EC funded AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION AND DIVERSIFICATION ... · EC funded AGRICULTURAL...

EC funded

AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION AND DIVERSIFICATION OF HIGH POTENTIAL IRRIGATION

SCHEMES (ARDOPIS)

IMPLEMENTED BY FAO AND AGROSPHERE

(OSRO/SOM/510/EC and OSRO/SOM/511/EC)

MID TERM EVALUATION REPORT

MAY 2008 Submitted by:

Acacia Consultants Ltd. P.O. Box 340, Sarit Centre 00606 Westlands, Nairobi, Kenya Tel/fax: 3742855 Tel: 3746655 / 3747867 Mobile: 0733 780900 / 0722 203 444 Email: [email protected] Website address: www.acaciaconsultants.org

ii

TABLE OF THE CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ....................................................................................................... iv

List of Figures ...................................................................................................................................... iv

List of Photos ....................................................................................................................................... iv

List of Tables ....................................................................................................................................... iv

LIST OF ACRONYMS USED ................................................................................................................. v

1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT ......................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 General Information to the Project area .................................................................................... 1

1.2.1 The Shabelle and Juba Rivers ............................................................................................... 1

1.2.2 Climate .................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2.3 Topography ........................................................................................................................... 2

1.2.4 Geology and soils ................................................................................................................. 2

1.2.5 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................ 2

1.2.6 Flora and fauna .................................................................................................................... 2

1.2.7 Water resources ................................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Socioeconomic Environment .................................................................................................... 3

1.3.1 Population of the Lower Shabelle Region ............................................................................ 3

1.3.2 The Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) ............................................................................. 3

1.3.3 Employment .......................................................................................................................... 3

1.3.4 Authorities and Governance ................................................................................................. 4

1.4 Project Design and Formulation ............................................................................................... 4

1.5 Overall Objective and purpose of the project ........................................................................... 5

1.6 Evaluation Methodology .......................................................................................................... 6

2.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSIONS ................................................................................................. 7

2.1 General Overview ..................................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Relevance of the Project and Design ........................................................................................ 7

2.2.1 The Quality of the Project Design: ....................................................................................... 7

2.2.2 Quality of Identification of the Target Groups and their needs. ........................................... 8

2.2.3 Relevance at the ARDOPIS’s Strategies, Activities and Approaches levels ....................... 8

2.2.3.1 Rehabilitation of Irrigation Systems and Promotion of Crop Production .................... 9

2.2.3.2 Improved Agricultural Production and Diversified Cropping ...................................... 9

2.2.3.3 Capacity Building and Institutionalization .................................................................. 9

2.2.4 Relevance of the Project to Poverty Reduction Policy of EC and TFG ............................. 10

2.3 Efficiency of Project Implementation ..................................................................................... 10

2.3.2 Timeliness ........................................................................................................................... 10

2.3.3 Project management and internal coordination arrangements ............................................ 11

2.2.3.1 Management and Utilization of the Financial Resources ........................................... 11

2.3.4 Reduction of the Project Overheads ................................................................................... 13

2.3.5 Organization and Institutional Coordination ...................................................................... 13

2.3.6 Field Organization .............................................................................................................. 13

2.3.7 Training and Formation of Community Committee groups ............................................... 13

2.3.7 Quality of Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 15

2.4 Effectiveness of the Project .................................................................................................... 17

iii

2.4.1 Overview: ........................................................................................................................... 17

2.4.2 Effectiveness of the Project Strategies and Activities ....................................................... 19

2.4.2.1 General observation of the Canals that may affect Implementation Efficiency: ........ 19

2.4.2.2 Effectiveness of rehabilitating canals and the related Structures ............................... 19

2.4.2.3 Effectiveness of Community Training ....................................................................... 21

2.4.2.4 Effectiveness in Crop Diversification and Marketing ................................................ 22

2.4.4 Gender and Environmental Issues ...................................................................................... 24

2.4.5 Visibility of EC ................................................................................................................... 24

2.5 Impact of the Project ............................................................................................................... 24

2.5.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................. 24

2.5.2 Desirable Impacts ............................................................................................................... 25

2.5.2.1 Projected Impacts from Irrigation Infrastructure Rehabilitation ................................ 25

2.5.2.2 Impacts Deriving from Crop Diversification and the Demonstration Plots ............... 26

2.5.2.3 Anticipated Impact from Community Mobilization and Capacity Building .............. 27

2.5.2.4 Impacts of the Water Pans Constructed ...................................................................... 28

2.5.3 Emerging and Potential Negative Impacts ......................................................................... 28

2.6 Replication potential of project .............................................................................................. 29

2.7 Sustainability of the Project .................................................................................................... 29

3.0 KEY LESSONS LEARNT ......................................................................................................... 31

3.1 Relevance of the Project ......................................................................................................... 31

3.2 Efficiency of the Project ......................................................................................................... 31

3.3 Emerging and Potential Effectiveness of the Project ............................................................. 31

3.4 Emerging and Potential Project Impacts ................................................................................. 32

3.4.1 Positive Changes Deriving from the Project Interventions ................................................ 32

3.5 Sustainability of the Desired Project Outcomes ..................................................................... 32

4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... 33

4.1 Conclusions............................................................................................................................. 33

4.2 Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 34

ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................................. 36

ANNEX 2: COMPANY AND CONSULTANTS PROFILE ................................................................ 41

ANNEX 3: EVALUATION METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 44

ANNEX 4: ARDOPIS LOGFRAME ..................................................................................................... 47

ANNEX 5: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVENESS ..................... 53

ANNEX 6: MAPS OF THE PROJECT INTERVENTION ................................................................... 57

ANNEX 7: LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED ............................................................................... 59

ANNEX 8: DETAILED PROJECT BUDGET AND EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS ........................... 60

ANNEX 9: LIST OF PEOPLE CONSULTED ...................................................................................... 63

iv

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

List of Figures

Figure 1: Intercropping maize,-sesame and maize-cowpea ........................................................... 23

List of Photos

Photo 1: Water being pumped from the river to the irrigation canal. ........................................... 20

Photo 2: A billboard conveying message of the organization behind the project implementation.24

Photo 3: Farmers within Acaaye Canal Command area have started clearing the canal in

anticipation of commencement of Rehabilitation Activities. .......................................................... 25

Photo 4: Farming is currently restricted to the few farmers who are able to rent out pumps ....... 26

Photo 5: Demonstration plot at Johar ............................................................................................ 27

Photo 6: Farmers have erected a fence in the water pan to prevent attack of livestock and human

being by the crocodile that had swam into the Shan Pan From Shabelle River ............................ 29

List of Tables

Table 1: Summary of the Budget and Utilization by Agrosphere and FAO ................................... 12

Table 2: Number of Farmers Trained ............................................................................................ 14

Table 3 Programme for completion of civil works ......................................................................... 15

Table 4: Results Oriented rating of the project .............................................................................. 18

Table 5: Status of Rehabilitation of Irrigation Systems Implemented by FAO-Agrosphere .......... 20

Table 6 Planting Materials and Chemicals Supplied ..................................................................... 23

Table 7: Targeted Irrigation rehabilitation and water conveyance system ................................... 26

Table 8: Demonstration plots Established in Lower Shabelle and Lower Juba ............................ 27

v

LIST OF ACRONYMS USED

EC European Commission ARDOPIS Agricultural Rehabilitation and Diversification of High Potential Irrigation

Schemes in Southern Somalia CBO Community Based Organization CBNRM Community Based Natural Resource Management CEFA Comitato Europeo La Formazione L’Agricoltura FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FSAU Food Security Analysis Unit (FAO implemented, EC main donor) IDPS Internally Displaced Persons IS Institutional Strengthening KM Kilometers M&E Monitoring and Evaluation OD Organizational Development PACSU Project Assistance, Capacity Building and Supervision Unit PCM Project Cycle Management PLA Participatory Learning and Action PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal SHARP Shabelle Agricultural Rehabilitation Programme SISAS European Commission Strategy for the Implementation of Special Aid in

Somalia 2002 – 2007 SWALIM Somalia Water and Land Information Management System (FAO implemented,

EC funded) TFG Transitional Federal Government WUA Water Users Association HA Hectare BoQs Bill of Quantities

vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction The mid term evaluation was commissioned by FAO and Agrosphere to assess the performance of Agricultural Rehabilitation and Diversification of High Potential Irrigation Schemes in Southern Somalia (ARDOPIS) Project. FAO commissioned Acacia Consultants Ltd to undertake the mid-term evaluation of this project. FAO and Agrosphere are implementing ARDOPIS in the Lower Shabelle Region in Afygoi and Awdegle districts and in Jamama in the Lower Juba. The project’s operational base is situated in Afygoe Town. The main target groups of the project are farmers practising irrigated farming, and traders in fruit, vegetables and other agricultural produce and agriculture input merchants. The report provides a technical, physical and socio-economic assessment of the intervention as implemented by FAO and Agrosphere. The project was formulated in accordance with Item 4(a) of the FAO-Agrosphere Local Agreement (LOA). Project Design and Formulation Implementation of ARDOPIS was expected to support rehabilitation of irrigation systems through strengthening of farmer organizations and development of sustainable market oriented farming. Through participatory planning, plans for rehabilitation of flood fed irrigation systems; crop production and marketing were to be developed. Off-takes, canals (measuring at least 150km of small primary canals and 30 km of secondary canals), pump sets, pipes and in-field systems were to be rehabilitated to allow water use on approximately 8,0001 hectares of irrigable area that provides livelihood to at least 10,0002 farm families. Other tasks included topographic and profile surveys. Profile survey was carried out in Lower Shabelle, while survey for 4 canals and 2 water pans in Awdegle was planned. In Afgoye, survey was to undertaken for 4 canals and 1 water pan.

The project budget was € 2,162,635.85 of which € 2,000,000, which represents 92.5 percent, is funded by the EC while the balance would be provided by FAO and Agrosphere. ARDOPIS implementation was scheduled to take 30 months starting from 11th March 2006.

Overall Objective and purpose of the project ARDOPIS overall objective was “Households incomes of rural families increased through improved agricultural production”. The achievement of this overall objective was to be gauged upon realization of the following objectively verifiable indicators:

(i) Household incomes of rural families increased by at least 15% compared to incomes before action implementation.

(ii) At least 60% of the target farm families undertake improved agricultural production.

Purpose

1 Which translate to 53.33 ha to be irrigated by a km of rehabilitated canal (150km of primary and 30 km of secondary

canals. Note area to be irrigated by pump is not included in this calculation as it is assumed (observed during the fieldwork)

that pumps are mainly confined within demonstration plots. 2 Meaning that for each ha under irrigation will serve 1.25 farm families

vii

“Farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in a productive and appropriate way.”

Evaluation Methodology

According to the TOR, the main issues of the evaluation were to obtain an objective and independent analysis of the progress of the project in terms of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness towards the expected impact and sustainability. A substantiated assessment was to be made on the progress, achievements of objectives and results with reference to the project proposal and log frame as well as the implementation methodologies and the projects internal procedures. The evaluation was also to identify and document lessons learnt and make recommendations that the project partners and stakeholders may use to improve the ongoing implementation.

The main methodology applied was the review of the project documents, interviewing key resource persons in Nairobi and in Somalia and the targeted beneficiaries within the canals command areas. Field visits and interviews to validate achievement with the Aw-Faqi a local community based organization (CBO), officials were conducted. After the fieldwork, the evaluation team held a series of meeting with Agrosphere and FAO for clarification of project issues. Debriefing at Agrosphere office provided another opportunity for collecting specific information.

Relevance of the Project Some of the reasons why the project was found to be relevant included the following:

• ARDOPIS project was intended to rehabilitate the irrigation system previously used for banana production. In other words the project focus was restoration of the irrigation infrastructure and not constructing new system altogether. This intervention enabled farmers to access water to irrigate their crops in an otherwise rain deficit area. Since the project was previously working well supporting the region’s production of crops for subsistence and export markets, ARDOPIS rehabilitation of 150km of primary and 30 km of secondary canals plus other corresponding irrigation facilities, was intended to benefit 10,000 farm families who would be able to access water for irrigation and start crop farming.

• The design and functions of the project also embedded strengthening and creation of networks between farmers and strategic stakeholders including traders, marketing organizations and administration among others. This activity strengthened productive capacity of the beneficiaries thereby enhancing their livelihoods.

• The quality of the project design can be encapsulated as an entire package intervention sufficiently addressing reintroduction of irrigated agriculture in part of the formerly banana growing areas and it was appropriate in improving the income of the targeted farm families. The project activities were realistic and their implementation so far shows that the project was moving towards realizing the three expected results. The results in turn were logically related to the project’s purpose and eventually, to the overall goal of the project. This was a clear indication of the relevance of the project activities and results. The purpose of the project which is “Farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in a productive and appropriate way” was similarly appropriate in ensuring the project eventually accomplish its over all objective of “Households incomes of rural families increased through improved agricultural production”.

• Agrosphere’s Progress Report (May, 2006) showed that among the initial preparatory activities in the two project areas (Jamama and Shabelle) was to identify the local stakeholders. From this exercise, the beneficiary community prominently emerged as the key stakeholders.

viii

• Rehabilitation of the canals and provision of pumps coupled with intervention aimed at strengthening crop production would ultimately enhance crop production and increased household income. However, by the time of this review, crop production was yet to start.

• ARDOPIS seeks to contribute to the reduction of poverty among the rural families in the project areas. This objective is in line with EC Strategy for the implementation of Special Aid in Somalia (SISAS) of contributing to the alleviation of poverty and peace promotion as its goal. The accomplishment of the ARDOPIS goal at the project areas contributes to the attainment of the EC goal for Somalia.

Efficiency of Project Implementation

• According to evaluation team assessment, the project was behind schedule by six months. This delay was as a result of late signing of the agreement between FAO and Agrosphere which in turn delayed the release of the fund as provided for in the 1st LOA. Other reasons for the delay include

o Insecurity:-Somalia is a volatile area and insecurity issues are ever recurring, o Flooding:-the project area was affected by floods in 2006 rendering it inaccessible and

virtually difficult to carry out any meaningful activities until in mid 2006. o Nonetheless, this review singled out project management as the main cause of the

delay.

• Overall, the project financial resources have been spent well and for the purpose which it was planned. It is expected that, if the same budget expenditure was maintained, the project would be within the budgetary requirement of +/-15%.

• Agrosphere had strengthened canal committees and contact farmers in both managerial and technical aspects- O&M and in crop husbandry. It had also brought on board a local CBO, Aw-Faqi, to work directly with farmers at USD 2,000 per month which was reasonable. Being local, Aw-Faqi had fitted well and had a good working relationship had been established.

• For monitoring and evaluation of the project intervention, Agrosphere had baseline data depicting the status quo of the project area. Quarterly and biannual progress reports and planning are other monitoring tools adopted. However, it lacked basic data collection tools and data base for reporting.

Effectiveness of the Project

• While assessing the project activities as contained in the project logframe, the project had achieved 70.7 percent of the over all activities implementation. However, on its achievement of the three project expected results, on average, the project had realized 47.8 percent of its purpose.

• Out of the total 180km of canals (both primary and secondary), 62.4 km had been completed denoting about 35 percent achievement. This had been achieved within a record time of roughly one and half months. However, the canals were yet to convey water to the farms. If the implementation speed demonstrated since February 2008, was maintained, the project was likely to have rehabilitated all the canals by the end of June 2008, two months before the planned end of the project in August. The irrigation canals workmanship was within the specifications and of good quality.

• Since the project aimed at rehabilitating the irrigation canals that existed before they were run down through disrepair, the flood irrigation technology was not new to the people and as such, and with a little reorientation in its use and maintenance, farmers should be able to operate the system as they had done before. Thus, the canal flooding irrigation technology was effective and is appropriate for area.

• Regarding the demonstration and skills training on selected variety of preferred crops, the project had impacted knowledge to 2,000 farmers, representing 36 percent of the target group.

ix

Through demonstration plots, many farmers were expected acquire these skills easily and effectively.

• The training, whose objectives are to impact knowledge, skills and, attitudinal change and practices, and establish networks between farmers and other key stakeholders, was appropriate and effective. So far the training had benefited 75 percent of the 3000 farmers’ committee group members (canal, WUA, village development and contact farmers’ committees) planned.

