farm ii quarterly report april-july 2015

SOUTH SUDAN FOOD, AGRIBUSINESS, AND

RURAL MARKETS II PROJECT

1st Quarterly Report

April 16, 2015–July 15, 2015

Photo credit: Sandra Basgall

Abt Associates

Recommended Citation: Feed the Future South Sudan Food, Agribusiness and Rural Markets II

Project. “1st Quarterly Report FY 2015: April 16, 2015–July 15, 2015.” Prepared by Abt Associates Inc.,

Bethesda, MD, August 2015.

Abt Associates Inc. 1 4550 Montgomery Avenue 1 Suite 800 North 1 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 1 T. 301.347.5000 1 F. 301.913.9061 1 www.abtassociates.com

With:

ACDI/VOCA

Action Africa Help International

Risk and Security Management Consulting

Making Cents International

BBC Media Action

Norman Borlaug Institute-Texas A&M

FEED THE FUTURE SOUTH SUDAN

FOOD, AGRIBUSINESS, AND RURAL

MARKETS II PROJECT

1st Quarterly Report FY 2015-2016

April 16, 2015–July 15, 2015

Contract No. AID-668-C-15-00001

DISCLAIMER

The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States

Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

Table of Contents

Acronyms............................................................................................................................................................................ iii 1. Program Overview..................................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 2

2.1 Summary of Results to Date ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. Start-Up Activities ...................................................................................................................................................... 5

3.1 Workplan .............................................................................................................................................................. 5 3.2 Performance Management Plan ....................................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Workplan Strategy Session with Senior Technical Field Staff .................................................................. 5

4. Component 1: Agricultural Markets ...................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 Establish Value Chain Linkages ........................................................................................................................ 6

4.1.1 Conducted Market Assessment and Stakeholder Analysis .......................................................... 6 4.1.2 Market Linkages initiated with Key Buyers ...................................................................................... 7 4.1.3 Financial Linkages Initiated to Improve Access to Finance and Credit ..................................... 7 4.1.4 Financial Literacy Training Module Development .......................................................................... 8 4.1.5 Assessed Existing VSL groups in Western Equatoria State.......................................................... 8 4.1.6 Partnering to Facilitate Industry Roundtables ................................................................................. 8 4.1.7 Initiated Establishment of Market Information Services ............................................................... 8

4.2 Improve Post-Harvest Handling and Processing ......................................................................................... 8 4.2.1 Assessed Cooperative Unions and Farmer Group Capacity for Collective Marketing ........ 9

5. Component 2: Agriculture Productivity ............................................................................................................. 10 5.1 Improve Farming Practices ............................................................................................................................. 10

5.1.1 Seed Distribution ................................................................................................................................. 10 5.2 Strengthen Producer Organizations ............................................................................................................. 11

5.2.1 Identification of New payams ............................................................................................................ 11 5.2.2 Demonstration Plots ........................................................................................................................... 14 5.2.3 Yield Assessment .................................................................................................................................. 14 5.2.4 Postharvest Activities .......................................................................................................................... 14

6. Component 3: Capacity Building .......................................................................................................................... 15 6.1 Private Sector Development .......................................................................................................................... 15

6.1.1 Formation, Establishment and Training of New FBOs ................................................................ 15 7. Grants ......................................................................................................................................................................... 16 8. Cross-Cutting Activities ......................................................................................................................................... 16

8.1 Youth ................................................................................................................................................................. 16 9. Monitoring and Evaluation...................................................................................................................................... 17

9.1 Technology ......................................................................................................................................................... 17 10. Security ....................................................................................................................................................................... 17

10.1 Eastern Equatoria State ...................................................................................................................... 17 10.2 Central Equatoria State ...................................................................................................................... 18 10.3 Western Equatoria State ................................................................................................................... 18

11. Personnel .................................................................................................................................................................... 19 12. Key Activities Planned for Next Period .............................................................................................................. 20

12.1 Component 1: Agricultural Markets ............................................................................................... 20 12.2 Component 2: Agriculture Productivity ........................................................................................ 20 12.3 Component 3: Capacity Building ..................................................................................................... 20 12.4 Grants ..................................................................................................................................................... 21 12.5 Monitoring and Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 21

First Quarter Report: April 16, 2015–July 15, 2015 ii

List of Tables

Table 1: FARM II Indicators ............................................................................................................................................. 3

Table 2: Seed Quantities, Boarder Entry Points, Warehouse Locations ........................................................... 10

Table 3: Seed And Cassava Cutting Distribution ..................................................................................................... 11

Table 4: Seed And Cassava Waiting Distribution .................................................................................................... 11

Table 5: FARM II Working Area .................................................................................................................................. 12

Table 6: Distribution Of Hermetic Bags .................................................................................................................... 15

Table 7: Trainings ............................................................................................................................................................. 16

