International Fund forAgricultural DevelopmentVia Paolo di Dono, 4400142 Rome, ItalyTel: +39 06 54591Fax: +39 06 5043463E-mail: evaluation@ifad.orgwww.ifad.org/evaluation

Enabling poor rural peopleto over come poverty

Enabling poor rural peopleto over come poverty

P R O J E C T P E R F O R M A N C E A S S E S S M E N T

February 2012

IFAD IFAD

Republic of Uganda

Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme

Republic of Uganda

Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme Project Performance Assessment

February 2012 Report No. 2540-UG Document of the International Fund for Agricultural Development

Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD

Photos: Front cover: Katojo Market. Markets built by the Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme have created employment for over 5,700 people engaged in different types of activities. Page vi: Land has been allocated to the enterprises and improved agricultural technologies have been adopted, through the project, leading to increased yields of important marketable crops, such as potatoes, pineapple, and bananas. Back cover: Private investors noticed the profitability of the programme’s milk coolers and acquired similar coolers (left); The establishment of savings and credit cooperatives (SACCOs) helped facilitate farmers’

engagement in productive agricultural enterprises. @IFAD/Oanh Nguyen

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IFAD concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The designations ―developed‖ and ―developing‖ countries are intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgement about the stage reached by a particular country or area in the development process.

All rights reserved. © 2012 by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)

Contents

Currency equivalent ii

Abbreviations and acronyms ii

Preface iii

Executive summary iv

I. Background, methodology and process 1

II. The project 2

A. Project context 2 B. Project implementation 6

III. Review of findings by criterion 8

A. Project performance 8 B. Rural poverty impact 14 C. Other performance criteria 19 D. Performance of partners 22

IV. Overall project achievement 24

V. Conclusions and recommendations 25

A. Conclusions 25 B. Recommendations 26

ANNEXES

1. Rating comparison 28

2. Map of the project area 29

3. Basic project data 30

4. Terms of reference 31

5. Definition of the evaluation criteria used by the Independent Office

of Evaluation of IFAD 36

6. List of persons met 37

7. References and data sources 39

8. Physical progress of the programme 40

9. Linear logical project scheme 43

10. Statistics on SACCOs supported by AAMP and the Rural Finance

Support Programme 44

ii

Currency equivalent

Currency unit = Ugandan Shilling (UGX)

US$1.00 = UGX 2,375

(April 2011)

Abbreviations and acronyms

AAMP Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme

AfDB African Development Bank

CAIIP Community Agricultural Infrastructure Improvement Programme

COSOP country strategic opportunities paper

DLSP District Livelihood Support Programme

ERR economic rate of return

ESA East and Southern Africa Division (IFAD)

FRR financial rate of return

IOE Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD

IPC Inter-ministerial Policy Committee

MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries

M&E monitoring and evaluation

MOLG Ministry of Local Government

NAADS National Agricultural Advisory Services

NEMA National Environmental Management Authority

PCR project completion report

PCRV project completion report validation

PEAP Poverty Eradication Action Plan

PFT programme facilitation team

PMA Plan for the Modernization of Agriculture

PMD Programme Management Department (IFAD)

PPA project performance assessment

SACCO savings and credit cooperative

UCSCU Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union

UNOPS United Nations Office for Project Services

iii

Preface

This is the project performance assessment of the Area-Based Agricultural

Modernization Programme in the Republic of Uganda. The overall goal of the programme

was to increase the incomes and food security of poor rural households in the

programme areas and to modernize agriculture in the targeted districts. According to the

assessment, the programme’s support for and training of local farmer groups enabled

them to expand their production and become more commercially oriented at a time

when they were shifting from subsistence to market-based farming. The programme also

improved rural infrastructure, thus facilitating the commercialization of agriculture.

Better rural roads improved access to other services, such as input and produce markets

and financial services. There were concerns with the sustainability of some of these

activities, but these concerns are relatively minor compared with the programme’s

achievements. The assessment recommends to reinvigorate the infrastructure

management committees as well as ensure the financial sustainability of the savings and

credit cooperatives supported by safeguarding their nature as member-based and

savings-first institutions.

The assessment was prepared by Oanh Nguyen, lead evaluator, with contributions

from Turto Turtiainen (consultant, rural development specialist). Internal peer reviewers

from the Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD - Ashwani Muthoo, Deputy Director,

and Anne-Marie Lambert, Senior Evaluation Officer - provided comments on the draft

report. Lucy Ariano, Evaluation Assistant, and Anna Benassi, Administrative Assistant,

provided administrative support.

The Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD is grateful to the East and Southern

Africa Division and to the Government of the Republic of Uganda for their insightful

inputs, comments and support at various stages of the evaluation process.

Luciano Lavizzari

Director

Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD

iv

Executive summary

1. The Peer Review of IFAD’s Office of Evaluation and Evaluation Function conducted

by the Evaluation Cooperation Group in 2010 recommended that the Independent

Office of Evaluation of IFAD (IOE) transform its approach to project-level evaluation

by undertaking project completion report validations and, on a selective basis,

project performance assessments (PPAs). In this regard, the Area-Based

Agricultural Modernization Programme (AAMP) in the Republic of Uganda was

selected for a PPA in order to help build up evidence for the Uganda country

programme evaluation scheduled for 2011-2012.

2. The overall goal of AAMP was to improve the incomes and food security of poor

rural households in the programme area and modernize agriculture in the target

districts. Specific objectives were to: (i) increase the involvement of the private

sector in support of further commercialization of smallholder agriculture;

(ii) strengthen the capacity of economically active farmers to gain better access to

rural services (technical, financial and marketing); (iii) ensure the sustainable

development and improvement of rural infrastructure; and (iv) enhance public-

sector capacity to respond to production needs identified by interest groups and

rural communities. AAMP was implemented over a six-year period. The executing

agency was the Ministry of Local Government, which implemented the programme

in collaboration with district and subcounty governments.

3. AAMP was structured around four components: (i) agricultural commercialization

(US$4.1 million); (ii) rural infrastructure development (US$8.7 million);

(iii) community mobilization (US$1.2 million); and (iv) programme facilitation

(US$2.1 million). Under a parallel financing arrangement with the African

Development Bank, funds were spent on a separate component for the construction

of feeder roads in the programme area.

4. In general, the programme achieved the results expected because the planning and

execution capacity of the districts and subcounties improved, as did the farmers’

ability to obtain better access to services and financing facilities through the

savings and credit cooperatives (SACCOs). Training and support for local groups

enabled farmers to expand production at a time when they were shifting from

subsistence to market-oriented farming and their capacity to select enterprises

(subprojects) with higher returns increased. Farmers increasingly involved

themselves in group marketing to benefit more from their marketable surpluses.

The programme was implemented within the time frame originally projected, and

its funds were almost fully disbursed.

5. The programme also improved rural infrastructure, thus facilitating the

commercialization of agriculture. Better rural roads improved access to other

services, such as inputs markets and financial services. Women are now more

involved in economic activities and the impact on their empowerment is significant.

In addition, districts, subcounties and farmer groups have become involved in

sustaining activities initiated by the programme.

6. Although some of the targets set during the early stages of programme

implementation were not achieved, the vast majority were met or even exceeded.

There is still concern about the viability of some of the savings and credit

cooperatives (SACCOs) supported, the role and sustainability of the infrastructure

management committees, and the sustainability of the pass-on system (under

which the beneficiaries were expected to pass inputs they received free — such as

improved seed and animal progeny — to others in need), but these concerns are

relatively minor compared with the programme’s achievements. Some

shortcomings in design (such as the lack of targets for monitoring indicators and

inadequate planning and financing of the monitoring and evaluation system) were

corrected during implementation. Overall, AAMP’s achievements are rated

satisfactory.

v

7. The success of AAMP may be attributed to numerous factors, of which the most

important were: (i) flexibility in the design of programme interventions, allowing

for quick response to opportunities that arose during implementation;

(ii) mainstreaming of activities into government programmes and linkages with

decentralization policies, which helped build up capacity and enhance sustainability

of benefits after programme completion; and (iii) the involvement of local people in

selecting programmes interventions, taking real responsibility for the

implementation of these interventions and sustainability over the long term. The

high quality of programme management was also an important factor in the

success of the programme.

8. The PPA identified a number of broad recommendations related to important issues

for future IFAD operations in Uganda:

(i) Financing arrangements. Should it not be possible to place all external funds in

the same ―basket‖ for monitoring or other reasons, parallel financing,

organized under the same coordinating body, might be a relevant and efficient

financing solution.

(ii) SACCOs. Promoting local SACCOs is a promising approach to creating a

financial network to serve the financial needs of Uganda’s rural areas. The

financial sustainability and long-term survival of SACCOs will need to be

ensured, by safeguarding their nature as member-based and savings-first

institutions. Consequently, the Government and support organizations for

SACCOs should be careful when choosing the types of financial and technical

support they provide.

(iii) Infrastructure management committees. These committees should be

reinvigorated by means of training and endowing them with the authority and

self-esteem to act by themselves, thereby allowing them to be accountable for

the infrastructures they have chosen as priorities. Such follow-up would

require funding through district and subcounty budgets or, in the medium

term, with donor funds or as subcomponents of follow-on

projects/programmes.

(iv) Indicators and targets for monitoring. Even when there are uncertainties about

the types of subprojects to be chosen because of the community-driven

development approach, it is important to have targets for indicators, with the

caveat that such targets may be modified when clear local preferences

emerge.

vi

1

I. Background, methodology and process

1. Background. The Peer Review of IFAD’s Office of Evaluation and Evaluation

Function conducted by the Evaluation Cooperation Group in 2010 recommended

that the Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD (IOE) transform its approach to

project-level evaluation by undertaking project completion report validations

(PCRVs) and, on a selective basis, project performance assessments (PPAs). PCRVs

essentially consist of independent desk reviews of project completion reports

(PCRs) and other available and relevant project documentation.1 PPAs are

undertaken on a selected2 number of projects that have previously undergone a

PCRV, and include focused field visits. PPAs are not expected to investigate all

activities financed under projects/programmes or to undertake in-depth impact

assessments, but rather to fill major information gaps, inconsistencies and

analytical weaknesses of PCRs and further validate the explanations, conclusions

and lessons presented in PCRs. Another purpose of PPAs is to shed light on

selected features of project/programme implementation history not adequately

analysed in PCRs, hence contributing to learning and accountability.

2. The Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme (AAMP) in the Republic of

Uganda has been selected for PPA in order to help build up an evidence base for

the Uganda country programme evaluation to be undertaken by IOE in 2011-2012.

3. Methodology. The PPA relied on the extensive desk review of available

documents3 undertaken for preparation of the PCRV. These included the PCR, the

impact assessment by the Government, appraisal reports, mid-term review and

supervision reports. During the field work, primary data were collected to verify

available information and reach an independent assessment of programme

performance and impact. Given the time and resources available, no quantitative

survey was undertaken. The information gathered was therefore mainly of a

qualitative nature and focused on a restricted set of topics identified during the

desk review.4 Data collection methods included individual interviews, focus group

discussions with members of the former programme facilitation team (PFT)5 and

direct observations during visits to programme sites.6

4. The PPA followed key methodological fundamentals stipulated in the IOE Evaluation

Manual.7 A six-point rating system8 is applied to all evaluation criteria, as described

in annex 5.

5. Process. The PCRV of AAMP was prepared by IOE in February-March 2011 and

shared with the East and Southern Africa Division (ESA) of IFAD for comment. The

PPA mission9 was undertaken from 10-20 April 2011 in close cooperation with the

Government and the IFAD country office. The mission included field visits to AAMP

sites, interactions with government authorities, members of the former PFT,

beneficiaries and other key informants. At the end of the mission, a wrap-up

meeting was held at the Ministry of Local Government (MOLG), the programme

implementing agency, to share preliminary findings.

1 The PCRV performs the following functions: (i) independent verification of the analytical quality of the PCR;

(ii) independent assessment of project performance and results through desk review (including ratings); (iii) extrapolation of key substantive findings and lessons learned for further synthesis and systematization exercises;

2 The selection criteria for PPA are: (i) major information gaps, inconsistencies, and analytical weaknesses in the PCR

found by IOE during the validation process; (ii) innovative project approaches; (iii) need to build up an evidence base for future higher-plane evaluations; (iv) geographical balance; and (v) any disconnect between the ratings contained in the PCR and those generated by IOE during the validation process. 3 See annex 7.

4 The desk review identified the following topics to be focused on by the PPA: efficiency, natural resources and the

environment; operations and profitability of the savings and credit cooperatives (SACCOs); innovation and scaling up; and programme management. 5 It is important to note that AAMP was completed in 2008. At present, therefore, members of the former PFT are

working on other assignments. 6 See annex 6 for a list of persons met during the field visits.

7 www.ifad.org/evaluation/process_methodology/index.htm.

8 6 – highly satisfactory; 5 – satisfactory; 4 – moderately satisfactory; 3 – moderately unsatisfactory; 2 – unsatisfactory;

1 - highly unsatisfactory. 9 The PPA mission consisted of Oanh Nguyen, IOE lead evaluator, and Turto Turtiainen, IOE consultant.

2

6. The draft PPA report was exposed to the IOE internal peer review process for

quality assurance and subsequently shared with ESA and the Government for

comments before being finalized and published.

Key points

The Peer Review of IFAD’s Office of Evaluation and Evaluation Function

recommended that IOE transform its approach to project-level evaluation by

undertaking PCRVs and, on a selective basis, PPAs.

AAMP was selected for PPA to build up an evidence base for the Uganda country

programme evaluation to be undertaken by IOE in 2011-2012.

The PPA relied on an extensive desk review carried out for preparation of the

PCRV. Field visits were made in April 2011. The PPA followed key

methodological fundamentals stipulated in the IOE Evaluation Manual.

II. The project

A. Project context

7. Country background. After a period of prolonged but intermittent civil conflict

(1970-1986), Uganda has emerged as one of the most consistent economic

performers in Africa. However, despite its impressive economic progress, Uganda

remains a poor country with a GDP per capita of US$392 (2007).10 The

Government’s strategy for poverty alleviation and rural development has been

transformed over the last decade through the Poverty Eradication Action Plan

(PEAP) and the Plan for the Modernization of Agriculture (PMA). PEAP provided a

national planning framework to guide both sector and district plans and the budget

process, was accepted by the donor community as the country’s equivalent of a

poverty reduction strategy paper, and revised every three years. PEAP 1 covered

the period 1997-2000, PEAP 2 covered 2001-2004 and PEAP 3 covered 2005-2008

but was extended for one year to allow for the completion of its successor, the

National Development Plan 2010-2015, which continues to classify agriculture as a

primary growth sector and major source of income generation.

8. The PMA constituted an advanced rural sectorwide approach, providing a policy

framework that sought to eradicate poverty through agricultural transformation. It

focused on seven main areas for public expenditure interventions: (i) agricultural

research and technology development; (ii) delivery of agricultural advisory

services; (iii) agricultural education; (iv) rural financial services; (v) marketing and

agroprocessing; (vi) sustainable natural resources use and management; and

(vii) supportive physical infrastructure. The Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry

and Fisheries (MAAIF) also developed a five-year agricultural sector plan, the

Development Strategy and Investment Plan 2010-2015, which outlined priorities

for agricultural development and formed the basis for Uganda’s signature of the

Compact for Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme, the

framework for donor assistance.

9. These strategies have all been implemented under the overall context of Uganda’s

decentralization process. An effective system of participatory local government was

articulated in the 1995 Constitution and spelt out in a series of policy

pronouncements and in the Local Government Act of 1997. The central government

provided financial support to the districts, subcounties and parishes through

subventions under the Local Government Development Fund, capacity-building

grants, the PMA, and through donor-supported interventions. Public services were

provided through the districts, counties, subcounties, parishes and villages within

an increasingly participatory framework.

10

The Economist Intelligence Unit, Uganda Country Profile.

3

10. Rationale. AAMP was designed to test development approaches matching the

objectives of the PMA, all major aspects of which were reflected in the programme

(extension services, infrastructural improvements, marketing, rural finance and

capacity-building). AAMP’s rationale derived from several factors: (i) while growth

played a fundamental role in reducing rural poverty, districts lacked funds for

agricultural activities; (ii) the Government was supporting private-sector initiatives

and encouraging farmers to take full advantage of economic opportunities: the

scope therefore existed for an investment programme that aimed at further

commercializing smallholder farming and assisting rural communities to become

full market participants and be no longer cash-poor; (iii) key national programmes

required support from actions within districts; therefore, area-based interventions

represented a mechanism that would provide useful experience for the eventual

development of broader programmes in areas where national approaches were still

being developed; and (iv) the programme would build roads linking farms and

communities to major towns and markets, opening up other income-generating

occupations for rural communities, and providing goods and services.