Impact of the Project

• By the time of this review, no agricultural production attributable to ADORPIS had started as the canals rehabilitation was ongoing. For the few canals excavated, other related facilities were not yet in place to allow the release of water into the canals. As such, agricultural related impacts are basically projected. However, the process had inculcated good will to the beneficiaries.

• Agrosphere had managed to establish 18 demonstration plots and initiated crop production primarily for training through contact farmers. It was therefore proper to state that farmers had and would continue to acquire essential farming skills and knowledge in improved crop husbandry and diversification.

• Constructions of water pans had brought water closer to people and livestock. Specifically, the Darasalam water pan had reduced the travel to water point from 8 km to 2.5 km on average. In addition, it had contained farmers within their villages. Around the same time last year, villagers reported to had migrated and temporarily settled along the banks of Shabelle River in search of water.

Sustainability of the Project

• Sustainability concerns are built-in into project conception from the early stages of its formulation. Attempt towards building of sustainability of the project was noted out of the formation and / or has strengthening of the community governance structures and technical training on O&M of the irrigation system. This would enable the community to repair and maintain the infrastructure internally when the operation starts. Strong management committee not withstanding, the importance of having effective administration was underlined as one of the challenges associated with the management of common property resource use.

• Involvement of the beneficiaries which had a strong underlying strength observed in the overall design and practice of the project would promote commitment and instil the sense of ownership. Moreover, the flooding irrigation technology was not new as farmers were using same before the system was run down during the period of social turmoil. The context of the project being in an arid area fitted well with their needs. This was expected to engender commitment and instil the motivation to safeguard and sustain the maintenance of the system.

• General security in the area would play a major role in ensuring sustainability of the developments achieved so far as well as social infrastructure being revamped through training.

Key Lessons Learnt

• Despite the project delay in implementation, farmers’ interest had not waned as the rehabilitation of the irrigation system meant gaining of livelihood, which they lost as a result of silting of the canals.

• Where the level of the river had goes down, pumping offers the immediate appropriate option to irrigated agriculture. The high cost for running the pumps would only be affordable if only farmers were organized into cohesive groups and encouraged to institute a cost recovery scheme.

x

• Strengthening of the existing community governing structures, other than creating absolutely new structures, would pose a lesser challenge of popularising it amongst the community and other stakeholders, especially the administration. Transaction costs would be low as stakeholders understand roles and responsibilities of traditional structures upon which project management should be archored.

• Farmer field schools approaches that use of demonstration plots equip farmers with practical skills, and more farmers would be reached, and at low cost both in terms of time and finance.

• The community was getting more organized as a result of the training received as well as the newly found motivation of ensuring proper utilization of the water resources.

• Without intervention in diversification and improvement of crops, access to water alone would not effectively improve the crop production as farmers will continue planting the traditional maize and beans seeds.

• Improved farmers’ organization would result into increased social capital building and positively impact on consolidation of the community.

• Empowerment of the community in O&M was necessary and was a tool intended for enhancing the capacity of farmers to undertake basic maintenance of the irrigation system. It was intended to create a sense of ownership that hopefully would sense maintain the irrigation infrastructure after the completion of the project.

Conclusions

1. While taking the time planned for completion of the rehabilitation works, which according to the Project Report was projected for completion by the 20th month of the implementation period and while assuming, the remaining rehabilitation activities will only be complete by the 30th month, which marks the end of the project implementation timeline, the project is behind schedule by six months.

2. The Agrosphere partnership with AW-Faqi was a well thought out strategy as the latter had

brought on broad local experience in agricultural extension services as a local CBO. However, this relationship was being used to enhance monitoring of the project activities.

3. The local supervisors (in the project area) technical skills and experience to undertake civil works was noted to be wanting.

4. Overall, the ARDOPIS PROJECT was on course and performing as per the logframe (Annex 3). However, the consultant noted some items in the logframe such as promotion of regional and international markets linkages were unlikely to be achieved largely because of time limit and/or the environment was not conducive to their implementation.

Recommendations

1. Although the project was behind schedule by six months, it was possible to achieve 90% of

activities planned before the completion date. However, it was recommended a-no-cost extension phase of not less than three months to strengthen the capacity of the farmers to utilize, manage and maintain the irrigation system. This would also be used supported crop production activities. Issues to do with regional and international markets should be revised with a view of abandoning them as there was no time for their implementation and the environment was no longer conducive to their implementation. The evaluation found the project on course and implementation was as per logoframe and does not find it necessary to revise the same, especially as regards marketing as this can scaled down to promotion of village level marketing opportunities.

xi

2. Agrosphere cooperation with Aw-Faqi was a strategic direction of resource management and attaining value for money. Agrosphere should strengthen this cooperation and at the same time examine ways to strengthen implementation monitoring and evaluation of the project using local knowledge and experience of Aw-Faqi. This kind of relationship is encouraged.

3. Because of inadequate capacity to supervise and guide implementation of the civil work on the ground, it was recommended the Nairobi base engineer makes regular visits to the project area, and Agrosphere consider establishing a position of resident engineers if security allows. Frequent supervisory visits would arrest some of the challenges encountered especially during the time of actual rehabilitation.

4. Overall, the ARDOPIS PROJECT implemented by FAO and AGROSPHERE is on course and

performing as per the logframe (Annex 3). However, the consultant noted certain items in the logframe could not be implemented such as international markets either because of time limit or logically the program was not ready for such intervention. It is recommended the Aerosphere re-evaluate whether these activities are necessary with a view of discarding them all together. It was the opinion of the evaluation team that the project lacked the capacity and the environment was not conducive for promotion of markets and market linkages both in the region and internationally. This does not however, call for change of the project logframe as farmers are expected be supported to establish local markets (in village) to sell their surplus crop.

1

1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT

1.1 Introduction

This Mid of the Term Evaluation was commissioned by FAO and Agrosphere to assess their performance in implementing the Agricultural Rehabilitation and Diversification of High Potential Irrigation Schemes in Southern Somalia (ARDOPIS). The report provides a technical, physical and socio-economic assessment of the intervention as implemented by FAO and Agrosphere. FAO and Agrosphere are implementing ARDOPIS in the Lower Shabelle Region in Afygoi and Awdegle districts and in Jamama in the Lower Juba. The project’s operational base is situated in Afygoe Town. The main target groups of the project are farmers practising irrigated farming, and traders in fruit, vegetables and other agricultural produce and agriculture input merchants.

1.2 General Information to the Project area

1.2.1 The Shabelle and Juba Rivers

Lower Shabelle Region is mainly drained by the Shabelle River system which originates from Ethiopian highlands near the town of Yirgalem, some 250 km south of Addis Ababa. It flows at first in the direction north east for some 325 km, and then turns south east for about 650 km to the international boundary with Somalia, 30 km north of Belet Wein. The course of the river then passes south through Bulo Burti, Mahaddei Uen and Jowhar to Balaad, where it turns south west and runs roughly parallel to the coast from which it is separated by a range of sand hills about 25 km wide. After passing through Afgoi, Awdegle and Qoryooley, the River flow into the first of three swamp basins that extend to Avai. Below Avai the river resumes a defined channel but the flow is much reduced and it is only in seasons of exceptionally high flows that the water discharges into the Juba River at the confluence south of Cansuna and from there to the Indian Ocean at Kismayu. Juba River also originates from the Ethiopian highlands and flows into the Indian Ocean close to Kismayu City. Of the total 1,200 km long Juba River, 700 km drains to Somalia. Map I (Annex 6, Page 54) depicts the two river basins.

1.2.2 Climate

The climate of the river Shabelle and juba basin areas of South Somalia is tropical air to dry sub-humid and is influenced by the north-easterly and south-easterly air flows of the inter-tropical convergence zone (ITCZ). Annual average rainfall is about 500 mm in Jowhar, Balaad, Afgoi and Janale areas and decreases northwards to about 200 mm at Belet wein. The rain is very variable in amount from year to year and is distributed in two distinct seasons. Gu is the rainy season starting from April to June; Xagaa which occurs from July to September, littoral showers but dry and cool in the hinterland; Deyr is the second rainy season falling between October to December; and Jilaal, which comes between January to March, is the longest dry season throughout the country.

2

1.2.3 Topography

As has been mentioned earlier the Shabelle River originates from the Harar plateau at an altitude of 2680 m (above sea level) from where it descends to the Audamboi plain in southern Ethiopia and crosses the international boundary at an altitude of 300 m. At Bulo Burto in Somalia the river flows in closely confined channel with a narrow flood plain, which broadens, becoming flat and featureless and is dissected by River channel remnants. The plain is bounded to the south by the coastal range of sand hills and extends south west to the confluence with River Juba.

1.2.4 Geology and soils

In the area between Jowhar and Balaad, the soils adjacent to the River are grey vertisols with entisols on the recent river alluvium. They are non-saline and suitable for irrigation although difficult to manage than the vertisol soils above Jowhar. From Balaad through Afgoi and Janale to Qorioley, the river is bounded on both banks by a wide expanse of fine textured non-saline brown vertisol soils, which extend beyond Qorioley, south of the swamp basins. The soils adjacent to the swamp areas downstream of Qorioley consist of saline grey to brown vertisols. Some late Tertiary fluvio-lagunal deposits occur on the Lower Juba plain consisting of clay, sandy clay, sand, silt and gravel.

1.2.5 Hydrology

The Shabelle River flow ranges from 10 cumecs to 380 cumecs at Belet Wein gauging station. In general the high flows in the “Gu” flood that occur from April-May are of short duration while in the “Der” flood, during August-December, the high flows are usually sustained. The low flow period with the flow less than 10 cumecs is usually of about two months but can extend up to five months or in a good year, may last less than two weeks. The inflow to the river from the catchment in Somalia all occurs between Belet Wein and Bulo Burto and account for approximately ten percent of the total annual flow. The Lower Juba is an area prone to floods mainly due to their geomorphology context. The soils formed in this region are largely due to the landscape characteristics.

1.2.6 Flora and fauna

The vegetation of the area consists of grass, thicket (Dichrostachy glomerata) and tree species (Acacia nilotica; A. nubica; A. seyal; Commiphora spp; Cordia gharaf; Dodera glabra; Grewia spp; Euphobia spp and Salvadoria persica). Prosopis julifrola popularly known as “Mathenge” in Kenya and in Somalia as “Rambow” is also spreading fast and is covering most of southern Somalia. It is a good source of firewood and is also used as fuel to make lime chalk. However it has also been blamed for its poisonous thorns that have been harmful to both people and livestock. Livestock production is the predominant livelihood in Somalia with an estimated three quarters of the population obtaining the subsistence needs from camels, cattle, shoats (sheep and goats). The Shabelle and Juba Rivers provide an important dry season buffer to pastoralist, especially in times of drought when most sources of ground water are depleted. Wildlife has increasingly been decreasing

3

due to human encroachment hippopotamus, some types of fish mainly the mud fish and crocodiles are found in River Shabelle.

1.2.7 Water resources

Somalia is largely an arid or semi-arid country with irregular rainfall and water resources vary in quality and quantity according to location. In southern Somalia water is obtained from Rivers and shallow wells. Extensive permanent swamps and floodplains occur on the lower Shabelle River which ends up in a swamp. The Juba and Shabelle rivers are the only two large perennial rivers that rise from the Ethiopian highlands and flow across southern Somalia. They are both important sources of water for domestic consumption, irrigation and livestock. The area between the two Rivers is the country’s main rain-fed agricultural zone.

1.3 Socioeconomic Environment

1.3.1 Population of the Lower Shabelle Region

The population of the Lower Shebelle region was estimated in 1995 at 616,000 inhabitants, (urban 17%, rural 60%, and nomadic 23%). In 1989, it was reported that the rural population lived in 715 villages and the number of farms was about 70,000 of an average size of 2.7 ha. Out of about 200,000 ha of arable land, 40,000 ha were irrigable while 112,000 ha were under rain fed crops. As shown (Annex 6, Page 54), the Agrosphere and FAO project are covering Afgoye and Balad districts in the Lower Shabelle, the population is 264,355 and 118,655 respective while Jamama District in the Lower Juba region is 100,625 in accordance with FSAU 2005.

1.3.2 The Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)

In spite of the lawlessness that characterizes the country since the collapse of the Somalia government in 1991, it was reported that the sedentary population in the Shebelle region has largely remained stable. Due to control by the clans there was no heavy permanent influx of immigrants from other regions. But many of the workers’ villages that were sited on the commercial farms have been abandoned, partly because of the lack of work and because of the collapse of the canal system preventing drinking water reaching them. Most of them moved to small towns like Janaale, Shelembot, Qoryioley and Golweyn as well as Merka. With rehabilitation of these canals, like the Bakoro, considerable numbers of households who had left the village are returning to undertake irrigated fed crop production.

1.3.3 Employment

Changes in land use, cropping pattern and employment are direct consequences of the break-down of the banana industry, leaving the large banana-work force without employment. The progressing deterioration of the canal network forced the farmers to reduce their irrigated crops and larger areas are returned to rain fed cultivation, on small and large holdings alike. The farming community attaches the highest priority to the improvement of the irrigation system and expresses active cooperation and commitment.

4

1.3.4 Authorities and Governance

According to the project’s baseline report undertaken early in 2006, there existed two levels of governance structures in the two project areas of Lower Shabelle and Lower Juba, namely the village council of elders and the District Council of Elders. The major role of these councils of elders at the two levels is to solve conflicts and ensure some level of law and order amongst the community. In the absence of the central government, these structures were essential in maintaining social order.

1.4 Project Design and Formulation

FAO and Agrosphere have individually been collaborating with EC Somalia Unit for more that ten years in agricultural development of Southern Somalia. A series of actions funded by EC Somalia have gathered data which is kept under Somalia Water and Land Information Management System (SWALIM), bulletins and food security situation in Somalia produced by Food Security Analysis Unit (FSAU), design and of supervision of irrigation canals, water pans, and farmers training in appropriate crop production, canal management and efficient use of water by Agrosphere. Implementation of ARDOPIS is expected to support rehabilitation of irrigation systems through farmer organizations and development of sustainable market oriented farming. Through participatory planning, plans for rehabilitation of flood fed irrigation systems; crop production and marketing are to be developed. Off-takes, canals (measuring at least 150km of small primary canals and 30 km of secondary canals), pump sets, pipes and in-field systems were to be rehabilitated to allow water use on approximately 8,0003 hectares of irrigable area that provides livelihood to at least 10,0004 farm families. Other tasks included topographic and profile surveys. Profile survey was carried out in Lower Shabelle, while survey for 4 canals and 2 water pans in Awdegle was planned. In Afgoye, survey was to undertaken for 4 canals and 1 water pan. The project design technically is feasible and appropriate. However, there is a likelihood of the system becoming congested as more people may seek farming opportunities once it is complete and functional. This problem is also likely to grow as the insecurity continues to escalate- due to the peace prevailing in the project region, people running from the unsafe areas may seek refuge in the locality. Market and flood warning information was designed to be shared with farmers to ensure appropriate actions are being taken. During the fieldwork, information sharing mechanism was yet to be developed but still in the plan of action. Due to the topographical nature of the project area, two irrigation methods can be practised; gravity and pump fed system. Gravity system is only possible when the river level is high. Specifically for the Lower Shabelle, and only in three villages out of the 13 which are possible to be fed by gravity. From the operation and maintenance perspective, this has the least cost. However the period when the river flow is high is quite short. This period is not adequate for a full crop cycle, which might lead to loss of crop or complete crop failure.

3 Which translate to 53.33 ha to be irrigated by a km of rehabilitated canal (150km of primary and 30 km of secondary

canals. Note area to be irrigated by pump is not included in this calculation as it is assumed (observed during the fieldwork)

that pumps are mainly confined within demonstration plots. 4 Meaning that for each ha under irrigation will serve 1.25 farm families

5

The project budget is € 2,162,635.85 of which € 2,000,000, which represents 92.5 percent, is funded by the EC. ARDOPIS implementation was scheduled to take 30 months starting from 1st January 2006.

1.5 Overall Objective and purpose of the project

ARDOPIS overall objective is “Households incomes of rural families increased through improved agricultural production”. The achievement of this overall objective was to be gauged upon realization of the following objectively verifiable indicators:

(iii) Household incomes of rural families increased by at least 15% compared to incomes before action implementation.

(iv) At least 60% of the target farm families undertake improved agricultural production.

