RTB Update

IITA Ibadan

27 January 2016

Six reasons why RTB is best CRP!

1. Only CRP to receive “excellent” in Annual Reporting to CO in 2014 and 2015!

2. Commendation by CO for reporting on gender and used our format as model for other CRPs

3. CRP with highest number of A grades in ISPC review of pre-proposals

4. Outstanding external review (best of all six read so far by Yvonne Pinto of ISC)

5. Based on performance review DFID granted RTB 3.5 million pounds of W2 funding

6. Just agreed BMGF funding for RTB led project on cassava seed systems for $11.6m

1. Governance & Management

Center & Gender Focal Points

RTB 1.0 to RTB 2.0

RTB 1.0

RTB 2.05 Flagships and 25 clusters

Outcome Orientation (RBM)

Multidisciplinary teams from different Themes

Online software platform

Google drive

Research / output

orientation

7 RTB Themes

• Gender research coordinator, full time - Bhawana• Communications officer – Holly• M&E Officer - Claudio• Science officer – Michael:

– Product delivery plans – Formulation and review of progress discovery/breeding related

products, milestones and activities. – Strategic advice to Program Director on range of science issues

PMU staffing update

2. Adding value synergistic research: breeding

• Sequencing and phenotyping data • Support genomic analyses (GWAS, GS)

for complex traits (eg. potato tuberization and early bulking, fertility and fruit quality in banana)

• Common Vision RTB data management and bio-informatics• Promote linkages CassavaBase,

SweetpotatoBase, MusaBase etc with Integrated Breeding Platform and multiple crop/center tools

August 2015, Bioversity Montpellier

January 2015, Ithaca

2. Adding value synergistic research: breeding

Integrating End User Preferences in RTB Breeding – Workshop Kampala (Feb 2015)

Critical gaps: working across disciplines to fill gaps in knowledge and technical support to bring greater “end-user awareness” to public sector

• Biological and socio-economic surveys pests and diseases along altitudinal gradients

• Modelling to understand degeneration of planting material and design cost effective interventions

• Improvement of energy efficiency in cassava processing & adding value to RTB waste products

2. Adding value: seed, pests and diseases and post harvest

• Collaboration with ILRI and CRP Livestock & Fish and CRP Humidtropics

3. Communications● RTB communication channels in 2015

• Blogs and News – RTB research, publications, successes– Partners contribute and share

• Flyers – RTB second phase

84% increase in Facebook

followers from 2014

43% increase in Twitter followers

from 2014

1000+ Newsletter subscribers

25,000+ visitors to RTB website so far this year. Up from

14,000 in 2014

4. BMGF: Cassava seed Value Chain & project components

Breeder Seed

Foundation seed

Commercial seed growers

Farmers / Seed Users

Seed Quality & Protocols

Seed & Information

Consumer Demand & Money

M&E

4. BMGF: Cassava seed Value Chain next steps

• Project planning meeting this week!• Interview for project coordinator• Project start up and M&E workshop: 18-19th April

Global integrating programs

5. Pre-proposals Second Phase

Dryland Cereals and Legumes systems

GenebankS

++

Fish agri-food systems

Forest and Agroforestry systems

Livestock agri-food systems

Maize agrifood systems

Rice agri-food systems

Roots, tubers and bananas systems

Wheat agri-food systems

NUTRITION

&

HEALTH

PI

M

WLE

CLI

MATE

CHANGE

Gender

Capacity Development

Big data/ ICT

Genetic Resources Policy

Expressions of Interest

(10)

Agri-food systems programs

Genetic gain

Genebanks

FP1: Discovery

FP2: Varieties/

seed

FP3: resilient

crops

FP4: nutritious/

added value

FP5: Livelihood

systems

FP6: Impact @ scale

Clair Inge James Graham Piet (Philippe)

Dietmar

GlobalChallenges

Oscar

Partnership& CapDev

Simone

Gender Netsayi & Bhawana

ToC/IDO Claudio

5. Pre-proposal and ISPC review

Intense internal review: CIP BoT, ISC and MC!