11. Objectives. The overall goal of AAMP was to improve the incomes and food

security of poor rural households in the programme area, and modernize

agriculture in the targeted districts. Specific objectives11 were to: (i) increase the

involvement of the private sector in support of further commercialization of

smallholder agriculture; (ii) strengthen the capacity of economically active farmers

to gain better access to rural services (technical, financial and marketing);

(iii) ensure the sustainable development and improvement of rural infrastructure;

and (iv) enhance public-sector capacity to respond to production needs identified

by interest groups and rural communities. AAMP was implemented over a period of

six years. The executing agency was MOLG, which implemented the programme in

collaboration with district and subcounty governments.

12. Area and target groups. At design, AAMP was targeted to cover 30-40 per cent

of rural households in 10 districts12 in south-western Uganda. During

implementation, following the division of Kabarole into four districts,13 the number

of recorded districts supported at programme completion amounted to 13,14 but

the programme area remained the same. These districts were subdivided

administratively into 196 rural subcounties and 13 urban councils. The total

population of the districts, based on extrapolations from the 1991 census, was

about 5.3 million spread over 1.05 million households (about 25 per cent of the

national population), of which over 4.7 million persons and 947,000 households (90

per cent) were rural. Rural households averaged five persons, with agriculture as

the dominant occupation.

11

Both the appraisal report and the President’s Report written in 2000 used the term “expected outputs”, but these would probably be considered specific objectives in reports written later. In fact, the mid-term review used the term “expected results” and the PCR referred to them as “objectives”. 12

The original 10 implementing districts were: Bundibugyo, Bushenyi, Kabale, Kabarole, Kasese, Kisoro, Mbarara, Ntungamo, Rukungiri, and Sembabule. 13

Kabarole, Kemwenge, Kanungu, Kyenjojo. 14

In October 2005, Mbarara was divided into four districts: Mbarara, Isingiro, Kiruhura and Ibanda. In fact, therefore, the number of programme-supported districts was 16 in all, but this division of Mbarara was not recorded in the PCR.

4

Table 1 Project information

Country: Republic of Uganda

Title: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme

Approval date: 08 December 1999

Effectiveness date: 20 May 2002

Closing date: 31 December 2008

Total cost: US$30.0 million

IFAD loan : US$13.2 million

Lending terms: Highly concessional

Contribution of Government: US$1.5 million

Contribution of beneficiary: US$1.4 million

Parallel financing from the African Development Bank (AfDB): US$13.9 million

Cooperating institution: United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS)

13. AAMP covered two major target groups: (i) economically active smallholders in the

rural areas wishing to participate in commercial agriculture; and (ii) existing or

potential small-scale entrepreneurs and business associations providing services to

rural households. Among the target group, women played a major role in crop and

livestock production, processing and small enterprise operation. The programme

did not target pre-specified activities to particular areas and/or groups of potential

beneficiaries. Rather, within certain guidelines, the districts decided how to use the

majority of resources available to them, according to the specified eligibility criteria

and demands of poor rural people.

14. Components and cost. AAMP was structured around four components:

(i) agricultural commercialization, including two subcomponents, namely, an

agricultural commercialization fund established by the programme and from which

the districts could draw down funds to finance eligible activities, and rural financial

services training. This component had a cost of US$4.1 million; (ii) rural

infrastructure development: US$8.7 million; (iii) community mobilization: US$1.2

million; and (iv) programme facilitation: US$2.1 million. The parallel financing

arrangement with AfDB materialized, and the funds were used for a separate

component for the construction of feeder roads.

15. Implementation arrangements. AAMP was supervised at the central level by the

Inter-ministerial Policy Committee (IPC), with management and coordination

undertaken by a PFT based in Mbarara. The programme facilitator based in

Kampala acted as the link between the PFT and MOLG as the executing agency, and

also served as secretary to the IPC. The programme support officers were

responsible for the supervision of district-level implementation. UNOPS was the

cooperating institution.

16. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system. The foundation of AAMP’s M&E

system and impact assessment was the logical framework prepared by the

appraisal team, a series of performance indicators and AAMP’s operational manual.

According to the original plans, PFT was to include a government-seconded M&E

officer and an AAMP-financed short-term consultant to design a ―simple and

effective monitoring system‖. An evaluation of AAMP’s performance and impact was

carried out by an independent agency at both mid-term and the end of the

programme.

17. The approach to M&E was participatory. The general principles of this approach

were as follows: (i) end-user associations and interest groups, supported by

service providers, monitored (and reported on) their activities and investment

performance; (ii) local councils monitored activities, inputs and outputs in their

5

respective areas; (iii) relevant institutions monitored their support, involvement

and capacity-building activities; and (iii) MOLG monitored the overall operations for

planning and coordination purposes (i.e. compliance with the set minimum

conditions and the performance of the districts and subcounties).

18. Changes during implementation. The first change during implementation (as

captured in the first loan amendment in 2004) was the increase in the number of

districts in the programme area, from 10 to 13, due to the division of Kabarole into

four districts after AAMP started up (see paragraph 12). When Mbarara was divided

into four districts in October 2005, the total number of programme-supported

districts was in fact 16, but this second division was not captured in any loan

amendment. It is important to note that the geographical area remained the same.

19. The second change during implementation (as captured in the second loan

amendment in 2006) was the reallocation of programme funds, with a reduction in

the agricultural commercialization fund and rural infrastructure fund, and an

increase in budget for community mobilization and programme facilitation. The

increase of 39.4 per cent in the community mobilization component resulted

primarily from the larger number of farmer groups mobilized than anticipated at

appraisal. The increase (84.8 per cent) in the funds originally planned for

programme facilitation was the result of the change in the programme’s

administrative/coordination structure, under which more PSOs,15 subcounty

coordinators and paraprofessionals16 were deployed than foreseen at appraisal, and

the creation of an M&E unit (as recommended by the first supervision mission in

200317). The 2006 loan amendment noted a number of reasons for this change,

including the increased number of districts supported and the fact that, in the

parallel cofinancing by AfDB for the rehabilitation of feeder roads, no provision had

been made for incremental operating costs associated with the monitoring and

inspecting of activities, which had to be financed from the IFAD loan.

20. Another change was that, at design, the programme was to provide, under

―enterprise development support‖ (part of the agricultural commercialization fund),

matching grants for technical support to selected interest groups to obtain support

from the private sector.18 As recommended by the first supervision mission of June

2003 (and confirmed by following missions), these grants were directed to the

financing of eligible group ―enterprises‖ (subprojects) and to establishing a

―revolving fund,‖ also known as the ―pass-on system.‖ The pass-on system was to

supply inputs, such as improved seed and animal breeding stock, which the

beneficiary groups were required to pay back on the basis of a specific repayment

plan. The repaid inputs were then to be passed on to new eligible groups.

21. Another change from the original design related to the subcomponent for rural

financial services training. The original plan was to provide training in rural financial

services for the purpose of: (i) upgrading the management and business skills of

staff of the microfinance intermediaries, including lending groups and associations;

and (ii) informing community leaders and district and subcounty staff as to the role

and potential of the microfinance intermediaries. The start-up of activities for rural

finance was delayed as programme implementers were awaiting the preparation of

a new government policy document, the Rural Financial Services Strategy, which

was finalized in August 2006 and stipulated that SACCOs, recently introduced in

Uganda,19 would be the vehicle through which the Government would support the

15

Appointment of PSOs to all 13 districts instead of three regional PSOs as originally planned. 16

Paraprofessionals were local people specially trained for extension services. Their services were not anticipated at the time of appraisal. 17

The supervision mission of 2003 noted that a short-term consultant had been recruited to design the details of the M&E system (and for computerizing it), but that the programme’s M&E officer was working on only a part-time basis from Kampala. The mission recommended that the M&E activity be strengthened by appointing a full-time person for the M&E officer’s post based in Mbarara and with adequate funding (very few funds were provided in the programme cost tables). 18

The “matching” part by the group was to be 20 per cent. 19

SACCOs represent a cooperative credit and savings concept successfully introduced in Kenya in 1969. They were originally known as Union Credit and Savings Sections, then Union Banking Sections and, in the 1990s, were given the acronym SACCOs (savings and credit cooperatives). The term was then assumed in other East African countries.

6

development of rural financial services. Consequently, AAMP was directed to

concentrate on helping establish SACCOs in the programme areas.

B. Project implementation

22. Details of the physical progress of AAMP are given in annex 8 of this report. The

following paragraphs provide only a brief discussion of the main activities and

results achieved.

23. Agricultural commercialization. There were three main types of outputs under

this component: (i) technical support to farming enterprises – a range of activities

were undertaken, including establishment of on-farm trials and demonstrations,

training of farmers in modern farming technologies and training in the logical

framework approach; (ii) business development and market linkages, with

enterprise development support in the form of a revolving fund, formation and

training of marketing associations and support to value addition initiatives; and

(iii) rural financial services support, basically including capacity-building for

selected SACCOs.

24. A total of 470 on-farm demonstration plots and 1,020 on-farm trials were

established (94 per cent of the targets). Trials were used to test crop varieties

released by the National Agricultural Research Organization and compare them

with local varieties. Successful varieties were then included in on-farm

demonstrations. The demonstrations led to a high rate of adoption by various

enterprises.20

25. Under the decentralized arrangement, the training of farmers was the responsibility

of the subcounty field extension workers. Accordingly, a total of 209 subcounty

extension workers (97 per cent of targets) were trained as part of capacity-building

for subcounty extension service delivery. All programme-supported groups received

several types of training, including technical training pertaining to the chosen

enterprises as well as instruction in enterprise development, group dynamics and

leadership, business planning and record-keeping. A total of 1,020 farmer groups

were also trained in the logical framework approach, which helped farmers to

identify their problems, find appropriate solutions and to systematically monitor the

benefits accruing. Exchange visits were also organized to develop awareness and

skills, and to promote knowledge sharing among farmers and extension workers.

26. Enterprise development support was the driving force behind the programme’s

agricultural commercialization efforts. By completion, AAMP had supported 2,788

groups to set up agricultural enterprises, and there were 66,196 beneficiaries of

the revolving fund of which 55.3 per cent were women. These groups included 886

groups supported with ―pass-ons‖ recovered from the original groups. Support

under the revolving fund took the form of packages standardized according to the

types of enterprises involved.21

27. Marketing initiatives promoted by the programme were based on marketing

associations. Workshops were organized, and market information was collected and

disseminated through radio programmes and on subcounty notice boards.

Marketing associations also took advantage of the wide coverage of mobile

telephone networks to establish links with supermarkets in Kampala. In

collaboration with the Uganda Integrated Programme, AAMP also carried out a

study on value addition facilities with potential in the region. A number of

enterprises were identified, including the drying of fruit, milling of grain, hulling of

rice, processing of honey and dairy produce, and production of Irish potatoes,

meat, fruit and vegetables.

20

For example, upland rice in Kabarole, Kanungu and Rukungiri Districts, improved banana management in Ntungamo District, Irish potato growing in Kabale, Kisoro and Mbarara Districts, pineapple growing in Sembabule and Kyenjojo Districts, and adoption of improved goat husbandry in all programme districts. 21

For example, rice farming groups received seed and a spray pump; bee-keeping groups received modern hives as well as tending and harvesting equipment; fish farmers received fish fending materials, etc.

7

28. As mentioned above, AAMP implemented the rural financial services support

activities through SACCOs. By programme completion, 35 SACCOs had received

support in the form of training22 and equipment23 to enhance their operational

capacity (109 per cent of the target). The districts and subcounty commercial

officials helped them to prepare business plans, monitoring reports, annual reports,

accounts and annual audits. The Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union

(UCSCU), financed by another IFAD-supported intervention,24 undertook to

supervise and guide the SACCOs under AAMP through monthly visits.

29. Rural infrastructure development. Infrastructure investments eligible under the

IFAD loan included the improvement of existing community roads, covered

markets, cattle dips, valley dams and storage facilities. The choice of infrastructure

schemes was left to the communities themselves, within the menu set out above.

The parallel financing from AfDB was for the construction of feeder roads. At

completion, the targets set for milk cooler capacity, feeder roads and market

structures were exceeded by 8 per cent, 60 per cent and 87.5 per cent,

respectively. However, some targets were not met. Only 27 per cent of the target

set for cattle dips was achieved because of managerial problems encountered at

the district level; therefore AAMP did not move forward to finance these dips, given

the lack of sustainability. Eighty-three per cent of the target set for valley dams

was achieved, although the target was optimistic and required hydrological design

work that was far beyond the capacity of MOLG. With regard to community roads,

only 51 per cent of the target was achieved but the problem had to do with

programme design rather than its implementation. The road gravelling costs were

not included in the cost estimate and this has emerged as a principal lesson

learned.

30. Community mobilization. Under this component, support was intended to be

delivered in terms of skills development, community mobilization and institutional

support. The first was to concentrate on the training of community development

staff in mobilizing and working with groups; the second concerned start-up

workshops, identification of groups, needs assessment and promotional activities;

and the third aimed at improving the outreach of districts through the provision of

vehicles. By the end of the programme, the number of start-up workshops

organized (both at the district and subcounty levels) had met the targets, and

community development officers had been trained and vehicles provided.

31. Project facilitation. AAMP was implemented through existing local government

structures at the district and subcounty levels. Key technical staff at these levels

received specialized training and their capacity was strengthened. Initially, M&E

was carried out by a part-time MOLG official based in Kampala – an arrangement

found to be unsatisfactory by the supervision mission of 2003, which recommended

a full-time appointment that was eventually made in June 2004. It was not until

after the appointment of the full-time officer that a functional M&E system was

established, capable of collecting data at the grass-roots level, feeding it into the

district and national reporting system, and establishing standardized reporting

formats. There was also a substantial increase in programme staff during

implementation (see paragraph 19).

22

Training of committee members and new staff. 23

A safe, stationery and other small items. 24

Rural Financial Services Programme.

8

Key points

The Government’s strategy for poverty alleviation and rural development was

outlined in the PEAP and PMA.

AAMP was designed to test development approaches that matched the

objectives of PMA, all major aspects of which are reflected in the programme.

The overall goal of AAMP was to increase the incomes and food security of poor

rural households in the programme area and modernize agriculture in the

districts.

AAMP was structured around four components: (i) agricultural

commercialization; (ii) rural infrastructure development; (iii) community

mobilization; and (iv) programme facilitation.

Although some early targets were not met, by the end of the programme the

vast majority of the targets for each component had been attained or even

exceeded.

III. Review of findings by criterion

A. Project performance

Relevance 32. Generally speaking, it may be said that the programme objectives were relevant in

terms of their alignment with government policies for agriculture and rural

development, the country strategic opportunities paper (COSOP) for Uganda, and

the needs of the rural poor. AAMP was designed to promote increased smallholder

participation in the market economy and improve their opportunities for income

generation through a number of initiatives related to rural infrastructure

development and measures to stimulate the provision of private-sector services to

smallholders. This is very much in line with the PEAP and PMA, which called for

increased commercialization of agricultural production, and with the Local

Government Act of 1997 that emphasized the principles of decentralization and

gave considerable responsibility for administration, service provision and

investments to elected local councils.

33. AAMP approaches were also in line with the COSOP of 1998, particularly regarding

(i) support to demand-driven community and interest-group projects;

(ii) connecting farmers to markets and agroprocessors; (iii) promotion and

adaptation of known technologies to local conditions as well as focus on cash and

tradable food crops; and (iv) livestock production within smallholder farming

systems.

34. In the formulation of AAMP, lessons were also drawn from past IFAD

projects/programmes, in particular the South-west Region Agricultural

Rehabilitation Project, of which AAMP is a follow-on intervention. Main lessons were

that: (i) efficient implementation and management should be decentralized to the

programme area; (ii) IFAD’s target groups have a strong interest in generating

cash income and savings from agriculture; (iii) with a few exceptions, input supply

no longer requires support from the Government; (iv) local infrastructure

development must respond to community interests and commitment, with a clear

understanding reached regarding the provision of adequate resources for road

maintenance before roads are rehabilitated; and (v) with limited positive

experience gained from agricultural extension activities, there is now a need to

develop extension approaches and methods suitable to the country’s changed

economic and institutional framework.