The above indicators necessitate the undertaking two baseline surveys the 1st prior to the start of action implementation and the second three months before end of action. The first baseline survey was undertaken in 2006 and focused on household income levels, sources, their livelihood activities, and factors influencing these livelihood activities. Importantly, the baseline survey detailed the current area under partial or full irrigated agricultural production, existing serviceable irrigation canal network, and water availability in time and quantity at farm level. Livelihoods approach adopted for the survey emphasizes on livelihood assets (physical, natural, financial, social and human) and livelihood strategies (strategies of accessing food and income, coping strategies, expenditure patterns and coping with the dynamic environment). Together with the focus on increasing rural based incomes through improved agricultural production, the project addresses the pertinent issue of the poverty reduction as envisaged in the Millennium Development Goal number 1 at the global level. At the project level, this focus conform to the project overall goal as underlined above.

Purpose:

“Farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in a productive and appropriate way.”

In addressing productive and appropriate ways of use of the irrigation infrastructure this action lays great emphasis on environmental sustainability and address pertinent issues highlighted in the Millennium Development Goal number 7. It is noted that the purpose and mainly access and use of irrigation infrastructure was identified during the agricultural baseline and the PRA conducted by Agrosphere in 2002 and 2003 respectively in Jamama District. The proposed purpose was also relevant to the EC Somalia strategy SISAS. FAO and implementing partners ensures that the following objectively verifiable indicators are realised.

(i) At least 150 km of small primary canals and 30 km of secondary canals are rehabilitated.

(ii) 8,000 ha of flood fed irrigated area developed.

(iii) At least 60% of the farmer population in the target area have access to adequate irrigation water and utilize this water appropriately, cropping plans and patterns.

(iv) At least 3,000 farmers are trained in improved agricultural practices including adapted irrigation techniques, through contact with the farmer trainers and relevant farmers’ organization.

(v) At least 5,500 farm families receive services from strengthened relevant organisation and administration.

6

The implementation objectives are to deliver the above indicators that would be used to gauge the performance by converting the availed resources to an improved irrigated agricultural economy. This will in turn be fast tracked through the project’s realization of the expected results and accomplishment of its purpose.

Expected Results and Indicators:

(i). Selected Irrigation Systems are Rehabilitated and Functional Indicators for this result will include:

(i) Kilometres of primary canals rehabilitated. (ii) Kilometres of secondary canals rehabilitated. (iii) Number of hectares irrigated under rehabilitated irrigation system. (iv) Real-time spatial data collected by the action and shared with SWALIM on spread, quantity

and/or quality of soil and water resources and the local demands. (ii). Improved agricultural production using irrigation and diversified cropping is practised on traditional farm land Indicators for this result will include:

(i) Number of trained farmers involved in sustainable crop production (ii) Number of varieties selected for crop diversification (iii) Itemised Production (tonnage) available for local and regional

(iii). Relevant organisations and administrations strengthened to fulfil their functional role Indicators for this result will include:

(i) Number of organization identified and supported by the project (ii) Status of rural growth linkages (consumption linkages, backwards production linkages and

forward production linkages) These results are concisely clear and achievable based on the activities the project planned and actually is undertaking. Although the project results and indicators are realistic and measurable, the interventions aiming at promoting markets, especially the international levels (partly under results II and III) are obviously unattainable owing to the project’s implementation timeframe. Certainly, market issues are sensitive and sufficient time is required to study, develop and operationalize the linkages.

1.6 Evaluation Methodology

The field work for the evaluation took place between the 21st and 28th April 2008 and was conducted by Martin Kamau Gitau and Charles Kamau, associate consultants of Acacia Consultants Ltd. The consultants’ profiles are included as Annex 2 to this report. The methodology, evaluation data tool applied and limitation to the study is contained in Annex 3, Page 41.

7

2.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSIONS

2.1 General Overview

Since the breakdown of the central government in the early 1990s, infightings, mainly clan based have dominated and pervaded much of Somalia both in the rural and urban areas. Insecurity and the related resultants have been a major bottleneck to smooth implementation of the ARDOPIS project. Although risks of renewed large scale conflicts, like the ones that characterized the country in the 1990s is low, increased localized conflict are sporadic and harmful to people’s livelihoods and endeavours to gain social basics. The instability and insecurity in Mogadishu and the surrounding areas since early 2007 has by far had had far reaching effects to the progress of the ARDOPIS progress including difficulties in implementation and follow up of the project activities, uncontrolled influx of the refugees running away from volatile Mogadishu to the immediate rural areas, especially Lower Shabelle and subsequent growth of IDPS. It is under this volatile and dynamic context that the ARDOPIS project is being reviewed.

2.2 Relevance of the Project and Design

2.2.1 The Quality of the Project Design

ARDOPIS project seeks to rehabilitate the irrigation system in the previous banana production area. In other words the project focus is restoration of the irrigation infrastructure and not constructing new system altogether. This intervention will enable farmers to access water to irrigate their crops in an otherwise rain deficit area. Since the project was previously working well supporting the region’s production of subsistence and export markets, ARDOPIS rehabilitation of 150km of primary and 30 km of secondary canals plus other corresponding irrigation facilities, if successfully implemented, the intended 10,000 families will be able to access irrigated farming. This action will contribute towards realization of the first result of the “selected irrigation systems are rehabilitated and functional”. By the time of this review, 62.4 km of the primary and secondary canals had already been rehabilitated in accordance with the design survey and prescriptions. . The quality of the project design was also assessed from its relevance and suitability in ensuring that “improved agricultural production using irrigation and diversified cropping is practised on traditional farm land” which is the other result expected. Through crop diversification cropping pattern, the economic enhancement of the farmers stands to be realized. The water conveyed through the rehabilitated canals will make it possible for farmers to resume irrigated cultivation. Interventions in crop diversification will provide farmers with opportunity to choose the crop mix and enable intensification of crop production for domestic and market oriented farming. Farmer field schools and demonstration plots used by the project as strategies to capacity building to farmers will enhance adoption of improved farming and ensure maximization of food production thus improving food security while at the same time maximizes on farm returns. Participatory trainings had been identified as a tool to reach the goal of improved, intensified, and diversified production, involving and supporting farmers during the assessment. Such training will support the introduction of improved practices and or new crops and technologies empowering farmers in order to develop, modify and spread appropriate and sustainable market driven production.

8

The design and functions of the project also embodies strengthening and creation of networks between farmers and strategic stakeholders including traders, marketing organizations and administration among others. This is intended to support realization of the other project result which is expected to ensure that “relevant organisations and administrations strengthened to fulfil their functional role”. This effort is intended to enable farmers within the intervention area to have regional and international market niche of the promoted farm produce. As such, the intervention is designed as a full package; that is from irrigation infrastructure rehabilitation to improvement of farming husbandry, farm inputs provision, organization development to market institution linkages. However, this review took note of fragility and complexity of marketing issues, which are further compounded by project time limitation which is insufficient to enable establishment of sustainable market linkages particularly oriented to regional and international markets. Based on the above issues, the quality of the project design can be encapsulated as an entire package intervention sufficiently addressing reintroduction of irrigated agriculture in part of the formerly banana growing areas and it is appropriate in improving the income of the targeted farm families. The project activities are realistic and their implementation so far shows that the project is moving towards realizing the three expected results. The results in turn are logically related to the project’s purpose and eventually, to the overall goal of the project. This is a clear indication of the relevance of the project activities and results. The purpose of the project which is “Farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in a productive and appropriate way.” is similarly appropriate in ensuring the project eventually accomplish its over all objective of “Households incomes of rural families increased through improved agricultural production”.

2.2.2 Quality of Identification of the Target Groups and their needs

According to the FAO-Agrosphere’s project report, the intervention was determined through and during PRA/ PLA sessions which were held with the community members from the target areas. During these participatory sessions, community members were facilitated to identify and set out their priorities for the project interventions. Similarly, the sessions were crucial in building and determining the communities’ commitments to the project. The FAO Progress Report (May, 2006) shows that among the initial preparatory activities in the two project areas (Jamama and Shabelle) was to identify the local stakeholders. From this exercise, the beneficiary community prominently emerged as the key stakeholders. Further, the target community members were facilitated to identify and prioritize their activities. Indeed, the report states that the interventions will be through groups of farmers that will be formed or strengthened for the management of water for irrigation and flood control systems and for crop production, processing and marketing.

2.2.3 Relevance at the ARDOPIS’s Strategies, Activities and Approaches levels

ARDOPIS strategies, activities and approaches are described below with regard to the actual rehabilitation of the irrigation system as a strategy to revamp agricultural production, crop diversification as an intervention to enhance crop production performance and finally capacity building as a long-term approach of ensuring governance, institutionalization and irrigation system maintenance.

9

2.2.3.1 Rehabilitation of Irrigation Systems and Promotion of Crop Production

Irrigation within Agrosphere’s operation area has always been practised. With collapse of the Somalia Government in 1991, virtually all public infrastructure and facilities were run down. The irrigation infrastructure in the former banana production area of the Lower Shabelle Region was not spared either. According to field observations, where canals are not functioning, irrigation is only possible for the farms lying along the river or by richer farmers who are able to irrigate using pumps in Afgoye and Awdegle districts. Out of the six natural depressions served by big canals in Jamama District, only Bode that was operational. Bode had been rehabilitated by Agrosphere under the “Improved Food Security and Water Resources Management” in 2002. Either way, only a small proportion of the community members are able to irrigate their lands. For instance, “there are only about 20 farmers (mainly farmers groups) practising irrigation in the area currently” (Project Report, 2005). Yet, Somalia is a food deficit country and “improved agricultural production would not only benefit the smallholder families living in the action target irrigation farming areas, but could provide surpluses to improve food security in the country as a whole, as well as reducing import requirements”5. ARDOPIS targets to provide livelihoods to at least 10,000 farm families who will irrigate 8,000 ha. Rehabilitation of the canals and provision of pumps coupled with intervention aimed at strengthening crop production will ultimately impact on enhanced crop production and increased household income. However, by the time of this review, crop production was yet to start.

2.2.3.2 Improved Agricultural Production and Diversified Cropping

Improved practice in agricultural husbandry and intervention in improved seed quality and diverse crop varieties and types have the potential of improving the overall performance of agricultural production. The areas targeted are those formerly under banana production before the civil war broke out. These areas are now requiring a more elaborate intervention aimed at diversification of crop production for improved livelihoods of the communities. Farm produce market interventions will not only guarantee a sustained market oriented production but emphasis will also be put towards production to ensure sustained food security. However, the planned market surveys have not been undertaken and as such market oriented farming potentials and dimensions remains unknown. Local markets are however, realistic, particularly now that the country, especially, in Mogadishu, the violence is prevailing, thus food demand will obviously escalate. Moreover, Somalia is largely a food insecure country, thus local demand for food will always be felt.

2.2.3.3 Capacity Building and Institutionalization

This activity involves strengthening of local institutions, which includes canal committee, water users associations, water pan committees, village committees and contact farmers. Capacity building focuses on organizational, managerial and technical skills. Organizational and managerial skills are to deal with aspects of discipline, cohesion and conflict resolutions amongst user groups of the canal command area. Technical skills are to do with empowering community to take more responsibilities over the canal maintenance and operation. These skills were reported to have contributed towards the project attaining 62.4 km of canals rehabilitation within a very short time as a result of effectiveness in committees monitoring the performance of the contractors hired. So far, 66.67 percent of the targeted 3,000 farmers and including committee group members (canal, WUA, village development and contact farmers’ committees) have been trained.

5 European Community Contribution Agreement with an International Organization, 2004.

10

This training is expected to provide farmers relevant and updated farming practices in terms of skills and knowledge. Improved farming skills will resort to improved irrigated agricultural production in lower Shabelle within the former banana production areas, thus achieving improved food security and household incomes. Apart from forming and strengthening the farmers’ institutions (canal committees, WUA and contact farmers), no evidence of external institutions strengthening was noted to have been done neither any effort done in establishing institutional linkages that were aimed at promoting marketing of farm produce.

2.2.4 Relevance of the Project to Poverty Reduction Policy of EC and TFG

ARDOPIS seeks to contribute to the reduction of poverty among the rural families in the project areas. This objective is very much in line with EC Strategy for the implementation of Special Aid in Somalia (SISAS) of contributing to the alleviation of poverty and peace promotion as its goal. The accomplishment of the ARDOPIS goal at the project areas contributes to the attainment of the EC goal for Somalia. In ensuring project sustainability, ARDOPIS has embraced the importance of involving the target community, organizing, developing the capacity of and building community based institutions to manage irrigation infrastructure and coordinate marketing of farm produce. This perfectly matches and contributes to the main objective of EC programme interventions of strengthening livelihoods at household level and support State and non-State actors through smallholder market oriented agriculture and livestock development, increase capacity of Somalis for decentralised management and create an enabling environment for re-integration of ex-combatants, IDPs and returnees as the new Government becomes functional.

2.3 Efficiency

2.3.2 Timeliness

The FAO-Agrosphere ARDOPIS project report shows that the project was started on the 1st of January 2006. However, the May, 2006 Project Progress Report indicated the inception activities were undertaken from 1st March to 31st May 2006, some two months behind the schedule. This delay was as a result of late signing of the agreement between FAO and Agrosphere which in turn delayed the release of the fund as provided for in the 1st LOA. While taking into account the time planned for completion of the rehabilitation works, which according to the Project Report was the 20th month of the implementation period and while assuming that the remaining rehabilitation activities will only be complete by the 30th month, which marks the end of the project implementation timeline, the project is behind schedule by 6months. According to this review, this delay is, to a large extent, attributable to poor project management and administration. Other factors that were noted to have occasioned delay of the project include:

• Insecurity:-Somalia is a volatile area and insecurity issues are ever recurring. Specifically, during the inception phase, security in Mogadishu deteriorated in mid March as a result infighting between militias (sharia courts) and the combatants of the warlords. The Project Progress Report (September 2007 to February 2008) stated that “The security situation especially in Lower Shabelle has remained fluid and work is interrupted intermittently. This fact has lead to delay in completion of works as targeted. In Jamama in particular lack of any administration has resulted in a situation where there is little order. Looting of mobile goods particularly water pumps recurs

11

frequently. The lack of order also delays work progress where armed militia interrupt works demanding money from the contract”.

• Flooding:-the project area was affected by floods in 2006 rendering it inaccessible and virtually difficult to carry out any meaningful activities until in mid 2006, although with poor project management, the take off would still have been shrouded with start off hitches

In addition, it was reported that in the implementation of the ARDOPIS, funds are released by EC to FAO and eventually to Agrosphere as in accordance to the signed LOA. According to Agrosphere, LOAs are quite inconvenient in that they are not flexible and accommodative to the dynamic environmental within which the project was being implemented. Occasionally, delay in project implementation was due to the LOA transactions. Nonetheless, this review singled out project management as the main cause of the delay.

2.3.3 Project management and internal coordination arrangements

2.2.3.1 Management and Utilization of the Financial Resources

This sub section seeks to establish whether or not the project expenditures are in line with the projected budgets and costing. It is further concerned with assessing whether or not financial resources have been utilized efficiently to realize the intended outputs as contained under appendix 3. According to table 1 which present summaries of the total budget and expenditures, the total expenditure incurred by FAO and Agrosphere as by end of February 2008 amounted to 1,022,235.26 Euros accounting to about 47 percent of the total project funding by the EC of 2,162,636 Euros. Annex 8 presents the detailed budget expenditure. The bulk of the project budget is devoted under item 6 referred to as “others-Works”, which is directed towards realization of the project’s results. This item of the budget accounts for 44.8 percent of the entire project budget. By the time of this review only 27 percent of this budget had been utilized mainly on the capacity building. Cost on human resource is the second most expensive item of the project representing 31.1 percent of the total project cost. By the time of this review, 75 percent of the budget had been consumed in the payment of the staff, mainly by FAO which had already exhausted 93 percent of its human resource budget. Agrosphere, on its part had spent only 46 percent of its budget. The reason for underutilization is mainly attributed to the times when the project activities could not be implemented mainly as a result of insecurity prevailing in the area and partly as a result of management challenges. Travel budget item is another area where utilization has been high as 78 percent of the budget had been spent by the time of the review. While considering the general implementation performance which has been rated at 70.7 percent, the balance of the budget is sufficient to carter for financial requirement for the implementation period including the three months no cost extension phase proposed. The bulk of the budget should be focused towards the completion of the rehabilitation works, which only 34.7 percent of the primary and secondary canals has been complete by the time of this review and in the diversification of the crop production as well as in capacity building. The main challenges will be on ensuring essential travels whose budgets will, most likely, not be sufficient to carter for the costs for the remain implementation phase. It is advisable that FAO try as much as possible to internally handle most of the short term consultancies whose expertise is available either with FAO itself or from Agrosphere. Some of the tasks that can be executed with internal expertise are under budget item 5 know as “Other costs, Services” including:

12

• Short term consultant- Crop Diversification

• Short term consultant- Crop Post Harvest

• Short term consultant- Irrigation/ Civil Structure

• Short term consultant- Soil Science.