Table 8: New Staff ........................................................................................................................................................... 19

Table 9: Staff That Left ................................................................................................................................................... 19

Table 10: Current Staff By Location And Organization ......................................................................................... 19

List of Maps

Map I: Central Equatoria State FARM II project payams ........................................................................................ 12

Map 2: Eastern Equatoria State FARM II project payams ....................................................................................... 13

Map 3: Western Equatoria State FARM II project payams .................................................................................... 13

First Quarter Report: April 16, 2015–July 15, 2015 iii

Acronyms

BDS Business Development Services

EABL East African Breweries Ltd

EAGC East Africa Grain Council

FARM II Food, Agribusiness, and Rural Markets II

FARM Food, Agribusiness, and Rural Markets

FPLC Farmer Participatory Learning Centers

GAP Good Agronomic Practices

GIZ German Development Agency

HSSP Health Systems Strengthening Project

IGF Innovative Grant Fund

LRA Lord's Resistance Army

MFI Microfinance Institutions

MIS Market Information System

MT Metric Ton

PMP Program Management Plan

PPP Public- Partner Partnerships

SACCO Savings And Credit Co-Operative

SME Small And Medium-Sized Enterprise

SSP South Sudanese Pound

TO Transition Objective

TOT Trainer Of Trainer

VSL Village Savings And Loan

VSLA Village Savings And Loan Associations

WFP World Food Program

1. Program Overview

Program Name: Feed the Future South Sudan Food, Agribusiness, and Rural Markets

II Project

Period of Performance: April 16, 2015 – April 15, 2016

Name of Prime

Implementing Partner: Abt Associates Inc.

[Contract/Agreement]

Number: AID-668-C-00001

Name of Subcontractors: ACDI VOCA, AAH-I, RSM Consulting, Making Cents International,

BBC Media Action, and Norman Borlaug Institute-Texas A&M

Geographic Coverage (cities

and or countries) Western Equatoria, Central Equatoria, and Western Equatoria1

Reporting Period: April 16 – July15, 2015

The FARM II project’s most notable accomplishments during this first quarter include:

Draft Workplan and Performance Management Plan (PMP) submitted to USAID;

Conducted strategy sessions with senior field staff from all three states, sensitizing them on the

Workplan, PMP, Grants portfolio, M&E, Gender, Feed the Future branding, and Success Story

development;

Conducted rapid market assessment and stakeholder analysis to determine key value chain

players and market position of agricultural products in the local market;

Procured and received 294 MT of seeds and 138 MT of cassava stem, and undertook a total of

411 grants in support of seed and cassava cutting distribution, delivered to cooperative union

warehouses for further distribution to FBOs; and

Responded to security threats to staff and programming throughout the project catchment area.

1 See complete list of counties and payams under each state on Table 5, page 12.

First Quarter Report: April 16, 2015–July 15, 2015 2

2. Introduction

This first Quarterly Report for the Feed the Future South Sudan Food, Agribusiness, and Rural Markets

II (FARM II) presents updates on accomplishments within the three key activity levels: 1) Agricultural

Markets, 2) Agricultural Productivity, and 3) Capacity Building. The reporting period covers April 16 –

July 15, 2015.

2.1 Summary of Results to Date

Much of the first quarter was taken up with hiring and deploying new staff, establishing management

practices and lines of communication, drafting the Workplan and Performance Management Plan. At the

activity level, the project got well off the ground and as such, programming has started in earnest. It is

yet too early to report on results, however, this report goes into detailed descriptions of ongoing activities.


Table 1: The indicators for FARM II are building upon the activities completed within FARM, but some areas are new and

baselines are being collected. Other activity areas are new, i.e. currently without a baseline data and known area

research data is being used as a proxy or none data at all and the value is zero.

No. Standard Indicators Baseline Project Target Q1 Mid-

Term Q3 Final

Report

Performance Achieved

to the End of Reporting Period (%)

On Target Y/N

1.1.1: At least 20,000 farmers use improved post-harvest handling techniques

16,167 20,000 16,167 Y

1.1.2: Post-harvest losses reduced by at least 50 percent by targeted farmers

40% Decrease by 50% NTR

1.1.3: Increase in total sales of farmers by at least 15 percent

over baseline

$79,590 Increase by15% NTR

1.1.4: At least 10 operators of value-added activities (such as milling or drying), receive technical assistance to

increase profits by at least 20 percent

1 10 NTR

Increase by 20% 0 NTR

1.1.5: At least 10,000 farmers and 20 agricultural enterprises

actively access financial services, whether through formal financial institutions, flexible financing, or community-level associations

0 10,000 0 NTR

20 0 NTR

1.1.6: At least 20 agricultural enterprises expand operations into markets outside of the Greenbelt