35. The PCR noted the relevance of AAMP with respect to its intended development

purpose and alignment to the needs of the rural poor. At the time of appraisal, 2.5

million of the country’s smallholder families produced 94 per cent of total

agricultural production, constituted 80 per cent of the employed population and

9

supplied virtually all the country’s food. About 80 per cent of households in the

programme area depended on agriculture and a substantial proportion of them

were poor. Therefore, modernizing smallholder agriculture was expected to

increase awareness about alternatives for income generation for targeted

households and contribute to poverty reduction. The programme outputs were also

relevant. With built-in flexibility, the agricultural enterprises and programme-

supported activities were region-specific and, within regions, modelled around the

livelihood and economic activities of the local population because the beneficiaries

were actively involved in the selection of enterprises or interventions for support.

36. At closing, the relevance of AAMP was still high on the basis of human development

and poverty indices. Although the overall rate of people living below the official

poverty line in Uganda declined from 56 per cent in 1992 to 31 per cent in 2005

(and 40 per cent in rural areas),25 in 2009 the human development index for

Uganda was 0.422, placing it at 143rd among 169 countries measured by the

United Nations Development Programme, and the proportion of people living on

less than US$1.25 a day was 51 per cent.26

37. The parallel financing arrangement with AfDB for feeder road improvement was

also relevant because, with this, IFAD loan funds could be focused on community

roads to link farms and communities to towns and markets, often via the feeder

roads.

38. The targeting approach of AAMP was explicit in stating that economically active

smallholder farmers and existing small-scale entrepreneurs and business

associations were the principal target group, as this reflected the nature of the

activities to be supported. The President’s Report rightly recognized that ―the

beneficiaries are generally economically active smallholders who suffer less from

food poverty than from cash/income poverty‖. This is true of all the country: as

stated on the IFAD website report on Uganda, smallholder farmers are poor

because of weak or non-existent market links, the absence of technology to boost

production and lack of access to financial services to establish small enterprises.

39. AAMP was designed to include most of the essential elements of agricultural

income generation. However, it differed from the so-called ―multiple component

approach‖, which generally has numerous components, subcomponents and

activities sometimes aimed at supporting agencies only loosely linked with

project/programme goals.27 These types of multiple component interventions rarely

involve communities in a serious manner and, unlike AAMP, have seldom

mainstreamed activities into governmental programmes.

40. In order to facilitate the assessment of programme design, the PPA evaluation

team prepared a linear logical project scheme for AAMP to understand the logic

leading to its design (see annex 9). This scheme demonstrates that the various

inputs are well linked with the expected intermediate results, which again

supported the expected final results. AAMP also took account of the necessary

prerequisites for reaching results, that is, decentralized implementation structures

and arrangements, and adequate facilitation/coordination arrangements. The

scheme further shows that the design is capable of creating improved prospects for

continued rural development in programme areas.

41. The President’s Report on AAMP included a logical framework with performance

indicators, means of verification and assumptions/risks, but without any targets.28

The rationale for defining indicators for monitoring, but not targets, is a matter of

25

IFAD website report on Uganda www.ruralpovertyportal.org/web/guest/country/home/tags/uganda. 26

United Nations Development Programme international human development indicators: http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/UGA.html. These figures are for all Uganda and do not represent only the more peaceful, southern part of the country. 27

Often the reason for including such components or subcomponents was that they were too small to be considered as independent projects. 28

The President’s Report noted that, since the districts would plan activities to be financed by the agricultural commercialization and rural infrastructure funds, targets had not been set. The monitoring indicators would compare programme performance each year with the targets set in the annual work programme and budget prepared by the districts and consolidated by the PFT.

10

debate. The appraisal mission argued that no targets for indicators could be set

because the programme was beneficiary-driven, that is, the local populations in the

districts and subcounties would determine the types of ―enterprises‖ (subprojects)

they wished to establish. The first supervision mission pointed out that it would be

very difficult to monitor and manage programme operations and finally evaluate

success without targets, and proceeded with a recommendation to establish targets

for the different activities to assist in monitoring performance and evaluating

programme impacts (a baseline survey was under way at that time). Targets for

most of the physical indicators were established following that mission; the

remaining targets were established by later supervision missions and the mid-term

review. The PPA mission agreed that it was difficult to set fixed targets for some

activities such as the agricultural commercialization fund, whereas it would have

been possible to agree at least on tentative targets for some other indicators listed

in the logframe. Furthermore, as the economic zones and the agricultural potential

of the programme areas were known at appraisal, the PPA team was inclined to

agree with the first supervision mission that tentative targets could have been set

at appraisal for most indicators, or perhaps for all, with the caveat that such

targets could be modified when clear local preferences emerged.

42. As mentioned in the previous section, the design of AAMP was modified during

implementation to address changes in the context and shortcomings identified

(establishing targets for indicators, setting up a functional M&E unit, reallocating

programme funds). Overall, the coordination and management arrangements were

appropriate for AAMP implementation and fitted well with the Government’s

development and decentralization approach, which aimed to integrate donor

activities with those seen as government responsibilities.

43. Given all the above, the PPA rating for relevance is 5 (satisfactory), similar to that

assigned to this criterion by IFAD’s Programme Management Department (PMD).

Effectiveness 44. The overall objective of AAMP was to modernize agriculture in the districts

supported. In this regard, among others, four proxy variables for modernizing

agriculture, identified as PMA objectives, are improved productivity, increased

share of marketed production, participation in the market and gainful employment

through the secondary benefits of agricultural modernization. The impact

assessment study undertaken at AAMP completion noted that yields of important

marketable crops had increased, including bananas (50 per cent), rice (50–180 per

cent), and pineapple and Irish potatoes (double or even triple, depending on the

districts). Marketable surpluses, calculated as a proportion of total production,

increased on average by 12-20 per cent. The impact assessment also noted that

only about 40 per cent of farmers sold their produce in the markets before AAMP

but that this figure rose to about 60 per cent after the programme. The PCR

recognized that the 42 markets built by AAMP have created employment for over

5,700 people engaged in different types of activities, as did the installation of milk

coolers. From the above, it may be concluded that, in general, AAMP’s overall

objectives were achieved in a satisfactory manner.

45. The following paragraphs discuss achievements related to each specific AAMP

objective. It is important to note that, as indicated in chapter II section B, the

expected results of AAMP’s interventions were close to the targets and sometimes

exceeded them, therefore supporting the above overall positive assessment of the

programme’s performance. Details on the activities, indicators and comparisons

with the targets may be found in annex 8.

46. Specific objective 1: Increased involvement of the private sector in

support of further commercialization of smallholder agriculture. The impact

assessment noted that there had been increased private-sector participation in the

value chain of supported (and non-supported) enterprises, from input dealers

supplying the farmers with seed, fertilizer and pesticides to transporters bringing

farm produce to markets. The number of traders of farm produce increased, as did

the number and frequency of buyers reaching remote productive areas. The PCR

11

noted that the average number of traders accessing markets had increased by 71.7

per cent on a busy market day and 34.5 per cent on a non-busy one. Linkages

were also established with private supermarkets and processors. Examples include

the Kabale District Irish potato farmers who have linkages with Shoprite

supermarkets in Kampala; Kabarole District upland rice farmers who linked up with

the Rwenzori Rice Factory in Fort Portal Town; and Ntungamo District dairy farmers

who established market linkages with Birunga dairy processors based in Kisoro.

47. The private sector has also been stimulated to install processing facilities in some

districts. For example, the installation of milk coolers in Ntungamo, Sembabule and

Ibanda Dstricts has led to increased milk production as a response to increased

milk prices. The increase in milk delivered at the collecting centres has in turn

stimulated the installation of additional coolers by private milk dealers in order to

handle the increased production (in Kiyanja, the capacity of the AAMP milk cooler

was 3,000 litres and the private sector followed by installing 12,000-litre capacity

milk coolers). The farmer associations have also entered into partnerships with

private milk dealers who, in addition to buying the milk were also responsible for

the facility’s operation and maintenance. Another example is the installation of a

modern rice mill in Kabarole District and several small-scale rice hullers in the

Districts of Kanungu and Rukungiri as a result of increased rice production.

48. Specific objective 2: Improved capacity among economically active

farmers to gain better access to rural services (technical, marketing and

financial). The mobilization, screening and selection of farmer groups was a major

AAMP activity. Farmers formed groups and participated in the revolving fund

scheme (78 per cent of the targets were achieved) and in on-farm demonstrations

and on-farm trials (94 per cent). The programme’s training and support to groups

has enabled farmers to increase the scale of operations, expand production and

become more commercially oriented. Farmers have shifted from subsistence to

market-oriented farming and their capacity to select ―enterprises‖ (subprojects)

that give higher returns has improved. More land has been allocated to the

enterprises and improved agricultural technologies have been adopted, leading to

increased yields of important marketable crops.

49. Following the expansion of production, farmers were increasingly involved in group

marketing to generate cash earnings from their marketable surpluses. The

collective/bulk selling marketing arrangements gave farmers higher returns. The

establishment of SACCOs helped facilitate farmers’ engagement in productive

agricultural enterprises as a substantial portion of loans went into agricultural

enterprises. Farmer groups and associations were now linked to financial services,

especially with regard to potato-, rice- and banana-growing, and in milk-producing

areas. However, this started late29 and even though the programme supported

more than the planned number of SACCOs, the number of beneficiaries – about

29,000 – was low in relation to the farming population in the programme districts

(less than 10 per cent of the families in the programme areas were helped).

Moreover, as the average repayment rate of loans was a bare 75 per cent, it is

likely that there were several SACCOs with even lower repayment rates and thus

early candidates for failure.30 Another challenge is that, as the SACCOs are not yet

in position to raise sufficient funds to train their members and staff, they depend

on technical assistance in this respect. However, it was noted in the PCR that with

the completion of AAMP, most SACCOs have been taken up by the IFAD-financed

Rural Financial Services Programme to enable them to continue providing services

to the farmers. The section on sustainability will further discuss the performance

and potential of these SACCOs, based on updated data as of present, i.e. 2.5 years

after AAMP completion.

29

The PCR explained that the delay was due to having to wait for policy guidance from the central government concerning the Rural Financial Services Strategy (approved in August 2006), specifically regarding the microfinance policy framework. 30

The dangers arising from using SACCOs as conduits of outside funds to farmers. The politicization of microfinance, especially after the 2006 presidential elections, made the overall political environment under which SACCOs operated very challenging.

12

50. Specific objective 3: Sustainable development and improvement of rural

infrastructure. Various infrastructure schemes (roads, markets, storage facilities,

etc.) have been constructed and/or rehabilitated by the programme, thus

facilitating the marketing of agricultural produce and other rural economic

activities. As mentioned in chapter II section B, some schemes exceeded the

targets while others, for various reasons, did not even meet them. Overall, the new

roads improved access to the subcounty hinterland and hence much of the

marketable produce of farms located in these areas could now be picked up by

vans or trucks directly from the farms instead of being wasted because of

difficulties in getting it to market. Better rural roads have improved access to other

services, such as improved seed, veterinary and extension advisory services, and

financial services. They have also led to a reduction in the time needed for

collecting water, to the start of matatu services in areas where there are roads, and

to subsequent increases in school attendance.

51. Post-harvest handling structures have also been constructed. For example, in

Kabale, good Irish potato seed was selected, cleaned and stored for sale in well-

constructed structures. Milk cooler facilities were set up in five districts. AAMP also

constructed new covered markets, which are much cleaner and more convenient to

the stallholders and customers than the old open markets. Attendance at markets

has increased by 110.5 per cent on a busy day and 53.5 per cent on a non-busy

day.31 The combination of decreased transportation costs and the cutting out of

middlemen resulted in a rapid increase in farm-gate prices.

52. In order to ensure the sustainability of these infrastructure schemes, management

committees have been formed to operate and maintain them. Training has been

provided to the committees on technical and management issues. During

programme implementation, the committees were active in their roles, but once

programme financing was no longer available many of them became dormant. This

is further discussed under the section on sustainability.

53. Specific objective 4: Increased public-sector capacity to perform its role in

responding to production needs identified by interest groups and rural

communities. Building up the capacity of the public sector was one aspect of

AAMP, the aim of which was to enable staff to work with beneficiary groups using

analytical approaches and to fulfill a brokerage role with the private sector. Support

for capacity-building included technical in-service training for District Production

Department staff and subcounty extension workers, agri-business training for

community development staff, and funding the operations of the district technology

adaptation specialists. The provision of transport enhanced the mobility of

community development staff and helped them make and maintain contact with

AAMP groups and management committees.

54. Another activity that was not part of the design but was implemented due to

demand from beneficiaries, was the identification and training of community

agricultural paraprofessionals in each of the 73 subcounties to create local capacity

for the provision of basic agricultural extension services. The training was

specifically tailored to the key enterprises supported by AAMP in the respective

subcounties. The paraprofessionals worked under the supervision of local

government extension staff for purposes of quality control. This system was driven

by the demand and voluntarism of the farmers, who provided transport and

lunches for the paraprofessionals during training sessions.

55. Overall, following the decentralization policies and support provided by AAMP,

public-sector response to production needs in the rural communities has improved.

Districts and subcounties are also involved in sustaining the activities initiated by

the programme. The key issue is how to maintain these improvements in public-

sector capacity.

31

PCR, December 2008.

13

56. Given the above analysis, the PPA concurred with the rating of 5 (satisfactory)

assigned by PMD to the effectiveness of AAMP.

Efficiency 57. Although the programme was approved by IFAD’s Executive Board in December

1999, the loan was signed more than two years later (February 2002) because the

Government had first to obtain parliamentary approval. The programme became

effective three months later (May 2002). The use of programme funds was

relatively slow in the early years because it took time to complete the design and

procurement process for rural roads. Programme funds were almost fully utilized

and, in reference to the extent to which the programme objectives were achieved,

this is a good indicator of resource-use efficiency. It should be noted that the

devaluation of the United States dollar (USD) relative to the Special Drawing Right

(SDR) has meant that total programme costs in USD terms exceeded the appraisal

estimates, without however exceeding the loan amount in SDR (the currency of the

loan).

58. Programme finances were also well accounted for during the entire programme

period, amd all audits were timely and unqualified, with very few comments or

corrections by auditors. The programme was completed according to the original

six-year plan, and the total programme management cost (around 12 per cent)

was in line with the average in the ESA region. As noted above, an upward revision

of the programme facilitation costs was approved in the 2006 loan amendment.

The management costs included also the monitoring costs for the AfDB feeder

roads subcomponent.

59. Effective programme management greatly enhanced the efficiency of AAMP. The

manpower required was underestimated at design but, once that problem was

resolved, programme management was excellent and was able to meet its original

deadline. The management procedures included almost textbook-like practices:

maintaining regular relations with interest agencies and groups; using a

participation-based approach to annual planning; staffing the PFT with competent

personnel (most were from government agencies, while financial staff were from

the private sector); providing adequate leadership through monthly management

meetings that took place in the districts once every quarter; requiring thorough

periodic monitoring reports; exercising adequate control over achievements;

adjusting to the new requirements as the programme proceeded; and providing

feedback to, and motivation for, staff. The M&E system, after the modifications and

additional financing provided during implementation, performed well and was

capable of providing the data necessary for local/national decision-makers and for

IFAD to follow the programme’s progress.

60. The appraisal report had avoided presenting estimates of the financial rate of

return (FRR) and economic rate of return (ERR) despite having made calculations

to assess them, but it concluded that the programme investments were likely to

create an ERR of more than 12 per cent.32 Similarly, the PPA mission did not

attempt to recalculate the FRR or ERR for the programme investments in detail,

partly because (i) the mission’s visit did not allow time for collecting new data on

the different types of subprojects; and (ii) the programme offices had closed in

2008.

61. Economic and financial analyses presented in the PCR showed that positive net

benefits had been realized from programme-supported interventions. The

estimated ERR for the last three years of the programme was 42 per cent and the

PCR projected it to be 48 per cent over the next five years (2009-2013). The PCR

presentation of the ERR is very informative and allows readers to gain a good

understanding of the costs/benefits of the enterprises. The relatively high rate was

attributed to the fact that most households adopted better agricultural

32

In addition, the appraisal report estimated that, if the per capita income increased by one percentage point, the ERR would be 18 per cent, and if the annual production per hectare increased by UGX 100,000 (US$69), the ERR would be 46 per cent.

14

technologies, which resulted in higher yields; concurrently, a better rural road

network improved farmers’ access to markets, which ensured greater opportunities

to sell their produce.