Overall, the project financial resources have been spent well and for the purpose which it was planned. It was expected that, if the same budget expenditure was maintained, it was likely to be within requirement of +/-15% of budget.

Table 1: Summary of the Budget and Utilization by Agrosphere and FAO

Description of the Budget Item Budget Expenditure Balance Percent6

1. Human Resources

AGROSPHERE 257,025 119,396 137,628.69 54

FAO 416,010 386,691 29,318.91 7

Sub Total 673,035 506,087 166,947.60 25

2. Travel

Shared by FAO and AGROSPHERE 14,000 10,973.93 3,026.07 22

Sub Total 14,000 10,973.93 3,026.07 22

3. Equipment and Supplies

FAO 186,170 102,715.20 83,454.80 45

Sub Total 186,170 102,715.20 83,454.80 45

4. Local Office-Action Cost

FAO 27,650 5,206 22,443.91 81

Shared by FAO and AGROSPHERE 34,800 25,884 8,916.16 26

Sub Total 62,450 31,090 31,360.07 50

5. Other Costs, Services

FAO 83,500 21,254 62,245.73 75

Shared by FAO and AGROSPHERE 34,000 14,637 19,363.45 57

Sub Total 117,500.00 35,890.82 81,609.18 69

6. Others-Works

FAO 753,000 114,852 638,148.38 85

AGROSPHERE 215,000 148,631 66,368.94 31

Sub Total 968,000 263,483 704,517.32 73

8. Administrative

FAO 141,481 71,995.30 69,485.70 49

Sub Total 141,481 71,995 69,485.70 49

Summaries

AGROSPHERE 472,025 268,027 203,997.63 43

FAO 1,607,811 702,714 905,097.43 56

Shared Between FAO and AGROSPHERE 82,800 51,494 31,305.68 38

Total 2,162,636.00 1,022,235.26 1,140,400.74 53

6 This is calculated as the percent of the item expenses deducted from the budget (see also Annex 8).

13

2.3.4 Reduction of the Project Overheads

Attempts to reduce project operational costs were noted in transport. Investing in purchasing of project’s vehicle(s), maintenance and other related costs, mainly fuel and the driver, usually takes up a major share of the budget that would otherwise be used for development activities. To minimize on this transportation cost, Agrosphere had resorted to hiring transport. Motorbikes were used for extension service and were brought and distributed in Afgoye, Awdegle and in Jamama. Also it was noted motor bikes are more efficient and appropriate means of transport because of project area terrain and road network.

2.3.5 Organization and Institutional Coordination

Agrosphere had strengthened canal committees and contact farmers in both managerial and technical aspects- O&M and in crop husbandry. It had also brought on board a local NGO, Aw-Faqi, to work directly with farmers. Being local CBO, Aw-Faqi, had fitted well and a good working relationship appeared to had been established. But it was apparent that no other institutional linkages that Agrosphere had established, especially those were expected to enhance crop production, like creating linkage with the local traders and marketing as indicated in the logframe. In addition, this evaluation established that support and good working relationship with the local administration (districts and regional authorities) was significantly important in resolving and managing small differences. In this regards, it was noted the relationship between Agrosphere with local administration had not been healthy. Agrosphere had been trying to amend this relationship and had improved with the opening of Afgoye office and this may help in enhancing local partnerships and relationships.

2.3.6 Field Organization

In Jamama and Afgoye, Agrosphere had employed professionals who had been trained in-house in order to execute the organization’s work more effectively. Although this strategy was rather expensive, it had proved more appropriate, particularly for Jamama which is a remote district as compared with others and had no qualified manpower and equipments. In Awdegle District, Agrosphere opted for partnership with a local CBO - Aw-Faqi for rehabilitation and development activities. Aw-Faqi has experience in the capacity building and in agricultural production extension services. Other than Agrosphere establishing a field office and hire personnel, it entered into partnership with AW-Faqi to use their vast experience and knowledge of the area to undertake implementation of the ARDOPIS activities. The contract amount for services provided by AW-Faqi was 2,000 USD payable upon production of a monthly progress report. Under this arrangement, the evaluation team found it to be efficient in that Aw-Faqi had elaborate network of extension staff who known by local farmers. As such, transaction cost had been low and also cost related to staff employment and maintenance was avoided. However, supervision of the NGO’s activities, beyond use of the monthly reports, was found to be lacking and wanting.

2.3.7 Training and Formation of Community Committee groups

Community training was based on a tailor made-training module conducted by the project staff. The staff had undertaken a Training of Trainers (TOT) course on the same. The modules for training included:

14

• Improved crop production

• Operation and maintenance of irrigation system and pumps

• Organization for community participation including WUAs, and

• Group dynamics Training of the committees (canal, WUA, village development and contact farmers’ committees), were organized in situ within a central location. The trainings were designed to take two to three days starting from the morning and ending before 1.00 o’clock daily. This arrangement allowed committee members to attend the training sessions without many difficulties such as travel distance, and also gave farmers ample time to attend to their routine chores. So far, 83 contact farmers from various villages had been trained since 2006 in Awdegle by Aw-Faqi. The trained contact farmers, used demonstration plots to reach out to other farmers. The use of demonstration plots was noted to reach many more farmers, even outside the targeted villages. Moreover, owing to the illiteracy level of the community members, demonstrations were more appropriate for community that “learn by seeing and by doing “. It had proved to be an efficient way of imparting skills as opposed to class training. Table 2 presents the number of farmers trained.

Table 2: Number of Farmers Trained

Type of Training Number Trained Total Planned Percent

O&M and ODIS (Water Committee

2250 3000 75

Improved Farming Practices (Contact Farmers)

837 200 42

From contextual point of view of the training modules, in the long run, the performance efficiency will be enhanced and sustained internally (note the production is yet to start). For instance, the community was expected to use the acquired technical skills to ensure that the canals were always well maintained. This intervention would ensure an extended life span thus cutting cost that would have otherwise been incurred from rehabilitation occasioned by poor maintenance of the infrastructure. Also both, soft ware (conflict management, resource mobilization etc.) and hardware (canal and equipment maintenance; and spare parts) aspects would be addressed timely as the skills and knowledge had been impacted on the beneficiaries. The evaluation took the cognizance of the fact the project was forming and strengthening farmers’ management institutions around the traditional institutions. By so doing, the rigours of forming a new outfit was altogether avoided including the time taken to popularize the technologies amongst the farming community. While the training appeared relevant and appropriate in the realization of skills and knowledge delivery in farming, group leadership and in governing management of irrigation systems, the capacity to delivery and transfer the technologies and learning was insufficient. This view was formed out of the interview conducted to key informants by the review team, especially the local training coordinators. The interview revealed that the coordinators were not quite coherent in articulating the issues contained in the training manual. In addition, the contents of the training workshops were poorly reported, which was a manifestation of poor facilitation of the same.

7 The trained contacts farmers have in turn reached out to about 2,000 farmers through farmer field school approach based

training.

15

2.3.7 Quality of Monitoring

In order to establish the status quo condition of the project area, Agrosphere Project report had a provision for undertaking a target area community baseline survey. This appears to have been done according to one of the project quarterly report. Besides the quarterly reports, the project also has a six months progress and planning reports. Further, this review noted that Agrosphere always developed a workplan drawn from the project original logframe that guided them in the implementation of activities in the quarter and or in the six months planning period. At the time of this review, a well documented workplan report for September 2007 to February 2008 was presented to the team. This report also contained a measurable workplan/monitoring plan of the civil works expected to be completed by the end of the project period as depicted in the Table 3, below. In addition, the reports included the challenges/problems encountered in the implementation of activities and provide recommendations to overcome them as they prepare to implement the next quarter of the project. This is important as the pitfalls noticed will be avoided in the future. However, no tools for recording monitoring activities in the field were found.

Table 3: Programme for completion of civil works

No Status

of survey

Status of design

Activity March-May 2008

June – Aug 2008

Remarks

4 Done Done Rehabilitation/Construction of Bode secondary canal 1 (construction of culvert crossing)

Contracting in progress





7 Done Done Rehabilitation construction of Gobanimo – Isomery canal system including excavations and construction of culvert crossings

Construction in progress

8 Done Done Survey and design of desheks supply canals (Yaqjif, Naftur Qur, Rahole canals)


9 Done Construction of the desheks supply canals (Naftur Qur, Rahole and Yaqjif) including excavations and construction of 3 culvert crossings

Implementation planned for Mar/May 2008

10 In progress

In progress

Survey and design of Malashoy canal system

Survey completed for secondary canals

11 In progress

In progress

Rehabilitation construction of Malashoy canal system including excavations of main and secondary canals

Implementation planned for March/April/May 2008 for secondary canals and July/August 2008 for the main canal

12 Done Done Development of Bode Bode / Far Murgid canal culvert crossings

Contracting in progress – Construction

16

expected in Jan/Mar 2008

14 Not done Not done

Development of Bangeni/Geldille pump fed system including excavations and supply of pump sets

Not a priority – farmers prefer gravity system


Survey and design of Gobanimo – Isomery pump fed system

Not a priority due to security issues


Development of Gobanimo – Isomery pump fed system including excavations and supply of pump sets

Not a priority due to security issues

17 Done Done Rehabilitation of Hanole canal (Darasalam village) including excavation and construction of water control structures

Contracting process completed. Implementation works starting in March 2008

18 Done Done Rehabilitation of Yaqle canal (Shaan village) including excavation and construction of water control structures


19 Done Done Rehabilitation of Principal canal (Bulo Barow village) including excavation and construction of water control structures

Contracting process completed. Implementation works

20 Done Done Survey and design of Malable canal (Tawakal village), Boley canal (Jowhar village) and Herey canal(Barire village)

Survey done. Design in progress.

21 Done Done Rehabilitation of Boley canal (Jowhar village) including excavation and construction of water control structures

Survey done. Design in progress.

22 Done Done Rehabilitation of Sheikh Mohamed canal (Nuun village) including excavation and construction of water control structures and supply of pump set


23 Done Done Rehabilitation of Malable canal (Tawakal village) including excavation and construction of water control structures and supply of pump set

Survey done. Design and preparation of Boss in progress.

24 Done Done Rehabilitation of Herey canal (Barire village) including excavation and construction of water control structures and supply of pump set

Survey done. Design and preparation of BoQs in progress.

25 Done Done Rehabilitation of Governo canal (Sabiid village) including excavation and construction of water control structures and supply of pump set


26 Done Done Rehabilitation of Ashir canal (Mareerey village) including excavation and construction of water control structures and supply of pump set

Contracting of construction in progress

17

27 Done Done Rehabilitation of Agley canal (Galware village) including excavation and construction of water control structures and supply of pump set


28 Done Done Rehabilitation of Wadhere canal (Galgube village) including excavation and construction of water control structures and supply of pump set


29 In progress

Survey and design of Huurlaawe canal (Anole village), and Coley/Kalafow canal (Baqdad village)

Survey in progress. Design and BoQs to be ready by April 2008

30 In progress

Rehabilitation of Huurlaawe canal (Anole village) including excavation and construction of water control structures and supply of pump set

Implementation planned for May/July 2008

31 Done Rehabilitation of Coley/Kalafow canal (Baqdad village) including excavation and construction of water control structures and supply of pump set

Survey done. Design and preparation of BoQs in progress.

N.B. For Balow, Nuun, Barire, Tawakal, Sabiid, Mareerey, Galware, Anole, Galgube, Baqdad, Bangeni and Gobanimo pump fed

implementation will include rehabilitation of the canals and supply of irrigation pump sets.

2.4 Effectiveness of the Project

2.4.1 Overview

Being a mid term project evaluation, in terms of the project effectiveness, the extent at which the proposed milestones have been achieved and the implementation process were considered. The evaluation examined the associated benefits deriving from the project, the effectiveness and modalities of converting inputs into outputs, both planned and unforeseen. The two and half years ARDOPIS project that commenced in March 2006 has “household income of rural families increased through improved agricultural production” as its overall objective. The intervention was designed to produce three main results, namely: 1. Selected irrigation systems are rehabilitated and functional, 2. improved agricultural production using irrigation and diversified cropping is practised on traditional

farm land, and 3. Relevant organizations and administrations strengthened to fulfil their functional roles. Realization of the above results are major measuring elements in tracking the project performance towards realization of the purpose which is “farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in productive and appropriate way”. Table 4, below, depicts a summary of the projects performance measured against the indicators provided for measuring realization of the project purpose. While considering the stage of the project (which is about seven months from its official closure) and on average had achieved 47.8 percent implementation, it was unlikely to achieve the project targets,

18

especially the results II and III. Result I that was mainly civil works for canals would be achieved. Although the rehabilitation work had started late (in February for the Gobanimo system and towards the end of March, 2008 for the Hanole canal), considerable groundwork, rated at 70.7% (see Annex 4 (b), Page 47), in preparation for actual rehabilitation activities has been achieved. This could provide the explanation as to why within a very short time spent in the actual rehabilitation of the canals, a total of 62.4 km (of both primary and secondary canals as presented in table 3), had been done within a record time of roughly one and half months. This work represented about 35 percent of the total 180km of the canal that was planned. If the implementation speed demonstrated since February 2008, was maintained, the project was likely to rehabilitate all the canals by the end of June 2008, two months before the planned end of the project in August. More than 90 percent of the results II and III were projected to be accomplished by the end of the project. The results two and three activities were unlikely to be achieved, because of lack of time to organize for regional and international markets, and further institutionalization linkages as targeted in the two results. The overall project performance (overall objective and the hitherto activities and the resultant outputs of the project under review have been assessed and rated at 70.7 percent as presented in Annex 4 (b).

Table 4: Results Oriented rating of the project

Activity Indicators Planned Actual % Remarks/Comments

Rehabilitation of small primary canals (in km)

150 52.24 34.83 Villages targeted reached by canals developed and works continuing

Rehabilitation of secondary canals (in km)

30 10 25.00 Development work is going on

Area under flood irrigation (in ha) 8,000 3,319 41.49 Irrigation had not started, hence this present potential of the target area which will be reached once the water is released

% of the farmer population in the target area having access to adequate irrigation water and utilize this water appropriately, cropping plans and patterns

60 25.93 43.22 This present the potential of farm families to be served out of the targeted 10,000

Number of farmers trained in improved agricultural practices including adapted irrigation techniques, through contact with the farmer trainers and relevant farmers’ organization

3,000 2,000 66.67 Training is going on

Number of farm families receive services from strengthened water users association and village development organization

5,500 4970 90.36 Committees have been formed where irrigation development is taking place, have been trained and are having constant contacts with the farmers

% of target farm families undertaking improved agricultural production

60 1,800 33 About 1000 farmers have been trained. (Farmers in demo plots/target no of 3000). So far only 20% of the 3000 have been trained; hence more time is required in order to train the targeted number of farmers.

Total 47.8 As can be observed much of preparatory activities have been done, hence rehabilitation of the remain parts can be completed pretty fast if the rehabilitation pace is maintained

19

2.4.2 Effectiveness of the Project Strategies and Activities

This sub section focuses on the effectiveness and the results deriving from the projects strategies and activities implemented over the period under review.

2.4.2.1 General observation of the Canals that may affect Implementation Efficiency

Due to many years of neglect and increased level of siltation, the canals have no uniform bed slope. The quality of the workmanship was poor. The quality of workmanship was inferior and this resulted in canals bank collapsing and canals were noted not to be straight. At the time of the visit, heavy siltation was evident. The major maintenance activity of the canal would be de-silting. This was likely to continue to be the main challenge to the operation and maintenance activity of the project after completion date. Another concern noted during the field visit, was the invert levels. The canal depth has continued to increase, resulting in many farmers not getting enough water.