Builds on business cases for clusters and flagships

Program structure & ISPC rating

A A A A

C

C

5. Pre-proposal ISPC: feedback

5. Pre-proposal ISPC: feedback

Satisfactory with adjustment, recommends inviting full proposal

• Clear comparative advantage

• Well conceptualised, strong and stable management

• Pre-proposal generally very high standard • Role of other CRPs and partners explained succinctly

with great clarity• Theory of change and impact pathway for RTB clear,

focused, logical and plausible• Greatest concern FP5 (livelihood systems) and FP6

(impact at scale)

6. IEA review of RTB: headlines

5 person team led by Jill Lenne – extensive visits• Notable progress in past 4 years• Strongly warrants continuing• Well directed, achieving reasonable # of milestones• Adding value across crops and centers mainly through

complementary funded projects• Science sound• NARs appreciative• Good progress gender strategy• Good program governance and management

IEA review of RTB: for improvement

• using outcomes of priority assessment for more strategic allocation of budget across crops

• collaboration among breeders (cassava and banana)• strengthening CRP expertise in seed systems• improved integration of crop improvement and

management technologies• enhanced focus of post-harvest research on the

crop-specific aspects of value chain improvements

7. Full proposal: Rome meeting

• Budget down to $900m from $1400 submission• Reduced from 69 to 58 Flagships

• 3 D rated flagships eliminated • 16 C rated flagships consolidated

• Need more clarity Window 1 and Window 2 funds• Should be seen as leading the research and less as propping up

the system

• Management and supervision costs more efficient and comparable

• range from approx. $1m to $4.5m

RTB: best and now the biggest!

CRP

2017 Projected W1 + W2

US$ millions

2017 % of $207

million W1+W2

2017 ProjectedBilateral

& W3 US$

millions

2017% of

Bilateral & W3

2017 Projected

Total under $900m

indicative budget

US$ millions

% of Total$900

millionbase

budget

AFSCRPs

DCLAS 11.4 5.5 93.7 13.6 105.1 11.7Fish 8.5 4.1 17.6 2.5 26.1 2.9FTA 10.7 5.2 62.6 9.1 73.3 8.2Livestock 20.2 9.8 23.1 3.3 43.3 4.8Maize 12.6 6.1 55.1 8.0 67.7 7.5Rice 14.4 6.9 71.9 10.4 86.3 9.6RTB 22.3 10.7 91.9 13.3 114.2 12.7Wheat 14.7 7.1 28.5 4.1 43.2 4.8

GICRPs

A4NH 19.8 9.6 71.2 10.3 91.0 10.1CCAFS 20.9 10.1 36.0 5.2 56.9 6.3PIM 18.8 9.1 74.0 10.7 92.8 10.3WLE 9.4 4.5 49.3 7.1 58.7 6.5

Platforms

Genebanks 21.5 10.4 8.5 1.2 30.0 3.3Gen. Gain 2.0 1.0 8.0 1.2 10.0 1.1

TOTAL 207.2 100.0 691.3 100.0 898.5 100.0

Merge FP5 and FP6: rationale

• Common conceptual framework: innovation system perspective

• Multi-indicator, actors and scales and help design, test and target innovations

• Both strong gender content, linkages with FP1-4 and emphasis on enhancing impact

• Space for agronomists, nutritionists, sociologists and economists across centers to think and engage

Changes in restrategized FP5

• Place based clusters dropped• Systems dimension linked to site integration

– Vietnam ++ country: cassava with conservation ag. with and scaling via linkages processors

• More opportunistic – what do we have already?• Improved focus IPGs in cross cutting work• Stronger reciprocal linkages FP1-FP4• Linkages “livelihood/impact at scale” FPs in other

AFS CRPs

RTB New Program Structure

8. Full proposal: next steps

• Set up core writing team and extended team– Writing process underway– Cluster descriptions due Jan 20th

• Key period Feb 1-23rd • First draft due Feb 29th

• Submission March 31st

9. Wrap up

1. Dynamic Independent Steering Committee:

2. Planning shift RTB 1.0 to 2.0

3. Strengthened scientific collaboration: “RTB team”

4. Enhanced gender research

5. Dynamized RTB communication channels

6. Strong Pre-Proposal – well set to move forward

7. Outstanding external review

8. Working on full proposal NOW!