62. However, while the assumptions are moderate and partly based on actual

observations by the M&E unit, the methodologies used in computing the ERR do

not follow textbook or internationally approved practices, and thus undermine the

validity of the results (see PCR section on efficiency and annex VI of the PCR).33

What the PCR did was closer to a financial analysis than an economic one (even

then using computation methods that gave faulty results). However, there are

strong indications that the programme’s FRR and ERR are positive because of signs

of growth in productivity, marketable outputs, use of infrastructure, etc., even

though it is impossible to project accurately (on the basis of the PCR data and

computations) what the ERR should actually be.

63. The results calculated by the PPA on the profitability of the subprojects were even

better than those presented in the PCR. The net present values were very positive

for all five subprojects used as examples in the PCR – milk coolers, and smallholder

plantations for bananas, potatoes, upland rice and goat-breeding. For all these

subprojects, the farmers received subsidies in the form of training, visits to model

farmers, advice by farm extension workers paid by AAMP, and good quality seed or

goats/goat progenies. The PPA team prepared financial analyses for a period of

seven years (using AAMP’s production and cost data, partly updated) to determine

the rates of return in the event farmers had to pay all these expenses without

assistance. The FRRs were high in all of these test cases, varying from 27 to 210

per cent.34

64. As to the economic returns of all programme investments, for the reasons

mentioned in paragraph 60, the PPA mission could not re-work the computations

on ERR made by the appraisal mission. However, as the FRR returns for subprojects

were high, as the Government’s impact study had shown that 98 percent of

farmers reported higher incomes than before the programme and as the official

statistics indicated a 15 percent increase in household incomes, the PPA mission

was satisfied that the ERR for AAMP was adequate.35

65. The wide variety of beneficiaries – from district and subcounty officers receiving

training to farmer groups benefiting from enterprise grants and travellers on roads

– makes it difficult to compute meaningful unit costs per beneficiary or other

denominators, particularly because of the varied types of farmer enterprises and

different road construction conditions. However, as noted in the section on rural

poverty impact, by the end of the programme the number of beneficiaries

exceeded those indicated at appraisal.

66. The programme succeeded in completing all civil works on time, and no extension

of the closing date was needed despite some delays related to procurement for

rural roads. For these reasons and in view of the results calculated by the PPA

regarding the profitability of the subprojects and substantial increases in farmers’

incomes through programme investments, AAMP’s efficiency is rated as 5

(satisfactory).

B. Rural poverty impact

67. The overall goal of the programme was to increase the incomes and food security

of poor rural households in the programme area, and thus reduce poverty in the 13

districts. The programme aimed at improving the livelihoods of 312,500 households

33

For instance, the ERR has been presented on an annual basis for seven years, starting from the year when production data were actually collected. The computations gave the ERR for annual crops, for which the annual costs were higher than revenues, and did so on an annual basis, that is, for each investment year separately. For bananas, no investment costs or recurrent costs were included but the computations were calculated from the time the banana trees reached full maturity. The ERR for the road component and milk coolers included no maintenance costs. 34

Details of the financial rates of return are available in the PPA mission’s working paper. 35

Despite the constraints mentioned above, the PPA mission prepared tentative computations of ERR using data from the Government’s PCR, price data collected during the mission and best estimates (and no shadow pricing), and obtained positive ERRs for 15 to 20-year projection periods.

15

but, by programme completion, the number of households reached was

approximately 400,000. These households benefited from investments in the

commercialization of agriculture, including access to financial services,

rehabilitation of rural roads, and construction of other infrastructures. The main

impacts of programme investments are presented in the following paragraphs.

68. Household incomes and assets. The PCR noted that overall, according to official

government statistics, a 12.5 per cent reduction in poverty levels and a 15 per cent

increase in real household incomes were registered over the lifetime of the

programme.36 During the impact assessment study, about 98 per cent and 66 per

cent of the farmers interviewed reported that their incomes from farming and non-

farming activities respectively had increased. However, the changes experienced by

beneficiaries cannot be entirely attributed to AAMP since they have been exposed

to interventions by other organizations and to various changes in social, economic

and environmental factors.

69. The creation of employment from AAMP activities can be one proxy for assessing

its impact on household incomes. According to the PCR, the 42 markets built by

AAMP have created employment for over 5,700 people engaged in different types

of activities, ranging from owners of small businesses in the markets such as

eating places and telephone booths, to casual workers loading trucks and people

employed for cleaning and security. The milk coolers have also helped to create

employment and hence income for the farmers who produce milk for sale, for the

workers hired to transport milk from farms to the coolers and from the coolers to

the processing plants, and for workers employed at the coolers. Household income

is also generated from opportunities to sell production surpluses on the market or

at higher farm gate prices.

70. As for household assets, the PCR reported that increased livestock ownership was

the most obvious effect of the programme. For instance, the largest investment in

livestock under AAMP was the financing of a UGX 500 million (about US$250,000)

scheme for goat stock improvement, which benefited 15,771 persons, 60 per cent

of whom were women. This increase in productive assets helped households to

generate income that was mainly used for school fees, reinvestments in farming

and purchases of food for the households. There is also evidence of an increase in

the average number of non-productive assets such as mattresses and blankets in

households directly benefiting from the programme. In addition, the quality of

housing has improved: dwellings roofed with corrugated iron sheets rather than

grass increased from 69.1 per cent in 2001 to 83.1 per cent in 2008. Financial

assets also grew. The more than 17,000 members of the programme-supported

SACCOs had saved a total of UGX 1.42 billion (about US$700,000) by mid-2008.

Given these positive changes, the programme’s impact on household income and

assets is rated as 5 (satisfactory).

71. Human and social capital and empowerment. All AAMP activities involved

some building of human capital. These activities included training conducted by

extension advisers who met with more than 2,700 farmer groups and established

subcounty trials and model on-farm demonstration plots in an effort to increase

productivity and make farmers more business oriented. The demonstrations were

very important learning stations for farmers, inasmuch as they acquired the

knowledge and skills needed to adopt the new technologies. The demonstrations

were also largely responsible for the high rate of adoption of various crops.

Extensive training was also provided to district and subcounty officers to enable

them to more efficiently carry out their functions. All programme-supported groups

received several types of training as part of the enterprise development support.

This included technical training relative to the chosen enterprises as well as in

enterprise development, group dynamics, leadership and business planning, and

record-keeping.

36

The PCR noted that these figures are based on the Government of Uganda Statistical Abstract of 2008.

16

72. It was noted that, apart from training, AAMP-supported road building activities

brought health services closer in terms of the time needed to reach them, and

taught road users’ associations the value and skills of road maintenance. It also led

to a reduction in the time needed for collecting water, and the matatus had a good

impact on school attendance. Sanitary facilities built at the market places taught

people the value of hygiene, as did the HIV/AIDS campaigns. The quantities of

these and other training efforts are included in annex 8. A significant proportion of

loans from SACCOs was used for school fees, allowing more children to enter and

stay in school. The impact study also reported better capacity of SACCO members

to pay for medical care.

73. With regard to social capital and empowerment, the programme set up a number

of associations and groups including, for example, SACCOs, marketing

associations, infrastructure management committees and group enterprises.

Working in groups allowed members to acquire knowledge and skills, and the

groups’ chosen investment priorities were an important means of empowering local

people in terms of their own development. Overall, the impact on human and social

capital and empowerment is rated as 5 (satisfactory).

74. Food security and agricultural productivity. According to the impact

assessment, 90 per cent of the households interviewed reported that food

availability had improved considerably during programme implementation.

However, as in the case of household incomes, it should be noted that this cannot

be entirely attributed to the project. Forty-six per cent of the farmers interviewed

reported that they spent part of the additional income to purchase food for their

households. The statistics on marketed surpluses also show the increased use of

farm production for home consumption: the increases in production exceeded the

increases in the percentage of marketed produce. Improved food security was

specifically reported among rural farmer groups engaged in banana production,

upland rice growing and potato production. As livestock ownership has increased,

households now have better access to animal protein in the form of milk and meat.

75. Both the farmers’ views described in the impact assessment and the data collected

by the M&E unit of AAMP indicate substantial increases in agricultural productivity.

Yield levels improved for both crop (bananas, rice, Irish potatoes and pineapples)

and livestock (goats, bulls) enterprises. The increase in yield levels led to increased

marketable surpluses of various crops, as may be seen below:

Table 2 Change in marketable surplus resulting from AAMP support

Enterprise Marketable surplus (as % of total production)

Before AAMP After AAMP

Banana 44 64

Beans 59 76

Pineapple 67 75

Rice 80 88

Irish potato 45 57

Maize 43 67

Source: Impact Assessment Study (2008)

76. The farmers’ shift from subsistence farming to commercial farming occurred at the

same time. The impact assessment study noted that households engaging in only

subsistence farming fell from 49.8 per cent in 2001 to 25.6 per cent in 2008, and

those involved in the sale of crops increased from 27.8 per cent in 2001 to 40.8 per

cent in the same year. The proportion of households selling animals rose from 4.0

per cent in 2001 to 11.7 per cent in 2008. It is interesting to note that an impact

on agricultural productivity was also observed among non-programme

beneficiaries, and in a number of ways. Non-programme beneficiaries have been

17

seen to learn and adopt the best practices from the programme beneficiaries by,

for example, adopting improved varieties and breeds, planting in lines and spraying

against pest and disease. The programme’s impact on food security and

agricultural productivity is therefore rated as 5 (satisfactory).

77. Natural resources and the environment. The PPA mission noted that, in

general, AAMP did not give rise to any major environmental concerns and that the

National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) had overseen the

environmental soundness of AAMP investments. Throughout implementation,

environmental impact statements were prepared, and potential negative effects

and mitigation measures were identified and implemented. As an example,

wherever possible, the programme built on existing structures, improving roads

within their existing alignment and finding alternative uses for depleted gravel pits.

78. Regarding infrastructure, the mitigating measures required at the time of financing

appear to have been adequate. For example, satisfactory latrines have been built

at market places, and market associations look after the cleanliness of the stalls

and their surroundings.37

79. New feeder and community roads have improved access to areas previously

difficult to reach by large truck,38 and the amount of timber harvested and wood

materials for charcoal burning has grown in some areas (not all AAMP districts have

substantial natural forestry resources). While this activity has brought new income

to more remote areas, the depletion of forests will need to be checked and kept

within stipulated national and district guidelines. In principle, the regulatory

arrangements are adequate: the National Forestry Authority grants licenses for

timber harvesting, and district authorities issue permits to transporters. However,

the district environmental officers, whose number is sufficient for environmental

monitoring and mitigation at the district level, are inadequate to cover the large

programme area and handle the increasing number of interventions involved.

80. The PCR acknowledged that a number of environmental concerns remain because

of increased use of agricultural chemicals and their potential percolation to the

water table. In the view of the PPA mission, agricultural chemicals are still not

widely used in Uganda but the application of herbicide and fertilizer in upland rice

fields and potato plantations is likely to become more common. This is because

farmers are motivated to increase production and the labour requirements for

weeding are more costly than for the application of herbicides. Also, herbicides and

fungicides are needed to protect against insects and plant diseases. One factor that

has impeded increased use of fertilizer is its relatively high cost, which leads

farmers to rely more on manure and composted organic materials.

81. At the time of the PCR, global climate change was not seen as a significant

problem. However, NEMA, district and subcounty officials interviewed by the PPA

team have since acknowledged the effects of climate change in Uganda. Besides

unexpected droughts, substantial changes in rain and seasonal patterns have made

it difficult for farmers (and their advisers) to decide on the most suitable times for

planting crops.

82. Overall, the programme’s impact on natural resources management and the

environment is rated as 4 (moderately satisfactory), higher than the original rating

of 3 (moderately unsatisfactory) assigned by both PMD and the PCRV. This is due

to the PPA mission’s observation of no major shortcomings in implementing the

mitigation measures of the environmental assessments prepared for infrastructure

schemes, as well as the good supervision of environmental issues carried out by

the district environmental officers and NEMA.

37

As a smaller note, the PPA team observed that although the refuse collection areas at the markets could have been tidier, these areas did not create an environmental hazard because all refuse was organic and was periodically transferred to processing centres 38

The Government’s PCR and the impact assessment did not further discuss the environmental impact of the roads

18

83. Institutions and policies. While the PCR does not claim that it changed any

government policies, the programme generally supported the policies for poverty

reduction, agricultural commercialization, decentralization of public administration

and services, and changes in the approach to rural finance. With regard to

strengthening decentralization, the programme was implemented through existing

local government structures at the district and subcounty levels. Key technical staff

at these levels received specialized training with programme funds. Specifically,

capacity-building was strengthened in three key areas: (i) development planning;

(ii) financial management and internal audit; and (iii) civil works and community-

based services.

84. As far as financial institutions are concerned, 35 SACCOs had been established by

completion in the AAMP districts (compared with the target of 32). The PCR and

impact assessment highlighted the various benefits that SACCOs provide. The PPA

team concurs with these findings, which have been discussed in other sections of

the report. In addition, a further benefit of SACCOs – sometimes overlooked – is

that the poorest members of the population can also join a SACCO and benefit

from its services, provided they can invest in one share (equivalent to US$4-9,

depending on the bye-laws of the SACCO concerned). However, as mentioned

under the section on effectiveness, at programme completion, the number of

beneficiaries (around 29,000 households) was low in relation to the farming

population in the programme districts, and could not have affected income

generation and poverty reduction to any great extent. But based on observations

from the PPA team 2.5 years after project completion, progress has been promising

in this respect. This will be further discussed in the section on sustainability.

85. The other main institutions established with AAMP support are the infrastructure

management committees, formed for all types of infrastructures constructed or

improved by the programme (including markets, whose use is increasing), and

farmer groups which were the basis for delivering support to enterprises

(subprojects established by farmer groups) rather than to individual farmers.

86. The PFT of AAMP has been the principal motivator behind a policy change relative

to community access roads in Uganda, although the PCR did not specifically

articulate this point. The learning gained from AAMP implementation has led to a

change in the standards for community access roads, which previously were simply

compacted and graded, and lasted less than 2-3 years owing to heavy rainfall

throughout the country (1,500-2,000 mm). As a result of such learning,

community access roads now have two layers of gravel with compacted soil in

between the layers and then grading, thus improving them to all-weather

standards, reducing maintenance costs and ensuring sustainability. IFAD’s two

other loans to Uganda, for the District Livelihoods Support Programme (DLSP) and

for the Community Agricultural Infrastructure Improvement Programme (CAIIP),

have provided additional funding to implement this learning in the construction of

new community access roads.

87. AAMP had a major influence on MAAIF’s new paper: ―Development Strategy and

Investment Plan‖. AAMP’s impact was also evident in the AfDB’s new agricultural

strategy,39 which, according to the AfDB staff interviewed, was partly based on

AAMP’s experience and placed major emphasis on rural roads, agricultural

infrastructure investments and renewable natural resources management. Given all

the above, the programme’s impact on institutions and policies is rated as 5

(satisfactory). This is higher than the rating of 4 (moderately satisfactory) given by

PMD for impact on institutions and services, on the basis of AAMP’s successful

promotion of the decentralization policy, its capacity-building activities that

contribute to good performance of both the implementation agencies and the large

number of interest groups, marketing associations, infrastructure management

committees and SACCOs that it helped to set up.

39

AfDB: Agricultural Sector Strategy 2010-2014, January 2010

19

88. In sum, based on data in the impact assessment and PCR, as well as information

collected during the field visit, the PPA rates the overall rural poverty impact of

AAMP as 5 (satisfactory), given the benefits that have accrued to the target groups

in terms of markets, income and assets, human and social capital and

empowerment, institutions as well as food security and agricultural productivity.

C. Other performance criteria

89. Sustainability. The PCR considers the issue of sustainability from several

standpoints: political, social, community ownership, institutional, economic and

financial. In political terms, the Government has placed the commercialization of

agriculture at the forefront of its strategies for prosperity and for poverty

eradication, and is unlikely to change them in that respect. The programme’s

group-based approach is believed to have created social capital, as have the pass-

on scheme and the paraprofessionals who are village-based model farmers trained

by the programme.

