issue Recommendation Required supports
34. Personnel Limited personnel, some had double task as
administration officer
Each office should have at least 3 financial
personnel
The financial task should not be combined
with other tasks
Local government commitment to
provide human and budget
resources
35. Personnel Competence High turn over rate
Difficult to obtain required data and
documents
Minimized turn over, at least a year
The data and documents should be handed
over to a new financial personnel. The new
personnel should also be assisted for at least
a month
The data and documents should also be
accessed by the financial manager (PPK or
treasurer)
Training and facilities
Letter of Agreement
36. Personnel Capacity
Guideline
Knowledge on administration and
procedures
Knowledge on primary job and
function
Ability to interact and communicate to
others
Data inputting and consolidation
No progam/application used for financial
management
Administration was done manually
Laptop and wifi were insufficient
Application/digital based system should be
used
Application for financial
management
Trainings
Budget allocation for facilities
121
No Item Issue Recommendation Required supports
37. Keberadaan dan kelengkapan Pedoman
PHLN, termasuk WA (withdrawal
application)
Keterlambatan atas pengiriman
kelengkapan data pendukung WA (SPM,
SP2D, SPTJB, Berita Acara Pembayaran,
Ringkasan kontrak dan kwitansi) pada
tingkat manajemen
Komitmen penyampaian kelengkapan
dokumen pendukung WA sesuai dengan
kesepakatan.
Kelengkapan dokumen pendukung
38. Administration and Procedures Inputting wrong category
Tax was deducted from loan/grant
Late delivery of supporting documents for
withdrawal applicaton and financial report
Archive system was not optimal
Trainings
Sosialization
Improvement of archive
122
Appendix 13. Number of SHGs and Members
No. District/regency
Beneficiaries
Women Group Men Group Mixed Group TOTAL SHGs Federation
SHG
Number Member
SHG
Number Member
SHG
Number
Member SHG
Number
Member Number of Administrator
Women Men Women Men Total Women Men
Maluku Province
1 Centra Maluku 108 1,579 78 1,145 94 594 754 280 2,173 1,945 4,118 29 82
2 West Seram 61 773 55 688 104 649 582 220 1,422 1,270 2,692 105 101
3 East Seram 49 693 58 748 79 472 606 186 1,165 1,316 2,481 22 25
4 Buru 71 1,053 60 881 89 630 660 220 1,541 1,684 3,225 340 452
5 South Buru 26 390 20 300 84 572 688 130 962 988 1950 32 65
Total 315 4,488 271 3,762 450 2,917 3,290 1,036 7,263 7,203 14.466 528 725
North Maluku Province
1 Central Halmahera 80 820 66 672 54 274 273 200 1,094 945 2039 27 39
2 North Halmahera 59 702 52 596 88 537 588 199 1,223 1,199 2422 64 97
3 East Halmahera 70 719 42 425 69 396 324 182 1,115 749 1864 32 28
4 South Halmahera 68 739 59 617 70 358 365 196 1,097 982 2079 11 19
5 West Halmahera 70 693 41 393 82 435 411 193 1,128 804 1932 53 73
6 Sula Island 42 465 33 352 111 597 551 186 1,062 903 1995 27 46
Total 389 4,138 293 3,055 474 2,597 2,512 1,156 6,719 5,582 12,331 214 302
Grand Total 704 8,626 564 6,817 924 5,514 5,802 2,192 13,982 12,785 26, 797 742 1,027