2.4.2.2 Effectiveness of rehabilitating canals and the related Structures

Technical appraisal of hydraulic structures, assessment of pumping sets, profile survey, designs, preparation of bill of quantities (BoQs) and contracting of canals civil works and the water pans had been completed. The actual rehabilitation of the irrigation infrastructure works was underway apart from Malashoy secondary canal 1, Jamada Malashoy secondary canal 2, Jamama, Malashoy main canal and Far Mugid depression also in Jamama. In the Lower Shabelle, all the contracts had been issued for construction of the twelve canals to be rehabilitated and the four water pans. The construction had also started apart for four canals, namely Boley canal, Johwar village, Awdegle; Malable canal, Tawakal village, Awdegle; Herey canal, Barire village, Awdegle; Coley/Alifow canal, Baqdad village, Afgoye; Huurlawe canal, Anole village, Afgoye and for Galgube water pan, Galgube village, Afgoye. Indeed, seven canals and four water pans were complete. The status of rehabilitation activities is presented in table 5, below. However, no crop production has started as within the irrigation command areas of the completed canals. Therefore outputs related to crop production and household incomes were yet to be realized by the beneficiaries. However, the farmers were irrigating using by pumping technology, a technology which was restrictive due to high cost. It was therefore restricted to large scale producers or few farmers who could afford the cost of hiring pumps.

20

Photo 1: Water being pumped from the river to the irrigation canal.

Through EU-Sida funded water pan development, Agrosphere, FAO and AW-Faqi had constructed Darasalam and Shaan water pans. Mubarak water pan was under construction. These structures were useful in that they will discourage livestock from taking water straight from the canal once rehabilitated, which would otherwise result to its destruction. The pans had become a major source of domestic water. However, these pans will be dependant on the level of the river water. This also means that without pumps to feed into the pans, they will remain dry during the dry spell as it was the case with Darasalam Pan during the time of this review.

Table 5: Status of Rehabilitation of Irrigation Systems Implemented by FAO-Agrosphere

No Canal Km

planned Km surveyed

Km designed

Contracted or contracting process

Km implemented

1 Hanole canal, Darasalam village, Awdegle

8 8 8 8 8

2 Yaqle canal, Shaan village, Awdegle

5 5 5 5 5

3 Principle canal, Barow village, Awdegle

5 5 5 5 4

4 Sheikh Mohamed canal, Nuun village, Awdegle

8 8 8 8 4

5 Agley canal, Galware village, Afgoye

12 12 12 12 2.3

6 Ashir/Agley canal, Marereey village, Afgoye

13 13 13 13 7.3

7 Governo canal, Sabiid village, Afgoye

12 12 12 12 6.2

8 Wadhere canal, Galgube village, Afgoye

15 15 15 15 5.0

9 Darasalam water pan, Darasalam village, Awdegle

2 2 2 2 2

10 Shaan water pan, Shaan village, 2 2 2 2 2

21

Awdegle

11 Galgube water pan, Galgube village, Afgoye

2 2 2 2 0

12 Mubarak water pan, Mubarak village, Awdegle

3 3 3 3 3

13 Boley canal, Johwar village, Awdegle

6 6 6 6 0

14 Malable canal, Tawakal village, Awdegle

6 6 6 6 0

15 Herey canal, Barire village, Awdegle

15 15 15 15 0

16 Coley/Alifow canal, Baqdad village, Afgoye

15 15 15 15 0

17 Huurlawe canal, Anole village, Afgoye

12 12 12 12 0

18 Bode Bode secondary canal 1, Jamama 2

2 2 2 2


2 2 2 2


2 2 2 2

21 Gobanimo main canal, Jamama 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6

22 Gobanimo secondary canal 1, Jamama 2 2 2 2

1


2


1

25 Malashoy secondary canal 1, Jamama 2 2 2 0

0

26 Malashoy secondary canal 2, Jamama 2 2 2 0

0

27 Malashoy main canal, Jamama 1.2 1.2 1.2 0 0

28 Desheks - Abubakar/Naftur Qur canal, Jamama 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3

0

29 Desheks, Rahoe/Adede Geri Canal, Jamama 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2

0

39 Desheks, Gadudey Yaqjif canal, Jamama 1 1 1 1

0

40 Far Mugid depression, Jamama 8 8 8 0 0

Total 175.3 175.3 175.3 162.1 62.4

2.4.2.3 Effectiveness of Community Training

The farmers training module is broad and comprehensive touching on both the organizational development aspects (OD) and institutional strengthening (IS) aimed at strengthening the managerial aspects of farmers’ groups. Further, the training module is detailed on the agronomic aspects, O&M of the irrigation systems and marketing component. From the contextual perspective of the module, the training whose objectives are to impart knowledge, skills and, attitudinal change and practices, and establish networks between farmers and other key stakeholders, is appropriate and effective. So far the training has benefited 75 percent of the 3000 farmers’ committee group members (canal, WUA, village development and contact farmers’ committees) planned. Regarding the demonstration and skills training on selected variety of preferred crops, the project had imparted knowledge to 2,000 farmers, representing 66.67 percent of the target.

22

Another effects arising from training is the aspect of enhanced community mobilization and organizational capacity which is directly associated with capacity building as farmers are being organized to manage and maintain the irrigation system. Skills gained from improved farming husbandry could only be assessed at the demonstration plots as the technology is yet to be taken at farmer’s level. This is because the canals being completed at the time of this review were yet to convey water to the farms. Demonstrations plots were served by pumps. However, the quality of farming at the demo plots illustrated good farming husbandry in terms of health of plants and spacing, management of soils and variety of crops planted and appeared to do well. It was worthy noting that some of these skills and knowledge were gradually being imparted and they largely remain as intended in the shorter term basis. The effectiveness of these outputs needs to be further analyzed in terms of results as outcomes positively affecting the committees’ performance in attainment of the groups’ cohesiveness and in the operation and maintenance of the irrigation systems. In particular, the time taken in the training sessions appears insufficient to adequately cover the ODIS and the specific modules for instance the marketing, O&M etc.

2.4.2.4 Effectiveness in Crop Diversification and Marketing

Contact farmers interviewed registered their satisfaction from crop diversification intervention both in terms of introduction of new crops and training on improved agricultural activities. Table 6, below, shows the crops introduced and promoted including chemical supplied by Agrosphere in all the demonstration plots established. As per the information obtained from the contact farmers, they had been trained on the following aspects of improved farming practices:

• Seed spacing (for example, see figure 1),

• Intercropping

• Crop rotation,

• Diversification of crops,

• Application of fertilizer (Cow-dung, like fertilizer, easily found in loco), Kurstaky, against the stem borers on maize, Nim leaves solution, against the Thrips and cocciniglie on sesame

• Control of pesticides, and

• Post-harvest practices.

23

Table 6 Planting Materials and Chemicals Supplied

Types of Material Type/Variety

Cereals

Somtux Maize

Local Maize

Sorghum

Legumes

Erect Cowpea - KK1

Local Cowpea

Groundnut

Vegetables

Onion - Red Creole, Texas Grano

Water melon - Sugar Baby, Crimson sweet

Tomatoes - Money maker and Roma

Carrots – Nantes

Lettuce – Great lakes

Hot Pepper Red Cayenne

Sweet pepper California wonder

Capsicum – California wonder

Capsicum – Red cayenne

Okra – Clemson spineless

Oil crop Sesame

Chemicals/fertilizer

Urea

Triple super phosphate

Copper fungicides

Thiovit fungicides

Victory fungicides

Keshet aphicides

Fodder crops Sudan grass

Dolicos lab lab

Figure 1: Intercropping maize,-sesame and maize-cowpea

The contact farmers confirmed that once they were trained, they used the skill gained to carry out good farming practices at the demonstration sites where other farmers from the area come to learning new skills. Since February last year, Agrosphere had provided 11 pumps to contact farmers to support practical training carried out in the demonstration plots. This strategy would effectively reach more people and in a format that the majority of farmers who were illiterate would be able to adapt.

24

2.4.4 Gender and Environmental Issues

Attempts to mainstream gender in the operations of FAO and Agrosphere were observed. In its training manual, one of the topics trained was aimed at mainstreaming gender roles in irrigation development. The evaluation team also noted that Agrosphere ensured that at least a third of the trained farmers are women. It’s however not possible to assess the effects of gender mainstreaming in skills acquisition and its impacts on the entire management of the irrigation system and in particular in enhancing governance. This could be possible once the system start operating.

2.4.5 Visibility of EC

A strong bondage has been created between Agrosphere and the beneficiaries as a result of rehabilitation of canals that is expected to contribute in gaining of livelihoods for people within the canal command areas. Billboards erected at the project sites bear message of the parties involved in the implementation of the ARDOPIS project (as can be observed photo 2 below). In addition, it was observed that officials of the local authority were aware that the activities implemented by Agrosphere have been financially supported by EC.

Photo 2: A billboard conveying message of the organization behind the project implementation.

2.5 Impact of the Project

2.5.1 Overview

The evaluation team viewed project impacts as an assessment of the systematic changes in farmers’ lives as a consequence of the interventions implemented. Short and long term impacts, as well as direct and indirect impacts have been considered in the assessment. Further impacts have been assessed in terms of their positive or negative effects upon the targeted beneficiaries and the environment. By the time of this review, no agricultural production attributable to ARDOPIS had started as the canals rehabilitation was ongoing. For the few canals excavated, other related facilities

25

were not yet in place to allow the release of water into the canals. As such, agricultural related impacts are basically projected.

2.5.2 Desirable Impacts

2.5.2.1 Projected Impacts from Irrigation Infrastructure Rehabilitation

By the time of this review, only 62.4km of primary and secondary canals had been rehabilitated but were yet to convey water. What emerged clearly was that farmers were anxious to resume irrigated agriculture. In Afgoye, the review team found farmers clearing the canals in the expectation that the rehabilitation was soon to commence. Clearing “would ensure that the excavation, which had been delayed for more than one and half years, would takes less time once it started” remarked Mr. Ade Mohammed Musa, farmer in Garlwar village, Afgoye.

Photo 3: Farmers within Acaaye Canal Command area have started clearing the canal in anticipation of commencement of Rehabilitation Activities.

According to these farmers, irrigation would revive cultivation activities which had stalled for about two years after the canals silted. The collapse of the canal had confined crop production to the few farmers who were able to hire pumps. This had resulted in many households losing significant source of livelihood and rendering them vulnerable. The presence of extensive uncultivated lands did bears witness of the impact of silting of canals to irrigate to crop production.

Once the targeted canals are rehabilitated, farmers would revamp farming activities which would result in households’ food security and source of income from sale of surplus yield. However, as depicted in Table , below, about 50 percentage of the targeted canals for rehabilitation would be pump fed, thus sustaining high operation cost of the ever escalating fuel prices. This was an issue of concern to many farmers that would be beneficiaries.

26

Photo 4: Farming is currently restricted to the few farmers who are able to rent out pumps

Table 7: Targeted Irrigation rehabilitation and water conveyance system

Village System Canal

Darasalam Gravity system Hanole canal

Jowhar Gravity system Boley canal

Shaan Gravity system Yaqle

District Wide(Awdegle) Feeder tracks Water harvesting

Darasalam, Shaan and Mubarak

District wise (Afgoye) Water harvesting Galgube

Bode Bode Command area Gravity irrigation Bode Bode Canal

Gobanimo – Isomery - Kabirow Gravity irrigation Gobanimo, Isomery and Kabirow

Malashoy canal Gravity irrigation Nyirey, and Janale Jay

Deshek - Naftur Qur Demo, Qolley, Hongore, Dovaley

Gravity irrigation Naftur Qur, Rahole and GadudeyYaqjif

Bangeni / Dhygaras Pump fed irrigation Bangeni, Dhygaras, Jamama

District Wide Jamama Water harvesting

Barire Pump fed system Herey canal

Tawakal Pumped system Malable canal

Nuun Pump fed system Sheikh Mohamed canal

Bulo Barow Pump fed Burijibale (Principle) Canal

Sabiid Pump fed Governo canal

Qanole

Pump fed Huurlawe canal

Mareerey Pump fed Ashir canal

Galware Pump fed Agley canal

Galgube Pump fed Wadhere anal

Baqdad Pump fed Coley canal

Desheks (Naftur Qur, Demo, Hongore, Dovely)

Gravity fed Naftur Qur, Rahole and Yaqjif

Bangeni, Dhygaras, Jamama Pump fed Geldile

Gobanimo , Isomery and Kabirow Pump fed Gobanimo

2.5.2.2 Impacts Deriving from Crop Diversification and the Demonstration Plots

Agrosphere had managed to establish 18 demonstration plots (see the Table 8) and initiated crop production primarily for training through contact farmers. It is therefore proper to state that farmers had and continue to acquire essential farming skills and knowledge in improved crop husbandry and diversification. This had been helpful to the few farmers who were undertaking crop production by

27

using pumps that were hired. For the majority of the farmers in the project area, it could be argued that these skills would be a major boost to crop production once the canals were operational and would positively impact on the households’ food security and income.

Photo 5: Demonstration plot at Johar

Table 8: Demonstration plots Established in Lower Shabelle and Lower Juba

No Location Remark

Lower Shabelle (Afgoye/ Awdegle)

1 Tawakal village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

2 Mohamed canal in Nuun village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

3 Burijibale canal in Bulo Barow village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

4 Herey canal in Barire village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

5 Governo canal in Sabiid village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

6 Ashir canal in Marerey village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

7 Wardher canal in Galgube village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

8 Calgley canal in Galware village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

9 Alifow canal in Baqdad village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

10 Huurlaawe canal in Anole village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07

11 Hanole canal in Darasalam village Demo plot gravity fed

12 Yaqle canal in Shaan village Demo plot gravity fed

13 Boley canal in Jowhar village Demo plot gravity fed

Lower Juba (Jamama)

14 Gobanimo/Isomery Using pump supplied in 2005

15-16

Bangeni/\Dhygaras/Geldile Using pump supplied in 2005

17-18

Borini Iidow /Borini Sharifo Using pump supplied in 2005

2.5.2.3 Anticipated Impact from Community Mobilization and Capacity Building

The skills and knowledge the farming community had acquired from the project’s demonstration plots would enable them to run farming as a business for improved production while ensuring the integrity

28

of the resource base (water and soils). It was assumed that the skills learned on operation and maintenance of irrigation system and on managerial aspects, would equip the committees with capacity to manage and run common property resources through effectively managing conflicts encountered from the users. Moreover, the skills would improve on the allocation and distribution of these resources, especially water. The training in O&M would ensure that the benefits from the irrigation system were improved and sustained as much of the technical skills were owned by the managing committee. In addition, the act of improved community mobilization and organization would increasingly trigger the process of social capital building which eventually has the potential of creating a more consolidated and stable farmers’ society in the long run breaking clannism and ethnicity cords. Moreover, management and governance of common resources, especially water resource and the associated facilities would improve as farmers become more organized and responsive to O&M needs. Currently, pastoralists utilizing Shan water pan were paying user fee of 500 Somalia shillings after every 10 days into the maintenance kitty.

2.5.2.4 Impacts of the Water Pans Constructed

Water pans had brought water for livestock and for domestic consumption closer to the people. Specifically, the Darasalam water pan had reduced travel distance from 8 km travelled to Shabelle River to 2.5 km in average. In addition, it had contained farmers within their villages. This time, last year (during dry spells), villagers reported that they had migrated and temporarily and settled along the banks of River Shabelle. Also, population was reported to have increased around the water pans, although the actual increase could not be ascertained.

2.5.3 Emerging and Potential Negative Impacts

The negative impacts include existing and possible new ones are as described below:

• Risks of drowning and attraction to dangerous wildlife:-Risks of drowning in the canals or the water pans were real and sensitization needs to be done, especially to boys who were likely to use the facilities for swimming. In addition, dangerous wildlife, like crocodiles and hippos could find their way into the canals or the water pans. Like in Shan water pan, a crocodile had found its way into the water pan posing a danger to livestock and human being.

• Vector breeding grounds: - Rehabilitated water canals and water pans could be suitable breeding grounds for mosquito and other vectors consequently raising incidences of malaria and other waterborne diseases.

• Environmental Impacts:- Some of these may include degradation of water quality and quantity, and degradation of the land resources. Efficient and productive use of water resources training to be strengthened in order to eliminate water wastefulness. Other important indicator for ensuring water productivity was its adequacy, dependability and equity in the allocation. Lined canals would increase the efficiency of water flow and eliminate wastes, but the cost was extremely high and limiting.

• Public health issues-due to lack of proper sanitation, canals were also used for solid and waste disposal.