90. Most programme activities, ranging from building infrastructure to agricultural

enterprises, were identified by the communities themselves by means of a

participatory process, thus helping ensure a sense of ownership among local

populations. Improved skills among local governments and the Government’s

promotion of private-sector input suppliers and cooperatives, along with public-

sector support of other up- and downstream activities of the value chains, are

expected to improve institutional sustainability. As an exit strategy to ensure

continuity of service delivery to farmer groups, all AAMP-supported groups are

being taken over by the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS). As for the

financial sustainability of the programme’s subprojects, the PCR emphasizes how

important new market places and community and feeder roads are to obtaining

higher prices for farm produce. There is also evidence of learning for better

sustainability regarding the community access roads (see paragraph 86).

91. The PCR recognized the challenges of maintaining the roads and other

infrastructure financed by the programme. Maintenance of programme-financed

infrastructure depends on the commitment and competence of voluntary

management committees. In this regard, the PCR noted that these committees are

faced with a lack of recognition within the decentralization framework, which

severely limits their mandates. On a related aspect, with changes in government

policy (i.e. the move to privatizing the management of markets, milk coolers and

collection of market dues), the committees have less of a role and now focus

mainly on informing local government authorities when a tenderer does not

perform up to expectations, and act as a link between the vendors/farmers,

tenderers and the local governments.

92. Road maintenance by local governments is subject to the availability of funds. The

impact assessment study noted that some subcounties (e.g. Kitagata in Bushenyi

District) were in the process of formulating bye-laws for maintaining the

community roads established using Burungi bwansi, whichR means participation of

local people. However, as recognized in the PCR, overall, road maintenance was still

a challenge because there were inadequate funds for this purpose following the

abolition of graduated tax. In this regard, a dedicated road fund has now been

established, jointly funded by the central government, the Poverty Action Fund,

districts and subcounties, locally-collected revenues and development partners.

93. The revolving fund or pass-on system under which the beneficiaries were expected

to pay back inputs (e.g. seed and progeny of donated animals) for distribution to

new beneficiaries, seemed promising and the project authorities expected the

system to become a genuine revolving fund, continuing far beyond the programme

period. However, in practice, only 866 groups of the 2,788 supported were willing

and able to return the benefits they had received. The beneficiaries’ interest in

continuing the system beyond the first or second round of ―repayment‖ seemed to

have waned, first among the animal owners and gradually also among others. The

reasons are not quite clear, but it is possible that a more formalized system,

20

including more uniform methods for keeping records and attaining commitments,

would be required for long-term sustainability of this aspect of the programme.

94. In order to be viable and to facilitate employment of high quality staff, the SACCOs

must have sufficient savings and loans (and later, other financial services); but in

order to attain that level, they must also have relatively high memberships. The

UCSCU, the national unions of SACCOs, has estimated that at least 350 members

are needed before a SACCO can employ its first staff member, but this estimate is

based on the income level of the general population. The membership of rural

SACCOs should, in fact, be substantially higher, probably at least double, and for

two reasons: (i) the level of poverty among farm families suggests that more

members are necessary to support a staff member; and (ii) as operations increase,

the staff must also increase – in both number and level of education – and its

support thus becomes more expensive.

95. At the beginning of 2011, that is, 2.5 years after the completion of AAMP, the total

number of members in AAMP-supported SACCOs had grown significantly (from

around 17,000 when AAMP completed to 25,000). Even though some AAMP-

supported SACCOs still had memberships of less than 500, the present average

membership of these SACCOs is 750. Much larger membership numbers are

possible because, in most subcounties, there are no other financial institutions

other than the SACCOs.40

96. The 2011 statistics collected by UCSCU show that most SACCOs have portfolios

with manageable overdue loan rates and methods to enforce repayment (e.g.

taking delinquents to court). However, there are concerns regarding SACCOs with

low repayment rates and thus lower profitability. The problem of overdue loans is

accentuated by the fact that external funds have found their way into the lending

programmes of some SACCOs; this phenomenon is probably a major reason for the

low repayment rates and profitability, as observed by the last IFAD/UNOPS

supervision mission in 2008.41 SACCOs are member-based institutions whose

integrity is based on safeguarding members’ savings. Experience in Uganda and

many other countries has too often shown that using cooperatives as conduits for

funds endangers their integrity, because the members often see external funds as

grants that need not be repaid.42 Caution in this respect does not mean, however,

that small start-up funds could not be provided to new SACCOs, but more

extensive use of them for transmitting donor or governmental funds (often for

political reasons) should be avoided.

97. Given the above, sustainability is rated as 4 (moderately satisfactory).

98. Innovation and scaling up. The PCR and supervision reports described several

innovative features of the programme, such as the bottom-up participatory

approach, flexible selection of ―enterprises‖ (subprojects), on-farm demonstrations

and trials, revolving funds (or pass-on system), community-based

paraprofessionals,43 group-based learning and infrastructure management

committees. In the view of the PPA team, some of these approaches are to be

considered more as best practices than as innovations. For instance, the on-farm

demonstrations were common in previous training and visit projects. Similarly,

group learning and the bottom-up selection process were in use before AAMP.

40

The two SACCOs visited by the PPA had memberships of 621 and 488, respectively. The smaller and newer one was located in a very modest rented room that could hardly be called a financial institution. However, encouragingly, both were able to show a small annual profit, carry out simple book-keeping, maintain records and safeguard members’ savings. And both had been audited. 41

The 2008 supervision report correctly stated: “External funds will not help a weak SACCO to become strong. In fact, wholesale lenders risk doing more harm than good when they lend to SACCOs with weak management, ineffective governance, or poorly performing portfolios. External credit changes the orientation of weak SACCOs from savings-led to being simple mechanisms for disbursing external funds, resulting in deterioration of their loan portfolio… Strong SACCOs tend to retain their savings orientation when receiving external loans.” 42

The most recent example, and a very large-scale one, is the crisis in the Indian microcredit industry. 43

AAMP identified and trained two men and two women from each of the 73 subcounties under the programme to create local, inexpensive capacity of model farmers and agricultural advisers.

21

These did not pose any particular risk for programme implementation because they

had been tried earlier, even in Uganda.

99. On the other hand, several of the approaches were indeed innovations and new (at

least in Uganda) at the time of programme design, and thus represented more

risky endeavours. They included such ideas as the flexible selection of

―enterprises‖, the revolving fund, community-based paraprofessionals and

infrastructure management committees. Because some of these practices were not

mentioned in the appraisal report and many were ready for replication and scaling

up in other programmes, they showed a high level of initiative on the part of the

Government, the programme leadership, and the supervision and financing

agencies.

100. With regard to scaling up, some innovations have been already scaled up all over

the country. These include the zoning approach (in which subprojects are promoted

according to the potential of the agroecological zones) and the revolving funds.

Both ideas are being replicated by NAADS. As mentioned above, the learning

concerning the community access roads has been replicated in DLSP and CAIIP, as

was the setting up of infrastructure management committees in those

interventions. The repercussions of AAMP’s success are even greater: as mentioned

in the section on impact on institutions and policies, AfDB has used the model as a

basis for modifying its agricultural sector strategy, and it plans to finance projects

in other countries based on approaches used by AAMP. These projects include

community and feeder roads as well as production and processing infrastructures.

101. Other developments and activities were perhaps hoped for but not explicitly

mentioned at the time of appraisal. Some infrastructure investments, such as

agricultural markets, produce stores and milk cooling facilities, when placed in

appropriate locations (for instance, at a crossroads), soon attracted other

businesses, shops and private investors and formed a basis for economic mini-

centres. Private investors noticed the profitability of AAMP milk coolers and

acquired similar coolers, competing for milk sellers with the farmers’ associations

and ensuring competitive prices for farmers. Another phenomenon, hoped for at

appraisal, was that other economic groups found ways of copying subprojects

financed by AAMP. This included groups that were unable to obtain AAMP financing

of their enterprises as well as groups in subcounties not covered by AAMP.

102. To sum up, given the nature of many of the innovations and the achievements in

terms of scaling up, overall, innovation and scaling up is rated as 5 (satisfactory).

103. Gender equality and women’s empowerment. The appraisal report stated that

―women’s groups will be made aware of the opportunities available for increased

income generation, other economic opportunities as well as for enhanced food

security and nutrition.‖ However, it did not contain any special promotional

activities for women and set no targets in this respect, both of which were

corrected during implementation. According to the PCR, with AAMP-promoted

gender sensitization, women were much more involved and benefited substantially

from its activities, almost achieving the very ambitious objectives set at mid term.

104. Overall, the programme had a significant positive impact on women. The following

paragraphs provide a more detailed assessment of AAMP’s achievement against the

three corporate gender objectives contained in the IFAD’s Gender Plan of Action

2003. These are to (i) expand women’s access to and control over fundamental

assets – capital, land, knowledge and technologies; (ii) strengthen women’s

agencies – their decision-making role in community affairs and representation in

local institutions; and (iii) improve women’s well-being and ease their workloads by

facilitating access to basic rural services and infrastructure.

105. With regard to the first corporate gender objective, women and youth constituted a

considerable proportion of the members of targeted economic interest groups. That

being the case, women had a strong influence on AAMP-supported activities. For

example, 55 per cent of the group membership was made up of women, the

majority of whom were engaged in growing Irish potatoes and bananas, and

22

rearing goats. In the case of goat production, 60 per cent of the beneficiaries were

women. As much as 47 per cent of the services under the programme and 40 per

cent of the SACCO loans were extended to women, against the target of 50 per

cent in both cases. Over 75 per cent of the vegetable and fruit stall operators in

markets rehabilitated or constructed under the programme are women. Fifty per

cent of the paraprofessionals selected were women. The women reportedly

benefited from AAMP training that reduced their dependence on their husbands for

basic needs, and increased their responsibilities in their homes and communities.

Furthermore, men were positive regarding the increased economic empowerment

of women because, unlike before, they were sharing household and community

responsibilities. According to the impact assessment study, women members of

SACCOs testified that access to financial services had enabled them to manage

money and have greater control over resources and access to knowledge, which led

to them having a greater voice in family matters accompanied by growth in self-

esteem and self-confidence. In this way, the programme was responsive to

balancing the traditional gender roles within the target communities in line with

Millennium Development Goal No. 3.44

106. With regard to the second corporate gender objective, the satisfactory degree to

which women were empowered and played more a decision-making role is

demonstrated by the fact that they were represented in leadership positions in all

subprojects, maintenance committees and SACCOs. The impact assessment noted

that a number of AAMP-supported groups were dominated by women, some of

whom were executive members of their respective group committees. For example,

executive positions in the Bivamuntuyo pineapple growing group in Sembabule

District were dominated by women.

107. Concerning the third corporate gender objective, AAMP-supported activities have

contributed to improving women’s well-being and easing their workloads. Enhanced

rural infrastructure helped reduce the time spent on travel for domestic tasks (i.e.

collecting water and firewood, trips to the grinding mill to produce flour for

domestic consumption and to local markets, etc.). The impact assessment also

noted that in mountainous areas, such as Nyakitunda in Isingiro District, the

stretcher ambulance had been replaced by motorcycles to transport pregnant

women and the sick, as a result of improved operability of the roads.

108. In view of the programme’s overall positive impact on women, gender equality and

women’s empowerment is assessed as 5 (satisfactory), higher than the rating of 4

(moderately satisfactory) assigned by PMD.

D. Performance of partners

109. IFAD. The Fund’s innovative programme design was praised by the PCR inasmuch

as it was found to be within the framework of the Government’s strategy of poverty

eradication and the PMA. The design process was participatory, and aimed at

promoting ownership by the Government. IFAD also sought to incorporate lessons

from AAMP’s predecessor, the Southwest Region Agricultural Rehabilitation Project,

and provided support needed to implement the programme, particularly delivering

the agreed funds in a timely manner and showing flexibility when some aspects of

programme design needed to be modified and funds reallocated. Together with the

Government, IFAD took prompt action to ensure the timely implementation of the

recommendations of supervision and implementation support missions.

110. IFAD has also been active in forging effective partnerships and maintaining

coordination among key partners to ensure the achievement of programme

objectives, including the replication and scaling up of pro-poor innovations.

Practical arrangements and procedures of AAMP, its pass-on system and

community mobilization approaches are being replicated by other government

programmes such as NAADS and CAIIP. In addition, IFAD established a country

office in Kampala in 2006, which participated in some supervision missions during

44

PCR Section 3.4 on gender considerations, supported by observations and interviews recorded in the impact assessments.

23

AAMP’s last two years of implementation. The establishment of the country

programme management team in 2008 enhanced knowledge-sharing and

networking among all IFAD-funded projects/programmes in the country.

111. On the other hand, IFAD bears responsibility for some of the original design

shortcomings, such as (i) inadequate planning and financing of the M&E system

(one short-term consultant for planning the system and a part-time employee were

not enough to ensure that M&E could be carried out in a programme covering 13

districts, 73 subcounties and some 3,000 subprojects); and (ii) underestimation of

the number of extension agents needed to implement the programme. Omitting

the cost of gravel from the design of community roads was another shortcoming.45

112. Every effort was made to address these shortcomings, however, following the

recommendations of supervision missions and the Government’s requests for

modifications. And, as mentioned earlier, improvements were facilitated by IFAD’s

flexibility. Considering IFAD’s overall performance during programme

implementation, the rating given is 5 (satisfactory).

113. Government. The PCR noted that the IPC provided effective policy guidance as

well as a platform for sharing experience and exchanging ideas among the

ministries involved. District and subcounty officials particularly appreciated the

interactions with IPC during field missions, which also served as a source of

information to high-level policy organs about programme implementation. The

Permanent Secretary of MOLG provided guidance and overall support to the

programme team throughout implementation and served as a useful link to other

government programmes. The location of the PFT within MOLG also enhanced the

dissemination of knowledge and key experiences about the programme.

114. The last project status report noted that the PFT, composed of a team situated in

Kampala and a field office in Mbarara thereby accounting for a staff of about 15

professionals plus support staff, was extremely efficient and knowledgeable.

Although the programme had very wide coverage, it was implemented through

government systems for decentralization while the PFT took initiatives for initiating

and coordinating many activities. It also set up an excellent computerized financial

control system (see the comments on project accounting, auditing and

management under the section on efficiency).

115. Through its actions, including financial contributions, policy support and effective

approval of recommendations and follow-up, the Government confirmed its high-

level of ownership of the programme. Government and beneficiary contributions

were mainly in the form of settlement of duties and taxes on procured items, and

cash and in-kind contributions for rural infrastructure and subprojects. In line with

the original design, local governments and benefiting communities were required to

put up 20 per cent of the value of infrastructure investments; although this

percentage was later changed to 10 per cent, it was difficult for some district

authorities to meet these requirements. As of the last supervision mission in June

2008, contributions from Ugandan sources were 79 per cent of the agreed

amounts. Overall, the Government’s performance is rated as 5 (satisfactory).

116. Cooperating institution. At the start of the programme, UNOPS was designated

as the cooperating institution in charge of loan administration and supervision. The

PCR noted that UNOPS conducted all six planned supervision missions in a timely

and effective manner and that the missions visited all AAMP-supported districts

during their stays in the country. The recommendations led to improved

programme performance and were appreciated by the beneficiaries, IPC and

programme staff. The PCR specifically commended UNOPS for encouraging training

in the logical framework approach both in the districts and among subprojects,

establishment of the M&E section, conversion of matching grants into a revolving

45

It should be noted that, at the time, the standards of community access roads in Uganda (as established by the Ministry of Works and Transport) were such that gravel would be used only on a few very bad spots. However, lessons have been learned, policies have changed and community access roads are now being built to better standards.

24

fund, and timely disbursement of programme funds (all withdrawal applications

were honoured in time).

117. The team leader and most of the specialists remained the same for all supervision

missions, thus providing stability for the missions’ work and recommendations. A

review of some supervision reports showed that they were informative and

thorough, ranging from 55 to 70 pages, and containing detailed and practical

recommendations and follow-up lists for each programme activity. As for the rating

of programme activities, the mission’s recommendations were appropriate based

on the situation prevailing at the time of the visits: the 2003 mission pointed out

minor-to-moderate problems in nearly all categories, whereas the 2008 mission

was satisfied with the outcomes and outputs in general, noting only minor

shortcomings in M&E and physical outputs. Overall, UNOPS performance is given a

rating of 5 (satisfactory) on the basis of its systematic approach, good quality of

the supervision mission reports, and continuity of UNOPS staff in administrative

and supervisory tasks.

118. Cofinancier. AfDB provided funds for feeder road development in the programme

area under a parallel financing arrangement, which helped to expand the rural road

network thereby linking farms to markets. This parallel programme was scheduled

to close a year later than AAMP. The target to improve 700.6 km of feeder roads

was exceeded by 60 per cent. The PCR evaluates AfDB’s performance in AAMP as

satisfactory, which the PPA mission concurs with.