• The introduction of irrigation water into a previously arid environment had the potential to dramatically alter soil and water conditions. Some of these impacts were the direct result of changes in water flow, others were the results of the interaction between water and soil habitat and are:

o Reduced flow to downstream ecological systems/users due abstraction for irrigation

29

o Return water from the project on the natural systems

Photo 6: Farmers have erected a fence in the water pan to prevent attack of livestock and human being by the crocodile that had swam into the Shan Pan From Shabelle River

2.6 Potential for Replication the Project

Since the main activities of the rehabilitation of the irrigation infrastructures had not been complete, it was not possible for the evaluation team to make an objective assessment of the replication potential of the project. Nevertheless, the evaluation team noted an attempt made towards developing and strengthening the community structures for the improved management of the irrigation infrastructure to enhance crop production as an enterprise. Building of strong community management structures would immensely contribute to the project sustainability as well as development of potential replication of similar crop enterprises in the project area and beyond. The ability of the contact farmers to adopt and transfer the irrigation skills and knowledge to other farmers, underlined a potential for dissemination and replication of project. In addition, the project had an M&E plan that lessons learnt oriented and those experiences were likely to used for improvement of the project performance in each stage of the project cycle.

2.7 Sustainability of the Project

Sustainability here looks at whether the positive outcomes of the project were likely to continue after external funding ends, and also whether longer term impact on the wider development process can be sustained by the target group members. As the production had not started, sustainability then focused on preparatory activities. Agrosphere had focused on capacity building and organizing the targeted farmers. It was anticipated that this would translate into an improved management of the entire irrigation system. Sustainability concerns were built-in into project conception from the early stages of its formulation. Attempt towards building sustainability of the project was noted out of the formation and/or strengthening of the community governance structures and technical training on O&M of the irrigation system. This would enable the community to repair and maintain the infrastructure internally when the

30

operation starts. Strong management committee not withstanding, the importance of having effective relationship with the local administration was underlined as one of the challenges associated with the management of common property like an irrigation infrastructure. The challenge was how to deal with free riders or utility maximizing members who frequently float the by-laws. A strong support from the local administration would go a long in dealing with such errand members of the society whose behaviour might be beyond the management capacity of the committees. Involvement of the beneficiaries which was a strong underlying strength observed in the overall design and practice of the project, would promote commitment and instil the sense of ownership. The context of the project area being arid, the irrigation and farming technologies fits well with their needs. This was expected to engender commitment and instil the motivation to safeguard and maintaining the irrigation system. This would be cemented further by the ability of the community to carry out O&M activities, given that their capacity would have been developed by Agrosphere. General security in the area no doubt would play a major role in ensuring maintenance of the developments achieved so far as well as social infrastructure was revamped through training.

31

3.0 KEY LESSONS LEARNT

Lesson learning is an important component of effective project management and implementation. Lessons learnt should be an integral part in all the stages of project cycle management. A lesson is a new idea, process, experience or understanding, which goes to improve the way the project is managed and contributes to greater effectiveness and wider impact of the of an activity. Usually interventions do not turn out exactly the way they were planned; sometimes the needs are not immediately clear or cannot be easily understood; circumstances also do change, for instance there may be new people in the community, for our case, the IDPs who have settled in the project area running from conflict in Mogadishu, there may be new needs, old needs may have been addressed or problems might be affecting people differently. In this light, it is needless to state that project must make a conscious and deliberate effort to tease out lessons, document them and incorporate them into the project cycle as well as share them with partners and other stakeholders in order to contribute to best practice and enhance final products. Lessons learnt are more critical for the case of mid term evaluation as it focuses more on the implementation process in view of improving its performance. This section of the report summarizes some of the lessons learnt from FAO and Agrosphre’s project implementation hitherto. It is grouped into Relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impacts and sustainability of the interventions.

3.1 Relevance of the Project

• Despite the project delay in implementation, farmers’ interest had not waned as the rehabilitation of the irrigation system means gaining of livelihood, which they lost as a result of silting of the canals.

• To maintain the irrigation system through out the year, pumping offers the most logical and immediate solution. The high cost for running a pumping scheme was only possible if the farmers would be organized/ form structures that would provide for cost recovery.

3.2 Efficiency of the Project

• Strengthening of the existing community governing structures, other than creating absolutely new structures, will pose a lesser challenge of popularising it amongst the community and other stakeholders, especially the local administration. Transaction costs will be low as all stakeholders understand roles and responsibilities of traditional structures upon which project management committee are drawn.

• Organizing and strengthening the community takes a lot of time and resources. But ones the community were sensitized and commitment obtained, undertaking civil works was easier and fast, thus enhancing efficiency of rehabilitating.

• Farmer field school training based approach equips farmers with practical skills, and more farmers were reached at low cost in terms time and financial resources.

3.3 Emerging and Potential Effectiveness of the Project

• Water pans had considerably responded to people and livestock water needs and was encouraging settlement.

• The community was getting more organized as a result of the training received as well as the newly found motivation of ensuring proper utilization of the water resources.

• The irrigation interventions were intended for improving farming practices, intensifying and diversifying production systems. However, providing access to water for irrigation alone would not

32

definitely change crop production patterns as farmers will continue applying outdated farming techniques. Thus, the technologies transfer provided through farmers field schools were absolutely necessary for impacting the desired change.

3.4 Emerging and Potential Project Impacts

3.4.1 Positive Changes Deriving from the Project Interventions

• Improved farmers’ organization would result into increased social capital building and positively impact on consolidation of the community.

• The reduced cost of maintaining silt free canals can only come from increased number of farmers and proper catchment management/protection.

3.5 Sustainability of the Desired Project Outcomes

• It is hoped that the empowerment of the community in O&M would ensure that the capacity for basic maintenance and repair of the irrigation system was owned and retained in them even after the project comes to an end.

• Projects like ARDOPIS addressing reduction of poverty amongst vulnerable communities like the Lower Shabelle and Lower Juba, adequate time need to be availed to capacity building. More time is required for the community to apply the new technology where backstopping services are provided.

•

33

4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Conclusions

1. While taking the time planned for completion of the rehabilitation works, which according to the

Project Report was projected for completion by the 20th month of the implementation period and while assuming, the remaining rehabilitation activities would only be complete by the 30th month, which marks the end of the project implementation timeline, the project is behind schedule by six months.

2. The project had hitherto achieved 70.7 percent activities implementation. Specifically, when the

project was assessed in terms of its achievement of the three project results, only 47.8 percent had been delivered. The civil work had achieved (actual total length primary and secondary canal t be rehabilitated was 180km), 62.4km that was about 35 percent. If the implementation speed demonstrated since February 2008, was maintained, the project was likely rehabilitate all the canals by the end of June 2008, two months before the planned end of the project in August. More than 90 percent of the results II and III were projected to be accomplished by the end of the end of the project completion date. However, the regional and international markets would not be fully achieved partly because of lack time, but also because institutionalizing market linkages would require time and the environment within the project area is not conducive to this activity within the foreseeable future.

3. This review has established that local and regional authorities support was essential and

strengthened performance efficacy of the community based governance structures. Its support was actually a major precondition that determined the performance in terms of project legitimization. The relationship between Agrosphere and the Somali government (FTG) administration, had, however, not been cordial, but had improved at the time of writing the report.

4. The Agrosphere partnership with AW-Faqi was a well thought out strategy as the latter had

brought on broad local experience in agricultural extension services as a local CBO. However, it this relationship was being used for monitoring of the project activities.

5. Skills gained from improved farming husbandry could only be assessed at the demonstration plots

as the technology was yet adopted at individual farmer’s level. This was because the canals were being done during the review of the project. However, farmers had demonstrations plots that were being irrigated by pumping water from the river. The quality of farming at these plots illustrated good farming husbandry in terms of health of plants and spacing, management of soils and variety of crops planted and were an indicator a potential successful irrigated farming everything else being equal.

6. Monitoring and evaluation: Agrosphere undertook an initial baseline survey to establish the

benchmark upon which monitoring and evaluation of the project can be measured. The project had also quarterly and biannual reports documenting the project planning and progress. In addition, the reports included the challenges/problems encountered in the implementation of activities and provided recommendations to overcome them as they prepared the next phase of implementation. This was important as the pitfalls noticed along the way were avoided. However, no tools for recording monitoring activities in the field were found. As such, the quality of recording and documentation was certainly questionable. A simplified and easy to fill field progress appraisal tool for the field officers and the community committees’ representative would enhance proper recording thus improving quality of the monitoring activities.

34

7. Involvement of the beneficiaries was strong underlying strength observed in the overall design and practice of the project, and was expected to promote commitment and instil the sense of ownership. The context of the project being in an arid area, the irrigation and farming technologies fitted well with beneficiaries needs. This was expected to engender commitment and instil the motivation to safeguard and maintaining the irrigation system. This would be cemented further by the ability of the community to carry out O&M activities as their capacity was being developed by Agrosphere.

4.2 Recommendations

1. The project implementation is behind schedule by six months. The Project implementation phase was on a crucial implementation phase that involved heavy civil works. While considering the time left, Agrosphere should carefully plan for the civil works investments and try to get rid of unnecessary delay, such as delay caused breakdowns of machines and strict monitoring of works during the construction to ensure compliance with the design specifications. This would essentially entail taking advantage of the lessons learnt and experience gained during the implementation process to ensure that care was taken to “getting it right in the first place” and all the planned outputs were effectively implemented. In this regards, the project purpose and objective were likely to be realized within project completion date.

2. The evaluation team noted that by the end of the implementation period in August 20008, FAO- Agrosphere ARDOPIS project would have implemented majority of the activities as contained in the logframe. However, activities such as the regional and international market linkages would largely be left undone. It is recommended the Aerosphere re-evaluate whether these activities are necessary with a view of discarding them all together. It was the opinion of the evaluation team that the project lacked the capacity and the environment was not conducive for promotion of markets and market linkages both in the region and internationally. This does not however, call for change of the project logframe as farmers are expected to make use of local markets (village) to sell their surplus crop. Nonetheless, the evaluation team recommends a-no-cost extension phase of not less than three months. This should be purposely used for strengthening the capacity of the farmers to utilize, manage and maintain the irrigation system and would expected to be funded from monies earmarked for marketing activities.

3. Agrosphere action of amending and strengthening its relationship with the local administration

was in the right direction and should be enhanced and sustained. In this regard, it was recommended that Agrosphere should foster a good relationship with the local authorities and ensure that the community structures interact well with the authorities. This will help community committees to deal with conflicts especially over resource. The local administration would help in enforcing community decisions that they are unable to solve internally.

4. Agrosphere cooperation with Aw-Faqi is a strategic direction of resource management and attaining value for money. Agrosphere should strengthen this cooperation and at the same time examine ways to strengthen implementation of monitoring and evaluation of project activities using taking advantage of local skills and experience of Aw-Faqi. This kind of relationship is encouraged.

5. The Agrosphere should provide for follow up activities to ensure that the knowledge available

at the demonstration plots on crop husbandry was effectively applied on members’ farms once irrigation cultivation begin. This should be part of developing the exit strategy.

35

6. Monitoring and evaluation: These are important elements in project cycle management. The

aims of both monitoring and evaluation is to improve the overall management of projects and to enhance their performance by providing information and feedback on the implementation and the performance of the projects to all parties concerned. But the quality of the monitoring has everything to do with the quality of the data collected. Agrosphere should design simple and easy to fill implementation monitoring forms for its field officers and the committees. This should be followed with design of a simple database which is easily run to obtain results.

7. Right identification of the target community, responsiveness to the real needs and the technological relevance of the interventions coupled with Involvement of the beneficiaries are essential project tenets towards creation of the sustainability of the project. The project appears to have worked on these aspects quite effectively out of the participatory assessment carried out during the project start up activities. It has also ensured integration of the beneficiaries during the project activities’ implementation phase. The project should continue involving the farmers particularly now that the project had reached critical implementation phases and as the project move towards its final stages. This will allow farmers to effectively own and manage outputs and benefits accruing from the project.

36

8. ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE

EC funded

AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION AND DIVERSIFICATION OF HIGH POTENTIAL IRRIGATION

SCHEMES (ARDOPIS)

OSRO/SOM/510/EC and OSRO/SOM/511/EC

Contract Proposal for Project Evaluation

Terms of Reference

1- Evaluation of Project OSRO/SOM/510/EC in Middle Shabelle (Balad District) Lower

Shabelle, (Agfoye and Awdegle districts) and Lower Juba (Jamama district).

2- Evaluation of Project OSRO/SOM/511/EC in Lower Shabelle (Merka and Qoryooley

districts).

Country: Somalia Contract Authority: INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION (IO)

1. Background

IO, Agrosphere and CEFA have been collaborating with EC Somalia Unit individually for more than 10 years in agricultural development of Southern Somalia. A series of actions funded by EC Somalia have resulted in data gathered and kept under SWALIM, bulletins on food security situation in Somalia produced by FSAU, rehabilitation of agricultural infrastructure including irrigation canals, river embankment and farmers training in appropriate crop production by both Agrosphere and CEFA. In 2006, IO, CEFA and AGROSPHERE responded jointly to a call for proposals by the European Commission, and subsequently won the contracts for implementation of the ARDOPIS projects (OSRO/SOM/510/EC and OSRO/SOM/511/EC) aimed at rehabilitation of irrigation schemes. IO will implement this action together with Agrosphere (Lower Shabelle, Middle and Lower Juba) and CEFA (Merka and Qoryooley Districts). The main objective of the ARDOPIS project is that household income of rural families is increased through improved agricultural production.

37

The action purpose is that farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in a productive and appropriate way. At result level ARDOPIS is expected to achieve the following:

In the action implemented by CEFA: 1. 4 sub-command irrigation systems in Merka and Qoreyooley districts with a total control area

of 23,170 ha rehabilitated during the project period; 2. At least 3,000 farm families have improved agricultural production through use of irrigation and

diversified crops during the project period; 3. At least 3,000 farm families practice improved soil and water use and management during the

project period; 4. At least 1,000 farm families practice market-oriented farming for 2 seasons targeting local and

export markets during the project period. 5. At least 5,000 farm families receive services through strengthened relevant organization and

administration. For the action implemented by Agrosphere:

1. At least 150 km of small primary canals and 30 km of secondary canals are rehabilitated; 2. 8,000 ha of flood fed irrigated area developed; 3. At least 60% of the farmer population in the target area have access to adequate irrigation

water and utilize this water appropriately, cropping plans and patterns. 4. At least 3,000 farmers will be trained in improved agricultural practices including adapted

irrigation techniques, through contract with farmer trainers and relevant farmers’ organizations. 5. At least 5,500 farm families receive services from strengthened water users association and

village development organization. 2. Contract objectives

A local Consultancy Firm will be contracted by IO (Contracting Authority) in order to carry out separate evaluations of the two projects. The main aim is to obtain an objective and independent analysis of the progress of each project in terms of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness towards the expected impact and sustainability. A substantiated assessment should be made on the progress, achievements of objectives and results with reference to the project proposal and log frame as well as the implementation methodologies and the projects internal procedures. The evaluations will also identify and document lessons learnt and make recommendations that the Project partners and stakeholders may use to improve the ongoing implementation. One contract is being provided to cover both evaluations in view of the common partnership with IO and expectations of additional information to be gained from comparison between the two projects. The Consultancy Firms responding to the tender will be evaluated on the content of their proposal, their experience with evaluations, knowledge of the Somalia context and the quality of the individual candidates proposed. The company selected will be entirely responsible for the recruitment of the staff/consultants, their travel and the content of the final report. The Consultancy Firm should indicate, in accordance with section seven below (work plan and timetable) the number of days considered necessary to carry out the field work and data collection in Somalia. This is not envisaged to exceed 10 days per project.

A detailed budget/cost estimate should be submitted under separate cover at the same time as the technical proposal.

3. Issues to be covered

38

The following are some of issues to be included in the evaluations:

• Project design and its relevance - Extent to which the project has been consistent with, and supportive of, the policy and programme framework within which the action is placed; consistency between the planned resources, activities, outputs and objectives; adequacy of the project institutional arrangements.

• Project management and internal coordination arrangements, and the extent to which timely and appropriate decisions were made to support effective implementation and problem resolution.

• Stakeholder involvement and participation in the management and implementation of the project, the level of local ownership, as well as beneficiaries’ satisfaction.

• Performance - Efficiency (input delivery, cost control and activity management).

• Effectiveness (delivery of outputs and progress towards achieving the purpose).

• Contribution to impact, including possible unexpected outcomes or results.

• Sustainability (to what extent project achieved results so far are likely to be operated and maintained in the long term).

• Cross-cutting issues – gender and environment consideration in implementation of the project.

• Replication – analysis of replication potential of project positive results.

• Quality of works implemented in relation to technical specifications and standards.

• The EC visibility is also to be considered.

• Co-ordination with institutions and agencies (e.g. Local NGOs; Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture and Environment; INGOs; etc.).

4. Approach / Methodology

The approach should be impartial, independent, and credible. It is expected that the different project stakeholders will have the opportunity to express their views and that recommendations will be useful and applicable by the project management.

The consultants are expected to conduct a thorough assessment of relevant project documentation and products as well as internal management practices. Interviews with key project personnel and collaborators should be conducted as well as with key stakeholders and beneficiaries The evaluations should be in line with the EC evaluation guidelines and principles and tools of Project Cycle Management (PCM). In particular, they should evaluate links of the projects to the EC Strategy for Somalia (2002-2007) (SISAS). The methodology to be used in conducting the evaluations and tools for the same, taking account of the above considerations, should be included in the technical proposal by the Consultancy Firm. The selected consultants will be provided with the following documents for reference:

• The SISAS (EC Strategy for the implementation of special aid in Somalia 2002 – 2007)

• The project proposals including the log frame and budget

• The project reports (Inception, Summary and interim reports and financial reports)

39

5. Expertise required

The team will be composed of two experts, one Team Leader and one Technical Specialist. To the extent possible, they will work and travel as a team to cover both the CEFA and the Agrosphere project activities. The Team Leader should have at least 10 years experience of rural development project management with a good knowledge of project cycle management, monitoring and evaluation. The Technical Specialist should have a degree in civil engineering, irrigation or related field, and demonstrable experience in designing, monitoring and/or evaluating irrigation structures and projects. Some experience of similar EU funded project evaluation is required, especially for the Team Leader. Significant field experience in Somalia would be a strong asset. 6. Reporting requirement

Two separate reports, one for the project implemented in partnership with CEFA and one implemented by the project implemented in partnership with Agrosphere will be prepared. The preliminary draft report should be submitted, electronically as well as printed, to the contract authority within 10 working days following the presentation of findings and preliminary recommendations to the project management. The final report should take account of comments received and be submitted no later than one month after submission of the initial draft report. Aspects common to the two projects should be included in reports of both projects. Each final report should include:

• An executive summary (no more than 5 pages) focussing on critical points of the analysis with the main conclusions and recommendations

• A main text, including description of the project and analysis according to the evaluation criteria

• Conclusions and recommendations

Annexes of the report should include:

• Terms of references of the evaluation

• Name of the evaluators and their company (this should NOT include substantial information on company activities)

• Methodology applied

• Logical framework (original and updated)

• Map of the project intervention

• List of documents consulted

• List of persons and institutions met during the missions

7. Work plan and time table

The proposal from the Consultancy Firm should present a detailed work plan for each evaluation which should set out the consultants’ schedule for the following activities:

40

• Preparation in Nairobi: Meetings in Nairobi with IO, CEFA/Agrosphere and EC Somalia Unit; review of secondary data

• Meetings with project staff and stakeholders in Somalia

• Field work, data collection in the field and meetings with communities key respondents

• Presentation of findings and preliminary recommendations to the project management.

All the above activities should take place within a period of two weeks.

The following additional activities will be realized:

• Preparation of draft reports;

• Discussion of draft reports with the project management of IO, CEFA/Agrosphere and EC Nairobi

• Finalisation et presentation of evaluation reports

The final reports should be delivered no later than one month after the submission of the initial draft reports. The field work for the Evaluation of the project implemented in partnership with CEFA should take place in February 2008. Any additional field work required for the Evaluation of the Agrosphere project should take place in March 2008. 8. Assistance to the Consultancy Firm from the Contracting Authority and its partners

IO, CEFA and Agrosphere will make available the following information and facilities required by the consultants in the course of their assignment:

• Relevant reports, documents, maps, data in Nairobi and Somalia;

• Office space, furniture, access to a computer, printers, stationery and communication facilities in the field;

• Project budget and record of expenditures to date.

• The use of project vehicles and drivers in the field;

• Facilitation of travel to Somalia.

41

ANNEX 2: COMPANY AND CONSULTANTS PROFILE

a) Acacia Consultants Ltd Profile b)

Founded in 1995, Acacia Consultants Ltd. is a Kenyan based consultancy company that specializes in providing technical assistance and advice in the areas of livelihoods and food security, natural resource management and social and organizational development. Acacia has profound knowledge of the arid lands both from a technical and an institutional point of view. It is a full service provider with access to the management resources required to deploy and support technical assistance teams on the ground. Acacia’s Vision is ‘Poverty reduced in the Greater Horn of Africa through empowered communities sustainably achieving their livelihood goals’. Acacia’s Mission is ‘to provide clients and partners independent and high quality consultancy services in order to enhance the capacities of marginalized women and men to exploit appropriate technologies and to secure their basic rights’. Guided by these, the company has grown from a common interest in the development of livelihoods and pastoral lands in East Africa. Acacia’s areas of expertise have expanded both geographically and sector-wise to provide high level expertise in programme and project design, policy formulation, monitoring and evaluation, training and facilitation, applied research, financial and other services. Acacia advocates rights-based and livelihoods approaches and believe it is essential to promote sustainable use of natural resources and mainstream issues of HIV/AIDS and gender into any intervention in order for it to be effective in the long term. Acacia’s technical services are offers services in the following areas:

• Relief and development,

• Multi-sectoral Development (Integrated programmes).

• Social Development (health and education) ,

• Food Security, Agriculture and Livestock Development,

• Conflict and Disaster Management,

• Small and Medium Enterprises and Trade, Crosscutting issues: Acacia believes that it is essential to address and incorporate the following themes in programmes at all levels, as these are cross-sectoral and fundamental to poverty alleviation. The Acacia experience and expertise covers these issues:

• Environmental sustainability

• Gender equity

• Civil society and private sector partnerships

• HIV/AIDS Technical skills and services: The attainment of Acacia’s overall goal is achieved through the provision of the following key services;

• Natural resources inventories

• Livelihood and food security assessments

• Research studies

• Capacity development

• Programme and project design

• Monitoring and evaluation

• Institutional Development

• Policy Formulation

42

Administrative and Financial Management Services: Acacia offers a full range of administrative and financial management services in support of all technical assignments. This includes the control, management and reporting of the use of funds, the establishment of budget control systems to ensure transparency in expenditure, recruitment, placement and management of personnel, logistical services and support to field teams, contract management and all associated administration and liaison. Acacia’s clients: Acacia has a long history of involvement in donor-funded assignments, and clients have included bi-lateral agencies (RNE/DGIS), DFID, Sida, JICA, USAID etc), multi-lateral agencies (WFP, UNICEF, UNDP, FAO, EU, World Bank), national governments (Kenya, Ethiopia, Somalia, Uganda etc ), international and national NGOs, research and community Groups. Human resources of Acacia: Field experience by Acacia staff dates back to the early 1980s with professional involvement in relief and development of over 10 years. There are five permanent employees of Acacia Consultants Ltd and 30 close associate consultants providing services to clients through Acacia giving the company an extensive breadth of experiences working in environmental and natural resources management and livelihoods development. In addition to the core professional staff, Acacia has an extensive pool of international and local consultants who provide services on a short-term basis.

c) Consultants Summarised Profile

1) Martin Kamau – Team leader and M&E Specialist: Mr. Kamau is a highly experienced program development and monitoring and evaluation specialist. He has worked for over 10 years with communities in Kenya, Uganda, Somali and Sudan as a socio-economist and CBNRM expert. He has carried out numerous evaluations and socio-economic studies. As a community development practitioner, he has assisted in developing training manuals to various development organizations and conducting Training of Trainers for effective utilization of the tools and techniques in the manuals. These manuals include project cycle management. Recently (2008) he trained CDTF’s supported forest associations in Nyandarua and Laikipia districts in attempt to promote their planning and managerial skills while applying project cycle management approach and tools. Towards the end of 2007 and into 2008, he was the principal socio-economist in the evaluation of the Concern World Wide food security programme evaluation. He was the Lead socio-economist for End of Project External Evaluation for COOPI’s Pastoralist Livelihood Emergency Assistance in Sool, Sanaag (Somaliland) and Bari (Puntland) regions funded by EC; principal socio-economist for the Evaluation of Plan International’s Family and Basic Community Services Programme and was contracted by International Institute of Environment and Development (IIED), London, to carry out evaluations of Agenda 21 programmes of Jinja Municipality. He was also the lead consultant in conducting evaluations for Early Child Development Programmes, touching on child care; hygiene (including water and sanitation) and child education projects developed and conducted by SAIDIA (Samburu Aid in Africa); Water development projects by Semi Arid Rural Development projects (SARDEP in Laikipia and Kajiado Districts; and Arid and Semi Arid Lands, Laikipia (ASAL, Laikipia. He has also acted as the Principal socio-economist in numerous Environmental Impact Assessments and Audits. In particular he was the principal consultant in the Environmental Impact Assessment for the Alternative Livelihoods Area Economic Recovery Programme, a Horn Relief Programme in Somaliland. 2) Engineer C.G. Kamau - Technical Expert: Eng. Kamau is a specialist in all aspects of Water and Sanitation; water resources, water supply, sanitation and other social infrastructure formulation; design, implementation and operation/maintenance management; Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit , Supervision and Construction Management of Integrated Engineering Works. In the recent past he has been actively involved in the Value for Money technical and environmental audit of

43

several water and sanitation projects in Kenya. He has over thirty years’ hands on experience in civil engineering projects. Among the projects he has been involved in within the last five years includes: Value for money technical and environmental audit of water and sanitation projects in Kenya. His responsibility included the overall organization and administration of the technical matters, Environmental and Technical Audit of Nairobi City Water and Sewerage Company facilities, including project roads network, Water resources assessment for the Design of 35 m high earth dam serving Tiomin Kenya, Material Investigations for the construction of earth dam, client- Tiomin Kenya Ltd, Environmental Impact Assessment of Tiomin Dam Design of 35 m high earth dam for Tiomin Kenya Ltd., Detailed design of small scale irrigation gravity fed schemes and access roads - covering 400 hectares, Environmental Impact Assessment of roads within Mount Kenya East Pilot Project on natural resources, EIA of small scale irrigation projects within Mount Kenya Region, Design of water for low income communities in Meru and Mbeere Districts, Review of Final design of Shire Valley irrigation & infrastructure roads Project Malawi – 2005 and the preparation of EIA reports etc. He has worked in Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania and USA

44

ANNEX 3: EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

According to the TOR, the main issues to the evaluation was to obtained an objective and independent analysis of the progress of the project in terms of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness towards the expected impact and sustainability. A substantiated assessment was to be made on the progress, achievements of objectives and results with reference to the project proposal and log frame as well as the implementation methodologies and the projects internal procedures. The evaluation was also to identify and document lessons learnt and make recommendations that the Project partners and stakeholders may use to improve the ongoing implementation.

To successfully accomplish this evaluation objective, the main methodologies applied included the review of the project documents, conducting key resource persons with the project implementers in Nairobi and in Somalia and the targeted beneficiaries within the canals command areas. Field visits and validation were made to Lower Shabelle Region, specifically in Awdegle Districts, Honale canal which is under rehabilitation, Darasalam and Yagle Water Pans in Darasalam area. The evaluation team also had the opportunity to visit Acaaye canal in Afgoye which is planned for rehabilitation. Direct observation techniques and on the sport interviews with farmers encountered and validation techniques were applied by the evaluation team. The team employed participatory methodologies such as Focus Group Discussions, household interviews and key informant interviews with relevant stakeholders. Project staff, both in Nairobi and field offices provided invaluable information about the implementation performance and constraints. The visit coincided with the official opening ceremony of the Agrosphere field office in Afgoye town on the 4th March 2008. This provided the team the opportunity to hear and assess opinions of different stakeholders ranging from the Sultan of the Town Mr. Abdi Mohammed, some elders and a government representative from Agriculture, on the project.

a) Limitation to the Study The project focused on rehabilitation and upgrading of irrigation canal systems. These interventions will primarily benefit those farms that were originally served. It was almost impossible to determine the percentage of the farming communities who currently have access to reliable water and the percentage that needs to be covered by the end of the projects in order to achieve the objectives. Other limitations were:

• Low literacy levels

• Authorities and Governance

• Security situation in Somalia still remains a delicate issue

45

b) Main Tool for Collecting Crop Production Data (Yields Realized from five

main crops Grown in the Last Season and Utilization Estimates

Farmer

’s

Names

Cro

p

Typ

es

Yiel

d

Area

Cultivat

ed

Utilization Estimates of the Crops Harvested

Amount

Consum

ed

Amou

nt

Store

d

Amou

nt

Sold

Wher

e1

Price

1

Wher

e2

Price

2

Comme

nts

2

3

4

5

46

c) ARDOPIS CEFA Evaluation Programme

Date Activities Time

Planning and Debriefing Meetings in Nairobi

22/02/08 -Debriefing at FAO Somalia Office -Debriefing at Agrosphere Office

-10.00 -12.45 -14.25-16.00

Fieldwork Programme

01/03/08 -Evaluators’ arrival from K50 to Merka CEFA base -Meeting CEFA staff at Merka base

-10.15 -12.00 -14.00-16.00

02/03/08 -Leaving Merka base for field visit -Meeting the committee at Bufow on Market issues -Visiting Bufow X-regulator -Access roads (Golweyn- Madhulow & Madhulo Jerrow -Tourin Bukoro Canal (intake to the drainage) and Reservoir -Meeting the canal committee of Bukoro -Visiting farmers training in session & demonstration sites -Visiting Simsim Contracted farmers

-7.30 7.50-8.20 8.40-9.00 -9.00- 10.00 -10.00- 14.00

03/03/08 -Leave Merka base -Meeting Liban canal committee -Touring Fornale canal -Debriefing -Departure to Dar es salaam

-7.30 -10.30-12.30 -14.30

47

ANNEX 4: ARDOPIS LOGFRAME

a) Logframe as designed

Project Description Indicators Source of Verification

Assumptions

OVERALL OBJECTIVE

Household income of rural families increased through improved agricultural production.

1 Household incomes of rural families increased by at least 15% compared to incomes before action implementation.

Baseline survey reports, Household economy survey, FSAU and FEWSNET reports.

2 At least 60% of the target farm families undertake improved agricultural production.

Project reports, PACSU reports, FSAU reports

PURPOSE

Farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in a productive and appropriate way.

1 At least 150km of small primary and 30 km of secondary canals are rehabilitated

1 Quarterly Progress reports, final project report, Mid term and final evaluation reports

1. Market prices for farm surplus and cash crops allow the farmers to break even.

2. Relief food distribution does not take place in project area.

2 8,000 ha of irrigated area developed 2 Quarterly Progress reports, final project report, Mid term and final evaluation reports

3 At 60% of the farmer population in the target area have access to adequate irrigation water and utilize this water appropriately, cropping plans and patterns


4 At least 3,000 farmers will be trained in Improved agricultural practices including adapted irrigation techniques, through contact with the farmers trainers and relevant farmers’ organization


5 At least 5,500 farm families receive services from strengthened water users associations and village development


EXPECTED RESULTS

1 Selected irrigation systems are rehabilitated and functional.

1.1 Number of infrastructures rehabilitated.

1 Quarterly reports, appraisal report

Favourable climatic conditions (no extraordinary floods)

1.2 Kms of canals rehabilitated. 2 Quarterly reports

1.3 Number of hectares under irrigation 3 Quarterly reports

48

Project Description Indicators Source of Verification

Assumptions

2 Improved agricultural production using irrigation and diversified cropping is practised on traditional farm land.

2.1 Number of trained farmers involved in sustainable crop production

1 Quarterly report, baseline survey report

Security prevails

2.2 Number of varieties selected for crop diversification

2 Quarterly report, activity report

2.3 Itemised Production (tonnage) available for local, regional and international markets

3 Quarterly report, needs assessment report

3 Relevant organisations and administrations strengthened to fulfil their functional role.

3.1 Number of organizations identified and supported by the project

1 Quarterly report Market niche exist regional and internationally.

3.2 Status of rural growth linkages (consumption linkages, backwards production linkages and forward production linkages)

Quarterly report

49

b) ARDOPIS Implementation Achievements: Outputs for Measuring Project implementation Effectiveness

Activities, description Remarks Estimated achievements

realized %

0 Overall Inception Phase/IP coverage (LoAs FAO – AGROSPHERE no. 1, 2)

Done Completed 100

0 Start-up activities/ Staff recruitment

Done Completed 100

0 Start-up Activities/ Project office in Lower Juba operational

Done Completed 100

0 Start-up Activities/ Project Office in Lower Shabele operational

Completed 100

0 Together with local stakeholders hold validation workshops where the appropriateness of the proposed activities will be reviewed.