Key points

The relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of the programme are rated as satisfactory on the basis of its alignment to government and IFAD strategies as well as the needs of the rural poor, the level of achievements of its objectives within the time span and budget, and high profitability of the enterprises it supported.

The rural poverty impact is also rated as satisfactory given the benefits that have accrued to the target groups in terms of income and assets, food security and agricultural productivity, human and social capital and empowerment, as well as institutions, policies and markets.

Sustainability is rated as moderately satisfactory. The level of ownership by the local population and the financial sustainability of the programme’s subprojects are high, but there are still challenges with regard to sustainability of the infrastructure management

committees and the pass-on system. Some programme innovations (the zoning approach, revolving funds and learning with regard to the community access roads) have been scaled up all over the country, justifying a satisfactory rating for this criterion. On the basis of the overall positive impact of the programme on women, gender equality and women’s empowerment is assessed as satisfactory.

The performance of IFAD, the Government, UNOPS and AfDB are all rated as

satisfactory. IFAD was praised for its innovative design and flexibility in supporting the implementation of the programme when modifications were needed. The Government played an active role and showed a high level of programme ownership. UNOPS supervision was good, with a systematic approach and continuity of staff in the

administrative and supervisory tasks.

IV. Overall project achievement

119. Overall, despite differences from the targets set during programme implementation

(none were set at appraisal), the PPA’s rating of AAMP’s overall achievement is

―satisfactory‖. Annex 1 gives a summary of the ratings, including a comparison of

ratings as per PCR and PPA. The PMD ratings have been upgraded in three

instances: (i) impact on institutions and policies; (ii) impact on natural resources

and the environment; and (iii) gender equality and women’s empowerment. The

rationale for such upgrading has been explained in the corresponding sections.

25

V. Conclusions and recommendations

A. Conclusions

120. The overall goal of AAMP was to increase the incomes and food security of poor

rural households in the programme areas and to modernize agriculture in the

targeted districts. At the end of the programme, the farmers’ incomes and food

security had increased. The planning and execution capacity of the districts and

subcounties had also improved, as had the farmers’ ability to gain more access to

services and financing facilities. The programme’s support for and training of local

farmer groups enabled them to expand their production and become more

commercially oriented at a time when they were shifting from subsistence to

market-oriented farming, and their capacity to select enterprises (subprojects) with

higher returns had increased. The farmers increasingly involved themselves in

group marketing in order to benefit more from marketable surpluses.

121. The programme also improved rural infrastructure, thus facilitating the

commercialization of agriculture. Better rural roads improved access to other

services, such as input and produce markets and financial services. Women are

now more involved in economic activities, and the impact of their empowerment is

significant. In addition, districts, subcounties and farmer groups have become

involved in sustaining activities initiated by the programme.

122. The parallel financing arrangement with AfDB was a relevant and effective choice

because it allowed IFAD loan funds to be focused on community roads to link farms

and communities to major towns and markets, often via the feeder roads, which

were the focus of AfDB’s financing (see paragraph 37).

123. Rural financial services support was implemented through SACCOs. Although the

programme supported more SACCOs than originally foreseen, the number of

beneficiaries was limited. There is still some concern about the viability of a

number of SACCOs with low repayment rates and thus lower profitability (see

paragraphs 49, 84 and 96).

124. The maintenance of programme-supported infrastructure presents a challenge.

Although the infrastructure management or maintenance committees were active

during implementation, once programme financing was no longer available many of

them became dormant (in the case of roads, where subcounties have taken over

maintenance) or more limited in terms of their role (in the case of the milk cooler

associations, where the milk processing dairies or bidders now take care of

maintenance and other functions) (see paragraphs 52, 91-92).

125. While a number of early targets were not met (only 27 per cent of the target for

cattle dips was achieved and 48 per cent of that for community roads), the vast

majority were attained or even surpassed. The few concerns expressed earlier are

relatively minor in relation to the programme’s achievements. Some shortcomings

at design (such as the lack of targets for monitoring the performance of indicators,

inadequate planning and financing for the M&E system, etc.) were corrected during

implementation (see paragraphs 41-42).

126. The success of AAMP may be attributed to a number of favourable factors, the

most important of which are as follows:

127. Flexibility in the design of programme interventions. Flexibility allowed for

quick response to opportunities that arose during implementation. For instance,

AAMP staff numbers were substantially increased soon after programme start-up

and the original idea of allowing communities to select their own priority

investments was replaced by the concept of tailoring programme interventions to

accommodate the climate and cultural systems in respective districts.

128. Mainstreaming of programme activities and linking with decentralization

policies. It was important for government programmes to work through existing

administrative structures to build up capacity and enhance the sustainability of

benefits after programme completion.

26

129. Involvement of local people in their own development. If they are to take

real responsibility for interventions and for their sustainability over the long term,

target communities must be involved in selecting programme interventions and in

planning their implementation.

130. Another important element was the quality of programme management. The

PFT was competent and its management methods and procedures were effective

and motivational. And as it turned out, AAMP was an effective training ground for

good management practices, and its key persons were well placed in the

government structure after completion of the programme.

B. Recommendations

131. This section gives a number of broad recommendations on important issues for

future IFAD operations in Uganda.

132. Financing arrangements. AAMP provided a lesson concerning the cofinancing

arrangements (see paragraph 122). Both community roads (financed by IFAD) and

feeder roads (financed by AfDB) were crucial for farmers’ produce to reach

markets, and although these components were complementary they were

sufficiently distinct to allow implementation and disbursement recording through

the parallel financing arrangement. Thus, if it is not possible to place all external

funds in the same ―basket‖ for monitoring or other reasons, parallel financing,

organized under the same coordinating body, may be a relevant and efficient

financing solution.

133. SACCOs are a promising approach to creating a financial network to serve

Uganda’s rural areas. However, their financial sustainability and long-term survival

will need to be ensured (see paragraph 123) and, for that purpose, their nature as

member-based and savings-first institutions should be safeguarded. This calls for a

degree of caution when trying to increase their outreach, especially when

expanding their lending operations by inserting external funds into the system. The

SACCOs’ membership and clientele will need to increase to a level that allows them

to operate economically and become important financiers in the areas where few

other financial institutions usually exist. But this expansion should happen in a

controlled manner, ensuing that no harm is done to the institutions’ viability and

taking care not to inject excessive amounts of external funds into the lending

portfolio.

134. Much depends on how the Government or donors decide to promote these financial

cooperatives. External interventions in the form of financial or technical assistance

for organizational development generally include a subsidy element. Subsidies in

any form tend to distort market conditions and competition. However, because

market forces do not always support equitable development, particularly in poor

rural areas, external support is sometimes needed to get things going.

135. The Government and support organizations for SACCOs (UCSCU, Microfinance

Support Centre and others) should be careful when selecting the types of financial

and technical support they will provide. Support with long-term benefits in terms of

outreach and sustainability of financial cooperatives will not necessarily be

addressed directly to the cooperatives themselves but to the development of an

enabling environment that will facilitate their growth, performance and integrity.

Targeted subsidies, also called financial support, may be warranted if they are

transparent, of a specified quantity, explicitly entered into government budgets,

fiscally sustainable and economically justified. Furthermore, the interventions

should not subsidize the ultimate clients but should be aimed at building up the

human and operational capacity of SACCOs or supporting institutions (e.g.

supervisory authorities), as in the case of training and other business development

services. Appropriate financial support may even include partial payment of

expenditures (a safe, office furniture and stationery) and operating costs (such as

27

supporting supervision and audit costs) over the medium term if this is necessary

to achieve outreach objectives related to poverty reduction.46

136. Activating infrastructure management committees. Infrastructure

management or maintenance committees will need to be activated (see paragraph

124) to ensure sustainability of the infrastructure supported. In order to enhance

local people’s sense of responsibility – in the spirit of the paradigm that they are

largely responsible for their own development – these committees should be

reinvigorated by continuous training, allowing them to be accountable for the

infrastructures they have chosen as priorities and endowing them with the

authority (and self-esteem) to act on their own. Such follow-up would require

funding through district and subcounty budgets or (in the medium term) through

donor funds or as subcomponents of follow-on projects/programmes.

137. Defining indicators and targets for monitoring (see paragraph 125). The

AAMP appraisal mission argued that no targets for indicators could be set because

the programme was to be beneficiary-driven – that is, local populations in the

districts and subcounties were to determine the types of enterprises (subprojects)

they wished to establish. However, the first supervision mission established targets

for different activities under the programme although a number of them were

subsequently modified. The AAMP appraisal mission was right to note the

uncertainties involved, but given that appraisal missions are staffed by competent

experts who are specialists in the types of activities planned under AAMP, are

familiar with conditions in different agroeconomic zones, and are aware of the most

suitable agricultural activities for those zones, appraisal missions are probably in

better position to suggest tentative targets for most indicators, or perhaps for all,

with the caveat that such targets can be modified when clear local preferences

emerge.

46

For more on the appropriate role of government and donors in promoting financial cooperatives and expanding outreach, see IFAD: Decision Tools in Rural Finance, 2002; IFAD: Rural Finance Policy, 2004. And World Bank: Providing Financial Services in Rural Areas; A Fresh Look at Financial Cooperatives, 2007.

Annex 1

28

Rating comparisona

Criterion PMD ratingb PPA rating

Net rating disconnect PPA-PMD

Project performance

Relevance

Relevance

5

Design

5 5 0

Effectiveness 5 5 0

Efficiency 5 5 0

Project performancec 5 5 0

Rural poverty impact

(a) Household income and assets Physical assets

5 Financial assets

5 5 0

(b) Human and social capital and empowerment

Human assets

5

Social capital and empowerment

5 5 0

(c) Food security and agricultural productivity

Food security

5

Agricultural productivity

5 5 0

(d) Natural resources and the environment and climate change 3 4 +1

(e) Institutions and policies

Institutions and services

4

Markets

5 5 +0.5

Overall rural poverty impactd 5 5 0

Other performance criteria

Sustainability 4 4 0

Innovation and scaling up 5 5 0

Gender equality and women’s empowerment 4 5 +1

Overall project achievemente 5 5 0

Performance of partners

(a) IFAD 5 5 0

(b) Government 5 5 0

(c) Cooperating institution 5 5 0

Average net disconnect +0.15

a Rating scale: 1 = highly unsatisfactory; 2 = unsatisfactory; 3 = moderately unsatisfactory; 4 = moderately satisfactory; 5 = satisfactory; 6 = highly satisfactory.

b The PCR does not contain ratings. These are assigned by PMD.

c Arithmetic average of ratings for relevance, effectiveness and efficiency.

d This is not an average of ratings of individual impact domains.

e This is not an average of ratings of individual evaluation criteria. Ratings of partners’ performance are not included in the

overall project achievement assessment.

Annex 2

29

Map of the project area

Annex 3

30

Basic project data

Approval (US$ m)

Actual (US$ m)

Region East and Southern Africa Total project costs 30.0 30.4

Country Uganda IFAD loan and % of total 13.2 44.0% 13.6 44.7%

Loan number 516-UG Borrower 1.5 5.0% 1.5 4.9%

Type of project (sub-sector) Rural development

Cofinancier 1: AfDB under parallel financing arrangement 13.9 46.3% 13.9 45.7%

Lending termsa Highly concessional Cofinancier 2

Date of approval 08 Dec 1999 Cofinancier 3

Date of loan signature 15 Feb 2002 Cofinancier 4

Date of effectiveness 20 May 2002 From beneficiaries 1.4 4.7% 1.4 4.6%

Loan amendments

Two amendments (10 March 2004;

9 February 2006) From other sources:

Loan closure extensions 0

Number of beneficiaries (if appropriate, specify if direct or indirect)

312 500 households

399 363 households (direct and

indirect)

Country programme managers

Marian Bradley (current CPM), Joseph Yayock,

Fumiko Nakai, Miriam Okong’o Cooperating institution UNOPS

Regional director(s)

Ides de Willebois (current),

Gary Howe, Joseph Yayock (interim) Loan closing date 31 Dec 2008 31 Dec 2008

Project completion report reviewer Oanh Nguyen Mid-term review 30 June 2005

Project completion report quality control panel

Andrew Brubaker Fabrizio Felloni

IFAD loan disbursement at project completion (%) 95.8%

a There are four types of lending terms: (i) special loans on highly concessional terms, free of interest but

bearing a service charge of three fourths of one per cent (0.75%) per annum and having a maturity period of 40 years, including a grace period of 10 years; (ii) loans on hardened terms bearing a service charge of three fourths of one per cent (0.75%) per annum and having a maturity period of 20 years, including a grace period of 10 years; (iii) loans on intermediate terms with a rate of interest per annum equivalent to 50% of the variable reference interest rate, and a maturity period of 20 years, including a grace period of 5 years; (iv) loans on ordinary terms with a rate of interest per annum equivalent to one hundred per cent (100%) of the variable reference interest rate, and a maturity period of 15 to eighteen 18 years, including a grace period of 3 years.

Source: President’s Report, PCR, Project and Programme Management System, Loans and Grants System

(January 2011)

Annex 4

31

Terms of reference

I. Background

1. The 2010 Peer Review of IFAD’s Office of Evaluation and Evaluation Function

conducted by the Evaluation Cooperation Group recommended the Office of

Evaluation to change its approach to project evaluations by conducting Project

Completion Report Validation (PCRV) and a limited number of Project Performance

Assessments (PPA). The PPA is a more concise form of project-level evaluation

which supersedes the traditional IOE project evaluation. In general, PPAs will be

based on the findings from PCRV, further desk review and interviews at

headquarters, and a field visit to the concerned country.

2. The PPAs are to be conducted on a sample of projects that have already been

exposed to a project completion report validation. The projects will be selected

taking into consideration the following criteria: (i) synergies with forthcoming or

ongoing high-level evaluations (CPEs or CLEs); (ii) major information gaps in the

project completion report; (iii) novel project approaches; and (iv) geographic

balance.

3. The Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme (AAMP), Uganda, has been

selected for PPA, which would contribute to the Uganda CPE which is being

conducted by IOE in 2011-2012.

4. Project description. AAMP was approved by IFAD Executive Board in December

2009, came into effectiveness in May 2002 and closed in December 2008. The

project has a total cost of US$30.4 million, jointly funded by an IFAD loan of

US$13.6 million (44.7% of the total cost), AfDB under parallel financing

arrangement of US$13.9 million (45.7%), counterpart funding of the Government

of Uganda US$1.5 million (4.9%), and contributions from beneficiaries US$1.4

million (4.6%). At design, it was targeted to cover 30-40% of rural households in

10 districts1 in south-western Uganda. However, according to the project

completion report (PCR), the programme targeted 35% of rural households in 13

districts.2 The increase in the number of districts from 10 to 13 was due to the

division of Kabarole into 3 new districts. These districts were subdivided

administratively into 196 rural sub counties and 13 urban councils. The total

population in these districts, based on extrapolations from the 1991 census, was

about 5.3 million persons in 1.05 million households (about a quarter of the

national population), of which over 4.7 million persons and 947 000 households

(90%) were rural. Rural households averaged five persons, with agriculture as the

dominant occupation.

5. Rationale of the intervention. The rationale for the programme derived from

several factors: (i) growth played a fundamental role in reducing rural poverty,

however, districts lacked funds for agricultural activities; (ii) Government was

supporting private-sector initiatives and encouraging farmers to take full advantage

of economic opportunities: the scope therefore existed for an investment

programme that aimed to further commercialize smallholder farming and assist

rural communities in becoming full market participants and to cease being cash-

poor; (iii) key national programmes required support from actions within districts,

therefore area-based interventions represented a mechanism that would provide

useful experience for the eventual development of broader programmes in areas

where national approaches were still being developed; and (iv) this programme

would build roads linking farms and communities to major towns and markets,

opening up other income-generating occupations for rural communities and the

provision of goods and services.

1 The ten implementing districts are: Bundibugyo, Bushenyi, Kabale, Kabarole, Kasese, Kisoro, Mbarara, Ntungamo,

Rukungiri, and Sembabule. 2 The other three districts listed in the project completion report are: Kemwenge, Kanungu, Kyenjojo.

Annex 4

32

6. Objective of the intervention. The overall goal of the programme was increased

incomes and food security among poor rural households in the programme area,

with the objective of modernizing agriculture in the districts. The expected outputs3

were as follows: (i) increased involvement of the private sector in support of the

further commercialization of smallholder agriculture; (ii) improved capacity among

economically active farmers to organize themselves to gain better access to rural

services (technical, financial and marketing); (iii) sustainable development and

improvement of rural infrastructure; and (iv) increased public sector capacity to

perform its role in responding to production needs identified by interest groups and

rural communities. The programme was to be implemented over a six year period

with the Ministry of Local Government as the implementing agency, in collaboration

with district local governments.

7. Project target population. The programme had two major target groups:

(i) economically active smallholders living in the rural areas who wished to

participate in commercial agriculture; and (ii) existing or potential small-scale

entrepreneurs and business associations who provided services to rural

households. Among the target group, women played a major role in crop and

livestock production, processing and small enterprise operation. The programme

did not target pre-specified activities to particular areas and/or groups of potential

beneficiaries. Rather, the districts decided, within certain guidelines, how to use the

majority of resources available to them, according to the specified eligibility

criteria, and the demands of poor rural people themselves.

8. Project components and cost. The programme had four components:

(i) agricultural commercialization, including two sub-components namely

agricultural commercialization fund which the programme established and from

which the districts could draw down funds to finance eligible activities and rural

financial services training. This component has a cost of 4.1 million USD; (ii) rural

infrastructure development: 8.7 million USD; (iii) community mobilization: 1.2

million USD; and (iv) programme facilitation: 2.1 million USD. The parallel

financing arrangement with AfDB was materialized and the funds were spent on a

separate component which is the construction of feeder roads.

Programme financing plan and actual by component

Component Original plan (million USD)

Revised plan (million USD)

Percentage change after

revision

Cumulative expenditure

(million USD) Percentage

Agricultural commercialization 4.1 3.2 -20.9 2.7 83.9

Rural infrastructure 8.6 7.3 -15.9 7.3 100.6

Community mobilization 1.2 1.7 39.4 1.5 86.1

Programme facilitation 2.1 3.8 84.8 4.0 103.6

Feeder roads-ADB 14.9 - 12.7 85.1

Initial deposit 94.5

Total 16.0 30.9 28.2 91.2

Source: PCR (2008)

II. Methodology

9. Objectives. The main objectives of the PPA are to assess the performance and

results of the project based on the findings from the PCRV and the country mission.

Due to the time and budget limits, the PPA would not investigate the full spectrum

of project activities and achievements, rather to gather additional evidence only on

3 Both the appraisal report and the president’s report used the terms: “expected outputs”, but these could be considered

specific objectives.

Annex 4

33

the major information gaps of the PCR and the issues deserving further

investigation in the context of the Uganda CPE.

10. Evaluation criteria. The PPA would follow the evaluation criteria outlined in the

Evaluation Manual of IFAD (2009) and the newly added evaluation criteria (2010),4

and the IOE Guidelines for PCRV and PPA (Jan 2011). These include: project

performance (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency), rural poverty impact

(households income and assets, human and social capital and empowerment, food

security and agricultural productivity, natural resources and environment, and

institutions and policies), gender equality and women’s empowerment,

sustainability, innovation, replication and scaling up, overall project achievement

and performance of partners (IFAD, Government, UNOPS as cooperating institution,

AfDB as co-financier). However, given the limited resources (staff and non-staff)

for a PPA, the scope of the assessment will be selective and the emphasis given to

each criterion will depend on the PCRV assessment as well as on emerging findings

during the PPA process. As of present, findings from the PCRV suggest the PPA to

focus on efficiency, natural resources and environment, operations and profitability

of SACCOs, innovation and scaling up, and project management. Besides, the PPA

will also put emphasis on further emerging issues during the PPA process.

11. Data collection. The initial findings would be retrieved from the PCRV. During the

PPA mission, additional primary and secondary data will be collected to reach an

independent assessment of the performance and results. Data collection methods

will mostly include qualitative participatory techniques. The methods deployed will

be individual and group interviews, focus-group discussions with beneficiaries, and

direct observation. Questionnaire-based surveys are not applicable, because short

duration of the mission would not allow the generation of an adequate sample size.

The PPA will also make use – where applicable – of the additional data available

through the project M&E system. Triangulation will be applied to verity findings

emerging from different information sources.

12. Participation. In compliance with the Evaluation Policy but taking into

consideration the different nature of the PPA compared to full-fledged evaluations,

the main stakeholders of the AAMP will be involved throughout the evaluation to

ensure that the key concerns of the stakeholders are taken into account in the PPA

process, and the evaluators fully understand the context in which the project was

implemented, the opportunities and the constraints faced by the implementing

organizations. Regular cooperation and communication will be established with the

IFAD Eastern and Southern Africa Division (ESA) and Government of Uganda.

Formal and informal opportunities will be explored for discussing findings,

recommendations and lessons during the process.

III. Processes

13. The overall processes of the PPA include five (5) phases: desk work (PCRV) phase,

country work phase, drafting report and peer review phase, reviews by ESA and

government phase, and the final phase of communication and dissemination.

14. Desk work phase. The PCRV would derive the initial findings and the key issues

to be investigated in the PPA. The first draft PCRV is now available. The draft has

been peer reviewed within IOE by Mr. Fabrizio Fellon, Senior Evaluation Officer, and

Mr. Andrew Brubaker, Evaluation Officer. The PCRV, after having been shared with

ESA for comments, has now been finalized.

15. Country work phase. The PPA mission is scheduled from 11-20 April 2011. The

mission would interact with Government, other partners, project staff, and project

clients (beneficiaries). At the end of the PPA mission, a short wrap-up session will

be held in the country to summarise the preliminary findings and the key strategic

and operational issues.

4 Gender, climate change, and scaling up.

Annex 4

34

16. Drafting report and peer review. At the conclusion of the field visit, a draft PPA

report will be prepared and subject to IOE internal peer review for quality

assurance.

17. External review by ESA and Government of Uganda. The PPA report will be

then shared with ESA and thereafter the Government for comments. Upon receipt

of Government’s comments, IOE will finalise the report.

18. Communication and dissemination. The final report would be disseminated to

stakeholders in the country and in IFAD, and the key deliverables of the PPA would

post on the evaluation website of IFAD.

Flow of the Process of the PPA of the Uganda AAMP

IV. Key issues for investigation

19. Based on the findings from the PCRV, the Area-Based Agricultural Modernization

Programme apparently was a quite successful project, with nearly all expected

results achieved and in some cases even exceeded. Strong emphasis on ensuring

sustainability by the project implementers—and supported by the supervising and

financing agencies—is likely to ensure that the populations in the target districts or

even elsewhere will continue to benefit from the project’s approaches and

practices. The main concerns regarding the programme performance are the low

rating of the natural resources and environmental issues (moderately

unsatisfactory) and the uncertainties about the repayment rates and profitability of

the SACCOs. As mentioned in paragraph 10, for the PPA, a few issues are identified

for in-depth investigation and the findings from the investigations would contribute

to the Uganda CPE. Below are the proposed issues for further investigated, which

may subject to change during the PPA process with new findings emerging.

Efficiency – profitability of the enterprises (sub-projects) 20. Economic and financial analysis presented in the PCR showed that positive net

benefits had been realized from the programme supported interventions. The

estimated economic rate of return (ERR) for the last three years of the programme

was 42% and the PCR projected it to be 48% in the next five years (2009-2013).

The presentation of the PCR on the ERR is very informative and allows the readers

to get a good understanding of the costs/benefits of the enterprises. However,

while the assumptions are moderate and based on actual observations by the M&E

unit, the methodologies used in computing the ERR do not follow textbook or

internationally approved practices, and thus undermining the validity of the results.

The PPA will try to look further into this issue to have more clarity on the

uncertainties and shortcomings just mentioned.

Natural resources and environment 21. The PCR acknowledged that besides the infrastructural development just

mentioned, some environmental concerns remain because of the increasing use of

B. Drafting

PPA report

C. First IOE

peer review

D. Second IOE peer review

F. Review by

ESA

J. Finalization

H. Send to

Government I. Review by Government

G. Revision and audit

trail

E. Send to ESA for

comments

A. PPA

mission

TORs

Annex 4

35

agricultural chemicals and their potential percolation to the water table. For the

time being, use of agricultural chemicals is still modest, but the use of herbicide

and fertilizer in upland rice gardens is likely to increase because farmers were

motivated to increase production and because the labour requirements for rice

weeding are more costly compared to the application of herbicide. Another problem

is that the new feeder and community roads have improved the access to areas

that used to be difficult for large trucks to reach, and the amount of timber

harvested has grown. While this activity has brought new income to more remote

areas, the depletion of forests needs to be checked and kept within stipulated

national and district guidelines. However, the district environmental officers

responsible for environmental monitoring and mitigation at the district level have

inadequate resources to cover the large area and all interventions in their districts.

The PPA will look further into this issue.

Institutions – The operations and profitability of SACCOs 22. The original programme concept for supporting rural finance was to provide

training in rural financial services to staff of microfinance institutions, including

lending groups and associations. However, because there were other sources to

support microfinance institutions and few of them were interested in going outside

commercial centres, AAMP was directed to concentrate on helping establish

SACCOs in the project areas. By project completion, 35 SACCOs had been

established in the AAMP districts (compared with the target of 32). However, as

indicated in the impact assessment study, the sustainability of SACCOs is

precarious. Given the importance of rural finance issue in the whole country

portfolio, the PPA will look more into this issue.

Project management 23. The last Project Status Report noted that the Programme Facilitation Team,

composed of a headquarters team situated in Kampala and a field office together

having a staff of about 15 professionals plus support staff was extremely efficient

and knowledgeable. Although the programme had very wide coverage, it was

implemented through government systems for decentralization while the

Programme Facilitation Team took the initiative for initiating and coordinating many

activities as well as having put in place excellent computerized financial control

systems. Since this could be a very good example and lesson for the whole

portfolio, the PPA will look more into this issue.

Other issues 24. In addition to the above mentioned issues, the PPA would also devote attention to

other selected issues which merit further verification and/or enquiry, including:

(i) innovation, replication and scaling up and (ii) gender equality and

empowerment. Other issues emerging from the PPA process will also be included.

V. The PPA team

25. Under the supervision of Mr. Andrew Brubaker, Evaluation Officer (IOE) and lead

evaluator of the CPE Uganda, Ms. Oanh Nguyen, Evaluation Research Analyst

(IOE), was appointed as lead evaluator for this PPA exercise, and who is

responsible for delivering the PCRV and the PPA reports. Ms. Nguyen would be

assisted by one senior consultant, Mr. Turto Turtiainen, rural development

specialist, who would contribute to the draft PPA report with a write up on the

findings and recommendations on efficiency, SACCOs, project management,

innovation and scaling up and natural resources and management, etc.

Annex 5

36

Definition of the evaluation criteria used by the

Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD

Criteria Definitiona

Project performance

Relevance The extent to which the objectives of a development intervention are consistent with beneficiaries’ requirements, country needs, institutional priorities and partner and donor policies. It also entails an assessment of project design in achieving its objectives.

Effectiveness The extent to which the development intervention’s objectives were achieved, or are expected to be achieved, taking into account their relative importance.

Efficiency A measure of how economically resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time, etc.) are converted into results.

Rural poverty impactb Impact is defined as the changes that have occurred or are expected to occur in the lives of the rural poor (whether positive or negative, direct or indirect, intended or unintended) as a result of development interventions.

Household income and

assets

Household income provides a means of assessing the flow of economic benefits accruing to an individual or group, whereas assets relate to a stock of accumulated items of economic value.

Human and social capital

and empowerment

Human and social capital and empowerment include an assessment of the changes that have occurred in the empowerment of individuals, the quality of grassroots organizations and institutions, and the poor’s individual and collective capacity.

Food security and

agricultural productivity

Changes in food security relate to availability, access to food and stability of access, whereas changes in agricultural productivity are measured in terms of yields.

Natural resources and the

environment and climate change

The focus on natural resources and the environment involves assessing the extent to which a project contributes to changes in the protection, rehabilitation or depletion of natural resources and the environment as well as in mitigating the negative impact of climate change or promoting adaptation measures.

Institutions and policies

The criterion relating to institutions and policies is designed to assess changes in the quality and performance of institutions, policies and the regulatory framework that influence the lives of the poor.

Other performance criteria

Sustainability

The likely continuation of net benefits from a development intervention beyond the phase of external funding support. It also includes an assessment of the likelihood that actual and anticipated results will be resilient to risks

beyond the project’s life.

Promotion of pro-poor innovation and scaling up

The extent to which IFAD development interventions have: (i) introduced innovative approaches to rural poverty reduction; and (ii) the extent to which these interventions have been (or are likely to be) scaled up by government authorities, donor organizations, the private sector and other agencies.

Gender equality and women’s empowerment

Relevance of design in terms of gender equality and women’s empowerment. Level of resources of the project dedicated to these dimensions. Changes promoted by the project at the household level (workload, nutrition status, women’s influence on decision making). Adoption of gender-disaggregated indicators for monitoring, analysis of data and use of findings to correct project implementation and to disseminate lessons learned.

Overall project achievement This provides an overarching assessment of the project, drawing upon the analysis made under the various evaluation criteria cited above.

Performance of partners

IFAD

Government

Cooperating institution

NGO/community-based

organization

This criterion assesses the contribution of partners to project design, execution, monitoring and reporting, supervision and implementation support, and evaluation. The performance of each partner will be assessed on an individual basis with a view to the partner’s expected role and responsibility in the project life cycle.

a These definitions have been taken from the OECD/DAC Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results-Based Management

and from the IOE Evaluation Manual. b It is important to underline that the IFAD Evaluation Manual also deals with the “lack of intervention”. That is, no specific

intervention may have been foreseen or intended with respect to one or more of the five impact domains. In spite of this, if positive or negative changes are detected and can be attributed in whole or in part to the project, a rating should be assigned to the particular impact domain. On the other hand, if no changes are detected and no intervention was foreseen or intended, then no rating (or the mention “not applicable”) is assigned.

Annex 6

37

List of persons met

A. In Kampala

Mr. Keith J. Muhakanizi, Deputy Secretary to the Treasury, Ministry of Finance, Planning

and Economic Development

Mr. John Kashaka Muhanguzi, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Local Government

Mr. Benjamin Kumumanya, Under Secretary, Finance and Administration, Office of the

Prime Ministry (former Programme Facilitator of AAMP)

Mr. Pontian Muhwezi, IFAD Country Programme Officer

Mr. Yasin K. Sendaula, Assistant Commissioner, Ministry of Local Government, National

Programme Facilitator of the Community Agricultural Infrastructure Improvement

Programme (CAIIP)

Dr. Sam Mugasi, Programme Facilitator of the District Livelihoods Support Programme,

former M&E officer of AAMP

Mr. Sam Sakwa, Financial Controller of CAIIP – Ministry of Local Government, former

Financial Controller of AAMP

Dr. John Mbadhwe, Infrastructure Adviser for CAIIP, Ministry of Works and Transport

Mr. Wilson Kabanda, CEO, Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union

Mr. Joab Baryayaka, M&E officer, Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union

Mr. Andrew Byamugisha, Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries, former

Agricultural Adviser to AAMP

Mr. Asaph Nuwagira, Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist, African Development

Bank

Mr. Waiswa Ayazika Arnold, Director, Environmental Monitoring and Compliance,

National Environment Management Authority

Mr. Alex Winyi Kiiza, Environmental Impact Assessment Officer, National Environment

Management Authority

Dr. Francis Byekwaso, Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Manager, National Aricultural

Advisory Services (NAADS) Secretariat

Mr. Yusuf Kiwala, Planning and Monitoring Officer, NAADS Secretariat

Mr. Colin Agabalinda, Operations Manager, Rural Financial Services Programme

Mr. Denis Magezi, Infrastructure Engineer, CAIIP

Mr. Kenneth Ssenyange, Accountant, CAIIP

B. Field visits

Mr. Deo Karusigarira, Chairperson, Katojo Market Management Committee

Mr. Byanyamuhanga J, Vice Chairperson, Katojo Market Management Committee

Mr. Kajubi Benoni, Committee member, Katojo Market Management Committee

Ms. Baryaruha Rose, Committee member, Katojo Market Management Committee

Ms. Margaret Tibahungwa, AAMP former Programme Support Officer, Mbarara District

Mr. Tibugyenda Wilson, Chief Administrative Officer, Mbarara District

Mr. Kayumbu William, District Community Development Officer, Mbarara District

Mr. Asingwire Valerian, Road Inspector, Mbarara District

Ms. Byamugabe Beatrice, District Production Coordinator, Mbarara District

Mr. Kagaaju Gershorm, Agricultural officer, Ntungamo District

Annex 6

38

Mr. Godfrey Kagina, Chairman of the Omungyenyi Milk Cooler Management Committee

Ms. Atwiine Esther, Subcounty coordinator, Nyabihoko subcounty, Ntungamo District

Mr. Kusasira Ramonic, Treasurer, Nyabihoko SACCO, Ntungamo District

Mr. Muhumuza Asaph, Chairman of the loan committee, Nyabihoko SACCO, Ntungamo

District

Mr. Abbas Iga, Board member, Nyabihoko SACCO, Ntungamo District

Mr. Becungura Ephraim, Chairman, Nyabihoko SACCO, Ntungamo District

Mr. Kayise, Chief Administrative Officer, Ntungamo District

Mr. Kiiza Fideric, Deputy Chief Administrative Office, Ntungamo District

Dr. Nuwagaba, District Production Coordinator, Ntungamo District

Mr. Byaruhanga Remigio K, Agriculture officer, Sembabule District

Mr. Muwanga Kutaaya, Internal Security Officer, Sembabule District

Mr. Ndugu Kamara Bayeeye, Resident District Commissioner, Sembabule District

Mr. Galabuzi Denis, District Engineer, Sembabule District

Ms. Nakalungi Sarah, Chief Administrative Officer, Sembabule District

Mr. Murangira Levius, Subcounty Chief Administrative Officer, Lugusulu subcounty,

Sembabule District

Mr. Rwahlampola Bonns, Chairman of the milk cooler association, Sembabule District

Mr Karangura Matia, Vice chairman of the milk cooler association, Sembabule District

Mr. Tayebwa Kaginah Yosam, Manager of SACCO, Sembabule District

Mr. Banawana Tandenes Johnson, Accountant of SACCO, Sembabule District

Mr. Kafiro, Chairperson, Kawangire Pineapple Marketing group, Sembabule District

Annex 7

39

References and data sources

African Development Bank: Feeder Roads Component of the Area-Based Agricultural

Modernization Programme. Appraisal Report, May 2000.