Done Completed 100

1.1.a Through PRA and together with participating farm families determine/revise/prioritize project activities.

Done Completed 100

1.1.b Together with participating farm families determine flood fed irrigation infrastructure systems to be rehabilitated

Done Completed 100

1.2 Undertake technical appraisal of hydraulic structures including intakes and culverts within selected system(s).

Done 12 out o 17 systems appraised in Lower Shabelle as well as 5 out of 6 systems in Lower Juba

85

1.3 Undertake assessment of pumping sets requirement for systems included in the community action plans (CAP).

Done Done for the 10 systems in Lower Shabelle and 2 systems in Lower Juba

100

1.4 Undertake necessary survey – topographic or profile for the selected infrastructure including irrigated areas, roads, canals, drains, culverts

Ongoing Survey done for 6 out o 17 systems in Lower Shabelle and 5 out of 6 systems completed in Lower Juba

85

50

and reservoirs.

1.5 Design and prepare BoQs for selected flood fed (deshek) irrigation infrastructure systems

Ongoing Designs and BoQs prepared for 12 out of 17 systems in Lower Shabelle and 5 out of 6 systems completed in Lower Juba

75

1.6.a Contract, undertake and supervise infrastructure rehabilitation.

Ongoing Contracting done for 7 out of 17 systems and works started in 6 systems in Lower Shabelle and started in 4 out of 6 in Lower Juba

32.8

1.6.b Provide irrigation pump-sets to selected groups

Not foreseen for the period

Not expected in the report period

0

1.7 In collaboration with FAO implemented EC funded SWALIM gather relevant soil and water use and management information.

Continuous canals to be improved have been mapped. Areas for cropping to be mapped in the coming periods.

50

1.8 Adapt farmers’ training package for appropriate soil and water use and management.

Done Training manual prepared and in use for training

100

1.9 Undertake farmers’ training on appropriate soil and water use and management.

Ongoing The number is expected to jump up fast in the next periods as the activities move from demo plots to farmers farms

75

1.10 Facilitate strengthening/ establishment of functional water users association.

Ongoing 16 out of 16 systems done in Lower Shabelle and 10 out of 15 systems started in Lower Juba

75

1.11 Facilitate development of water users’ by-laws.

Ongoing Traditional by-laws identified, formal bylaws formulated and ready for dissemination to all water committees

50

2.1 Undertake a target area community baseline survey (Complete baseline survey for the specific beneficiaries).

Done. Completed 100

2.2 Undertake training of staff in participatory approaches including PRA, participatory Monitoring & Evaluation

Done Completed 100

2.3 Through participatory process determine preferred crops (food, fruit trees, cash crops & forage) to include in the cropping systems.

Done. Ongoing for new crops

Done in 18 sites 86

51

2.4 Undertake local markets survey for farm produce based on preferred crops.

To be done by FAO and CEFA

0% 0

2.5 Together with farming communities in the target area select representative contact farmers (to be trained as village based group)

Done Done for 7 villages in Awdegle 6 villages in Afgoye and 5 out of 9 locations in Jamama

82

2.6 Procure planting materials (seeds / seedling) and other farm inputs for different varieties of preferred crops.

Continuous Done for 7 villages in Awdegle 6 villages in Afgoye and 5 out of 9 locations in Jamama

82

2.7 Undertake adaptive test trials for the different varieties of preferred crops.

Ongoing, a continuous process

Done in 18 sites. To start for other sites in next report period

86

2.8 Develop modules for crop diversification.

Ongoing Training module done in conjunction with CEFA

100

2.9 Undertake demonstration and skills training sessions on selected variety of preferred crops.


2000 farmers trained on crop production aspects

36

2.10 Selection of multiplication materials for selected variety of preferred crops.


Materials for planting has been selected based on food security and markets

100

2.11 Distribute preferred plant materials and train farmers on appropriate cropping systems


Done on 18 sites where demonstration and training on crop production is going on

86

2.12 Continuous assessment of market situation

Ongoing (informally)

2.13 Together with the selected representative contact farmers prepare and implement production schedules based on different selected crops.

Ongoing in demonstration plots

Started and ongoing on the 18 items where demo plots and practical training has been started.

86

2.14 Develop and implement cropping patterns incorporating fodder trees and forage crops that maximize farm incomes and natural resource conservation.

Started Started in 3 sites out of 18 possible sites. To receive more attention in the remaining part of project

19

2.15 Harmonize local and international market survey results (in consultation with EC-funded CEFA-implemented ad hoc

Not done (awaiting CEFA and FAO studies)

Not possible under the prevailing security situation in Somalia

0

52

project)

3.1 Together with target communities identify and appraise capacity of relevant service and support organizations including water users, marketing, village development committees, professional associations and farm input services providers

Done. Ongoing for emerging institutions and organizations

Existing organizations have been identified. New institutions are expected to emerge during project period

80

3.2.a Undertake a study of target area community social groups and their interactions.

Done in collaboration with FAO

Completed 100

3.2.b Undertake a study on feasibility and operations of rural savings & credit schemes

Not done Not in the original Log frame. Introduced after inception phase

0

3.3 Support strengthening (capacity building) of organizations identified under 3.1 and – where necessary – establishment of new ones


Training of farmer and water committees associations has been started but needs to continue for organizations to be effective

50

3.4 Facilitate farmer organization based or private based marketing of farm produce.

Started in Jamama

Discussions on group marketing have been started in all project villages. Marketing infrastructure to be developed in the next report periods

15%

3.5 Sensitise traders and shopkeepers on appropriate farm inputs

Not done Expected to start in the next report period when training moves to the farmers own farms here they will need inputs. Currently inputs bought according to requirements of demo plots

0

Average Achievement 70.7

53

ANNEX 5: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVENESS

Equipment and works per the Project Plan

Design Specifications

Achieved Specifications of equipment and works.

Comment on variance

Scheme design

Irrigation water demand

Water resources planning This was not carried out

(This information is available with SWALIM)

No data is available on low, flood and probability of flows. In order to ensure the possibility of attaining maximum yields and returns for the farmers, the amount of water available must be determined.

Water rights Not indicated Sufficient flow must be maintained in the river throughout the year to meet the needs of downstream users.

River basin study

Seepage losses Permeability tests were not carried out during the design. .

The design report did not provide the specification for the canal bed and embankment.

Irrigation efficiency This was not technically determined

Construction equipment

Main canal Hydraulic performance parameters were not indicated

Secondary canals rehabilitated

54

KM of farm access roads rehabilitated

Bed slope

Embankment slope

Spatial data collected and shared with SWALIM

Flow measurement

Intake Works

Note that there are no diversion works into the canal

Control works

Water quality

Ha irrigated after rehabilitation works

Water availability at farm level

Water scheduling/distribution/operation

Water handling at plot level

Land slope

Drainage

Night storage

Compaction control No specification Proper Compaction is important to reduce seepage

Pump house and equipment

55

Type of embankment

Water losses Allowable losses per meter length of canal not determined

Amount Water lost through seepage is important in determining irrigation efficiency

Foundation treatment

Training provided

Handing over

Erosion and sedimentation Sediment load analysis was not estimated

Sediment transporting power of canals is less than the parent river. Deposited sediment reduces the capacity of canals.

Environmental impact assessment

Health and Sanitation Domestic water supply and sanitation were not provided for.

Health and sanitation training empowers the community to deal and avoid occurrence of common health and sanitation problems.

Water related diseases

Food availability

Gender distribution

Progress reports No regular and clear updating and reporting procedures have been established There is no guidance provided on how to measure progress

Monitoring and evaluation This was not a requirement

No regular reporting obligations and standards have been established. Funding for monitoring and evaluation not secured

Water users association Quorum not indicated

Productivity (yields)

Crop choice

56

Canal maintenance

No of gates rehabilitated

Access to agro-inputs

Crop marketing

Extension services

Land tenure

Labour availability

Credit

57

ANNEX 6: MAPS OF THE PROJECT INTERVENTION

Map 1: Project Area: Shabelle and Juba River Basins. (Source: WALIM, 2007)

58

Map 2: Somalia District Population and Density, 2004

59

ANNEX 7: LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED

Agrosphere Progress Report (2006, 07 and 08 CEFA (no date) Lower Shabelle Barrage Rehabilitation Feasibility Study Project Report (2005) European Community Contribution Agreement with an International

Organization FSAU (2007) Post Gu Analysis. Technical Series Report No. V.13 Mckevitt D. and A. Lawton. (eds.) (1994) Public sector management. London: Sage. Paron, P., Vargas, R. 92007) Landform of Selected Study Areas in Somaliland and Southern Somalia.

Integrated Landform Mapping Approach at semi-detailed scale using Remote Sensing and GIS techniques. FAO-SWALIM. Project Report L-02. Nairobi, Kenya.

SWALIM (2007) Product Catalogue 2007 Vargas, R.R. and Alim, M.S. (2007) Soil Survey of the Juba and Shabelle riverine areas in Southern

Somalia. FAO-SWALIM. Project Report L-08. Nairobi, Kenya.

60

ANNEX 8: DETAILED PROJECT BUDGET AND EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS

1. Human Resources

Agrosphere

Senior Surveyor 25,200 5,796.33 19,403.67 77

Assistant Surveyors 24,000 14,399.31 9,600.69 40

Local Agronomist 26,100 15,619.59 10,480.41 40

Field Technicians/ Trainers 43,500 18,304.21 25,195.79 58

Capacity Building Manager 18,850 8,440.27 10,409.73 55

Local Agronomist & Focal point Balad 26,100 5,287.88 20,812.12 80

Local Administrator 15,950 13,667.14 2,282.86 14

Accountant 14,500 6,874.25 7,625.75 53

Data entry clerk 10,150 1,871.10 8,278.90 82

Security 36,000 21,025.44 14,974.56 42

Cook 5,075 4,068 1,007.40 20

Waiter 2,900 2,900.00 100

Cleaner-Residence 2,900 1,594.50 1,305.50 45

Cleaner-offices 2,900 520.65 2,379.35 82

Generator Operators & general maintenance 2,900 1,928.04 971.96 34

Technical manager- Engineering 174,000 145,457.46 28,542.54 16

Agronomist 90,000 95,572.56 -5,572.56 -6

50% Deputy Coordinator (Finance/HR) 72,000 68,980.03 3,019.97 4

Expatriate Per diem (in Somalia if night speny) 3,570 2,159.08 1,410.92 40

Local (staff assigned to the action,if night out spent) 840 130.16 709.84 85

597,435 431,696 165,739.40 28

FAO

Project Assistant 4,800 6,197.28 -1,397.28 -29

Driver/messenger 4,800 1,663.58 3,136.42 65

Project Coordinator-FAO Nairobi 28,500 36,093.49 -7,593.49 -27

Logistics and oversight, 75% in field 37,500 30,437.45 7,062.55 19

75,600 74,392 1,208.20 2

Sub Total 673,035 506,087 166,947.60 25

2. Travel

Shared by FAO and Agrosphere

International Travel (from place of recruitment) 7,500 7,302.50 197.50 3

Airport taxes and visa 2,000 2,444.63 -444.63 -22

Local transportation 4,500 1,226.80 3,273.20 73

Sub Total 14,000 10,973.93 3,026.07 22

3. Equipment and Supplies

FAO

Rent of vehicles including fuel 130,500 69,916.76 60,583.24 46

LCD projector 1,600 996.55 603.45 38

Laptop computers 5,000 5,723.20 -723.20 -14

Desk top computers 1,400 6,853.71 -5,453.71 -390

Printers 800 784.62 15.38 2

Photocopier 4,000 1,218.01 2,781.99 70

Thuraya 2,000 95.29 1,904.71 95

VHF radio-Handsets 2,130 4,459.13 -2,329.13 -109

61

VHF base 700 719.73 -19.73 -3

VHF Mobile units 790 623.91 166.09 21

GPS 1,050 1,972.91 -922.91 -88

Survey levels 1,000 1,000.00 100

Salinity meter 200 200.00 100

Soil auger 200 200.00 100

Digital camera 1,500 2,278.63 -778.63 -52

Spare parts/equipment for machine, tools 14,500 290.43 14,209.57 98

Generators 4,800 4,800.00 100

Purchase of motor cycles 14,000 6,782.32 7,217.68 52

Sub Total 186,170 102,715.20 83,454.80 45

4. Local Office-Action Cost

FAO

Contributions, cost sharing on UN security etc 3,000 498.24 2,501.76 83

Motor cycle running cost 4,350 2,023.23 2,326.77 53

Office rent- Shabelle 20,300 2,684.62 17,615.38 87

27,650 5,206 22,443.91 81


Consumables- office supplies 14,500 11,326.56 3,173.44 22

Other services (tel/fax, electricity, maintenance) 20,300 14,557.28 5,742.72 28

34,800 25,884 8,916.16 26

Sub Total 62,450 31,090 31,360.07 50

5. Other Costs, Services

FAO

Short term consultant- Crop Diversification 15,000 7,036.95 7,963.05 53

Short term consultant- Crop Post Harvest 15,000 15,000.00 100

Short term consultant- Irrigation/ Civil Structure 7,500 8,360.79 -860.79 -11

Short term consultant- Soil Science 15,000 15,000.00 100

Consultant- Technical Monitoring and Evaluation 15,000 15,000.00 100

Midterm Evaluation 8,000 5,856.53 2,143.47 27

Final Evaluation 8,000 8,000.00 100

83,500 21,254 62,245.73 75


Financial Services (bank costs, transfer charges) 29,000 5,547.85 23,452.15 81

Visibility Actions 5,000 9,088.70 -4,088.70 -82

34,000 14,637 19,363.45 57

Sub Total 117,500.00 35,890.82 81,609.18 69

6. Others-Works

FAO

Irrigation Canal (primary/ secondary) rehabilitation 360,000 48,122.21 311,877.79 87

Agriculture activities/inputs 183,000 54,480.48 128,519.52 70

Market Development 210,000 12,248.93 197,751.07 94

753,000 114,852 638,148.38 85

Agrosphere

Expansion of office facilities (Jamama Base) 15,000 3,913.85 11,086.15 74

Capacity Building for advisory associations 200,000 144,717.21 55,282.79 28

62

215,000 148,631 66,368.94 31

Sub Total 968,000 263,483 704,517.32 73

8. Administrative

FAO

Administrative 141,481 71,995.30 69,485.70 49

Sub Total 141,481 71,995 69,485.70 49

Agrosphere 472,025 268,027 203,997.63 43

FAO 1,607,811 702,714 905,097.43 56

Shared Between FAO and Agrosphere 82,800 51,494 31,305.68 38

Total 2,162,636.00 1,022,235.26 1,140,400.74 53

63

ANNEX 9: LIST OF PEOPLE CONSULTED

Contact Farmer Members (Cooperative in Jowhar Village)

Abanur Omar Abdulle

Mohamed Sh. Ali Bube

Mukhtar Hussein

Hassan Sharowe

Mohamed Imam

Awmaye Mohamed Sube

Abdikadir Buto

Kamol Abdikadir

Maoley Make

Alow Aliyey

Ahmed Ziyar

Fadumo Abdi Kasow

Hussein Manene

Ibrahim Sheikh

Omar Sh. Osman

Deynabo Mwama

Amino Muse

Rowday Abanur

Muslimo Shikshigow

Asha Mohamed Bunde

Mohamud Abanur

Kaltumo Madey

Khadija Hassan

Sitey Abanur

Hassan Abdulla

Shan Water Pan Committee

Cunsman Haji Mox’ed Chairman

Aw Aolen Gurey Vice Chairman

Hassan Allow Ibrahim Member

Nunow Abdullahi

Aw Hossman Abdiyoni

Mox’ed Geeolow Aliyano

Haawaray M. Hassan

EC funded AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION AND DIVERSIFICATION ... · EC funded AGRICULTURAL...

Documents

Transcript of EC funded AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION AND DIVERSIFICATION ... · EC funded AGRICULTURAL...