African Development Bank: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. PCR, July

2009

African Development Bank: Agricultural Sector Strategy 2010-2014. January 2010

Government of Uganda (J. Mugisha, J. Beijuka and V. Male): Impact Assessment of the

Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme, August 2008.

Government of Uganda (Ministry of Local Government): Area-Based Agricultural

Modernization Programme 2002-2008, PCR, December 2008.

Government of Uganda/IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme.

Internal Mid-Term Progress Review, July 2005.

Government of Uganda/IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Mid-

Term Review Report, March 2006.

Government of Uganda/Mbarara District Local Government: Area-Based Agricultural

Modernization Programme, Completion Report for Greater Mbarara District. June 2008

IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Appraisal Report, Volume I

(main report). December 1999.

IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Appraisal Report, Volume II

(working papers), December 1999

IFAD: Report and Recommendation of the President to the Executive Board on a

Proposed Loan to the Republic of Uganda for the Area-Based Agricultural Modernization

Programme. December 8-9, 1999

IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme — Project Loan Agreement.

February 15, 2002.

IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme — Amendment to Loan

Agreement. 10 March, 2004.

IFAD: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme — Amendment to the

Programme Loan Agreement. February 9, 2006.

IFAD: Evaluation Manual — Methodology and Processes. April 2009.

IFAD: Guidelines for Project Completion Report Validation. January 2011.

UNOPS: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Supervision Report, July

2003.

UNOPS: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Supervision Report, May

2005.

UNOPS: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Supervision Report, June

2006.

UNOPS: Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme. Supervision Report, May

2008.

Annex 8

40

Physical progress of the programme

Activity Unit Programme

Target Actual Achievement

(%)

AGRICULTURAL COMMERCIALIZATION COMPONENT

Provide revolving fund for eligible groups No. of groups supported 3 650 2 788 78.2

People supported with revolving funds No. of persons 71 200 66 197 92.9

Establishment of on-farm demonstration plots No. of demo plots 500 470 94.0

Establish on-farm trials No. trial plots 1 080 1 020 94.4

Establish on- station trials No. of home station trials 72 41 56

Training of subcounty field extension workers No. FEWs trained 216 209 96.7

Exchange visits for technology adaptation specialists

No. of exchange visits 278 225 80.9

Participate in national agricultural shows and competitions

No. of farmers participating 18 18 100

Carry out feasibility studies on value- addition enterprises

No. of studies conducted 6 6 100

Train subcounty staff in logical framework No. of staff trained 146 146 100

Train selected beneficiary groups in logical framework

No. of farmers groups trained 1 780 1 020 57

Conduct agricultural research training workshop for staff and technology adaptation specialists (TAS)

No. of TAS trained 13 13 100

Conduct training of trainers for subcounty coordinators

No. of trainers trained 73 73 100

Train paraprofessional and equip them with skills to be able to offer technical support to groups.*

No. of paraprofessionals trained

0 292 +

Build up capacity of SACCOS for better delivery of services

No. of groups formed 32 35 109

Facilitate extension staff to support SACCOs and mobilize for savings

No. of sensitization meetings 128 118 80.8

Facilitate implementation of the exit strategy by all implementers

No. of meetings held 146 146 100

Persons trained in record keeping No. of persons 53 400 37 380 70

RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT

Training of district engineers No. of training workshops 6 5 83.3

Carry out socio-economic surveys for infrastructures

No. of studies 4 4 100

Carry out environmental impact studies for all infrastructures.

No. of studies 4 4 100

Train small contractors No. of contractors trained 480 430 89.5

Train road inspectors No. of inspectors 104 98 94.2

Rehabilitate community roads Km 2 000 1,011 50.6

No. of roads 200 113 56.5

Feeder roads rehabilitated Km 700.6 1,121 160.0

No. of roads 54 75 138.9

Construct valley tanks/dams No. of valley tanks/dams 6 5 83.3

Procure milk storage facilities No. of milk coolers 12 7 58.3

Annex 8

41

RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT (continued)

Capacity of milk coolers Litres 36 000 39,000 108.3

Renovate dip tanks No. of functional dip tanks 15 4 26.7

Rehabilitate water channel* No. of functional channels 0 2

Improve market No. of markets 42 42 100.0

Build market structures No. of markets structures 64 120 187.5

Build produce stores* No. of produce stores 0 3 +

Build maize cribs* No. of maize cribs 0 7 +

Construct potato stores* No. of potato stores 0 6 +

Construct pineapples sheds* No. of pineapple sheds 0 1 +

COMMUNITY MOBILIZATION COMPONENT

Conduct district start-up workshops No. of workshops 13 13 100

Subcounty start-up workshops No. of workshops 73 73 100

Organize community meetings to ensure meaningful participation and establishment of management systems for the improved rural infrastructure

No. of meetings 292 315 107

Support subcounties to develop workplans No. of workplans 438 438 100

Hold meetings to assist communities and interest groups to identify investment priorities

No. of meetings 292 212 72.6

Identify music, dance and drama groups to disseminate appropriate information to communities.

No. of groups 146 146 100

Production of promotional materials, radio programmes, and newsletters

No. of radio programmes 156 219 140.

Organize exchange visits/study tours for farmers

No. 436 350 80.3

Train community development officers (CDOs)

No. of workshops 13 13 100

Training of extension workers (FWES) No. FEWs trained 292 292 100

Organize information exchange seminars for CDOs

No. of exchange visits 26 13 50

Conduct community meetings to identify priority rural infrastructure investments

No. of meetings held 616 600 97.4

Establish O&M systems for rural infrastructure investments

No. of meetings held 292 292 100

Form rural infrastructure management committees

No. of committees formed 308 208 100

Train rural infrastructure management committees

No. of committees trained 308 108 100

Form marketing associations No. formed 146 146 100

Train marketing associations No. rrained 146 146 100

Drama presentations No. of drama presentations 850 539 63.4

Radio programmes aired No. of radio programmes 312 219 70.2

HIV/AIDS awareness campaigns* No. of awareness campaigns 0 46 +

Annex 8

42

PROGRAMME FACILITATION COMPONENT

Procurement of transport facilities No. of vehicles 22 22 100

No. of motorcycles 39 39

No. of bicycles 351 351

Identify and contract a consultant to design and document financial systems and control procedures

No. 1 1 100

Identify and contract a consultant to design and document an M&E system.

No. 1 1 100.

Attend regional workshop organized by IFAD for managers of IFAD-funded projects.

No. of workshops 6 6 100

Project management course in Turin, Italy No. 1 1 100

M&E skills training seminar provided No. of staff trained 16 16 100

Carry out a comprehensive baseline survey. No. of studies 1 1 100

Carry out district and subcounty assessment of compliance with minimum conditions and performance measures.

No. of assessments 13 13 100

Conduct monthly PFT management meetings No. 48 36 75

Conduct PFT-district quarterly review meetings

No. 12 20 50

Prepare and submit annual progress reports No. of reports 6 6 100

Hire consultant to carry out mid–term review No. of reports 1 1 100

Facilitate and coordinate supervision by IPC No. of meetings 12 6 50

Prepare and submit semi-annual progress reports

No. of reports 6 6 100

Carry out independent annual audit No. 6 6 100

Facilitate and coordinate UNOPS supervision missions

No. of missions 6 6 100

*Activities were not part of programme design but were implemented as a result of beneficiary demand.

43

Annex 9

Sta

tisti

cs o

n S

AC

CO

s s

up

po

rte

d b

y A

AM

P a

nd

th

e R

ural

Fin

an

ce S

up

po

rt

Prog

ram

me

1.

SA

CC

Os e

sta

blish

ed

befo

re A

AM

P m

id t

erm

Dis

tric

t S

ubcounty

S

AC

CO

nam

e

Me

mbers

hip

S

hare

capital

Savin

gs

Loans

PA

R %

* O

SS

%**

Mbara

ra

Ndaija

N

daija

People

s’ S

AC

CO

692

12 5

30 0

00

30 9

87,2

50

34 0

20 0

00

8

150

Ibanda

Ishongoro

ro

subcounty

N

yats

imbo

-Ishongoro

ro

SA

CC

O

539

48 0

04 0

00

163 0

61 2

50

164 3

50 8

00

8.5

187

Ibanda

K

ate

nsani S

AC

CO

964

76 6

66 6

50

40 0

06 0

95

164 8

43 6

17

8.7

158

Kiruru

ra

Sanga

Sanga S

AC

CO

516

10 3

20 0

00

4 7

18 3

00

19 7

53 5

17

45

37

Kiruru

ra

K

aru

ngi S

AC

CO

591

14 9

73 0

00

16 5

50 0

00

20 5

55 0

00

- -

Isin

giro

K

abuyanda A

gr,

SA

CC

O

895

27 7

62 6

00

78 3

36 5

00

146 1

30 5

00

1

149

Isin

giro

N

yakitunda F

arm

ers

’ S

AC

CO

737

4 9

50 0

00

3 1

95 0

00

5 3

80 0

00

- -

Ngungam

o

Rukoni

Bure

bero

SA

CC

O

742

44 6

23 5

00

43 8

55 5

24

51 9

79 4

98

16

112

Kam

wenge

K

am

wenge

subcounty

B

usin

ge S

AC

CO

1,0

15

34 8

85 0

00

41 3

97 2

72

132 1

08 5

96

2

83

Kam

wenge

K

ichence

Kic

hence S

AC

CO

772

17 2

15 0

00

31 2

08 6

75

80 7

78 4

56

4

112

Bundib

igyo

Rw

ebis

engo

R

webis

engo S

AC

CO

734

39 8

57 8

00

141 8

93 0

00

113 9

41 4

00

30

185

Kyenjo

jo

K

yegegw

a P

eople

s’ S

AC

CO

419

6 9

96 0

00

11 4

01 0

88

34 6

00 6

50

26

115

Bushenyi

Kitagata

K

itagata

Fin

ancia

l S

erv

ices

SA

CC

O

2,9

17

348 2

15 5

00

479 6

87 8

91

856 2

43 4

17

12

120

Rukungiri

Ruhin

da

Rw

enshaka S

AC

CO

1602

109 7

88 9

00

174 9

06 8

00

423 3

63 9

60

14

166

Kis

oro

Busanza D

ute

rim

bere

396

7 5

73 0

00

12 4

23 0

50

21 1

08 2

75

Sourc

e: U

CS

CU

Sta

tistical U

nit

* P

ort

folio

at

risk (

over

dues m

ore

than o

ne d

ay).

** O

pera

tio

nal self-s

uffic

iency (

ratio o

f re

venues o

ver

expenses).

Annex 10

44

2.

SA

CC

Os e

sta

blish

ed

aft

er A

AM

P m

id-t

erm

**

*

Dis

tric

t S

ubcounty

S

AC

CO

nam

e

Me

mbers

hip

S

hare

capital

Savin

gs

Loans

PA

R %

* O

SS

%**

Bushenyi

Kadshenshero

K

aju

nju

Abaham

bani S

AC

CO

406

38 4

89 7

44

49 4

17 2

31

94 4

72 5

66

K

aru

ngu

Karu

ngu S

AC

CO

539

12 7

20 0

00

11 8

13 9

28

25 7

25 7

71

Mbara

ra

Bih

arw

e

Bih

arw

e F

arm

ers

SA

CC

O

822

24 6

00 0

00

92 7

43 8

00

99 4

95 0

00

30

223

Ntu

ngam

o

Nyabih

oko

Nyabih

oko S

AC

CO

600

45 7

68 2

00

27 8

80 7

30

50 2

51 7

00

6

142

Kabaro

le

Buhesi

Kabbic

ai S

AC

CO

340

8 1

00 0

00

11 3

60 0

00

9 7

60 0

00

15

R

wim

i R

wim

i S

AC

CO

923

20 4

37 0

00

53 1

24 7

87

72 1

75 9

50

64

242

B

usoro

B

usoro

SA

CC

O

332

3 3

30 0

00

9 7

00 0

00

Kasese

Mukynyu

M

ukynyu S

AC

CO

342

12 6

80 5

00

5 1

56 7

50

14 6

75 9

00

Rukoki T

weyam

be S

AC

CO

602

19 5

64 3

00

13 4

59 0

00

24 4

53 0

00

4

74

Kyenjo

jo

Butiti

Miranga S

AC

CO

559

11 4

72 0

00

19 7

90 1

00

71 7

00 1

00

17

Kabale

B

ufu

ndi

Kacere

re S

AC

CO

946

19 0

00 0

00

41 5

97 5

65

28 0

96 7

50

76

B

uta

nda

Buta

nda S

AC

CO

414

8 7

88 0

00

22 8

26 0

00

44 4

01 7

77

44

360

Kanungu

Kih

ihi

Kabuna C

om

munity S

AC

CO

306

8 5

00 0

00

5 5

63 6

00

7 4

82 0

00

21

53

R

uyeyo

R

ute

nga C

om

munity S

AC

CO

463

22 7

55 5

00

7 4

83 4

93

37 1

37 3

74

Kis

oro

N

yakabande

N

yakabande F

arm

ers

SA

CC

O

554

13 9

60 0

00

14 6

93 9

50

38 0

75 0

00

B

uhunga

Kih

anga S

AC

CO

339

13 5

19 3

50

25 3

14 3

20

28 4

36 9

53

B

wam

bara

B

ikuru

ngu S

AC

CO

1,3

26

72 2

43 5

00

124 9

64 9

00

218 8

72 2

50

Sem

babule

S

em

babule

T/s

S

em

babule

SA

CC

O

1,6

97

67 7

40 0

00

103 1

98 4

81

3.2

148.5

Sourc

e: U

CS

CU

Sta

tistical U

nit

***

Som

e o

f th

ese S

AC

CO

s m

ay h

ave b

een a

ctu

ally

esta

blis

hed b

efo

re A

AM

P u

ndert

ook t

heir s

upport

.

Annex 10

45

International Fund forAgricultural DevelopmentVia Paolo di Dono, 4400142 Rome, ItalyTel: +39 06 54591Fax: +39 06 5043463E-mail: evaluation@ifad.orgwww.ifad.org/evaluation

Enabling poor rural peopleto over come poverty

Enabling poor rural peopleto over come poverty

P R O J E C T P E R F O R M A N C E A S S E S S M E N T

February 2012

IFAD IFAD

Area-Based Agricultural Modernization Programme