0 20 0 NTR

1.1.7: A minimum of 40 percent of participants of program

activities under this component are women

38% 40% 38% Y

1.2.1: At least 20,000 farmers (8,000 females), largely as

members of FBOs, receive technical assistance to increase production within approved value chains

16,167 20,000 16,167 Y

8,389 8,000 8,389 Y

1.2.2: At least 15 percent increase over baseline in production within approved value chains by targeted beneficiaries

$79,590 Increase 15% $79,590 NTR

1.2.3: At least 450 new or existing farmer organizations (at least 150 female FBOs) are developed or strengthened

through increased technical and managerial capacity of leadership and improved participation and commitment of membership

666 450 666 Y

0 150 NTR

1.2.4: At least 20 ‘lead farmers’ (8 females) are mentored within each value chain who serve as an example of best practices under the project

0 20 0 NTR

0 8 0 NTR

1.2.5: At least 40,000 hectares will be under new

management practices or technologies (new and continuing)

19,445 40,000 NTR

1.2.6: A minimum of 40 percent of beneficiaries of program activities under this component will be women

38% 40% 38% NTR

1.3.1: At least 200 CAEWs and PEWs and other public sector actors in the zones of intervention have increased capacity to provide extension services and implement policy, as relevant

39 200 39 NTR


No. Standard Indicators Baseline Project Target Q1 Mid-

Term Q3 Final

Report

Performance Achieved to the End of Reporting

Period (%) On Target

Y/N

1.3.2: State and county-level actors reach 30 percent female

composition of the CAEW and PEW work force

3 30% NTR

1.3.3: At least 50 micro, small and medium existing or start-up agribusinesses (to exclude agro-input suppliers

already covered under Component 2) receive business development services to identify constraints and increase their management and technical capacity over

the life of the program. These businesses may overlap with those described in Component 1, but services must extend beyond links to financial services and

capital described there

7 50 NTR

1.3.4: At least 12 trainings are conducted over the course of the project to state and county-level officials on the

implementation of nationally-approved agriculture, land, and business-enabling/investment promotion policies

12 12 t NTR

1.3.5: A minimum of 20 percent of project activities must be formally agreed upon by the state and/or county authorities in the form of MOUs or other written

commitment

27 20 % NTR

1.3.6: A Public- Partner Partnerships (PPP) will be facilitated and launched by the project

0 1 0 NTR

1.3.7: At least five local non-governmental organizations will be built or improved upon, as measured by USAID’s

Organizational Capacity Assessment or other

accepted tool, using the Innovative Grants Facility

7 5 7 Y

1.3.8: A functioning Competitiveness Council is established and effectively improves the dialogue between

stakeholders in the agriculture sector

0 4 0 NTR

1.3.9: A minimum of 20 percent of beneficiaries of program activities under this component will be women

38% 20% 38% NTR


3. Start-Up Activities

FARM II team prepared and submitted the project’s Workplan and Performance Management Plan within the first sixty (60) days of the project.

3.1 Workplan

The roadmap for the development of the FARM II Workplan focused on Transition Objective (TO) 1,

expanding on where the FARM project ended and adding new activities to accelerate or scale up

FARM’s impact. Using interventions, tools, and approaches that promote resilience, the project is

further strengthening the physical, human, social, and natural capital for farming households and

communities. FARM II’s three components are also a reflection of the Operational Framework in that

Sub-TO 1.1: “Facilitate community led response” reflects Component 1: Agricultural Markets, Sub-TO

I.3: “Increase disaster preparedness and risk reduction,” is consistent with Component 2: Agricultural

Productivity, and Sub-TO 1.2: “Deliver critical services,” is aligned with Component 3: Capacity Building.

Grants and cross-cutting activities run through all three.

3.2 Performance Management Plan

As South Sudan is a Feed the Future aligned country, seven of the Feed the Future indicators run

throughout the project deliverables/performance indicators. The majority of the baseline is made up of

the final FARM performance indicator numbers with baseline data being collected for “post-harvest

losses reduced by at least 50 percent by targeted farmers” which will be collected during the first

harvest starting in August; and “at least 15 percent increase over baseline in production within approved

value chains by targeted beneficiaries” currently being collected for maize, beans, groundnuts, and

cassava yields.

3.3 Workplan Strategy Session with Senior Technical Field

Staff

With the completion of the Workplan and the PMP, the project conducted a successful three day

strategy session which brought together FARM II senior-technical staff from all three states to discuss a

clear framework for implementing activities as well as to create synergies between all of the project’s

components. In addition to the overall strategy session, trainings were conducted on grants, M&E,

gender, Feed the Future branding, and success story development with the aim of weaving these mechanisms back into the three main project components.


4. Component 1: Agricultural Markets

Under FARM, 16,167 smallholder farmers are on record for having received technical assistance, training

and agricultural input (seeds) support. Consequently, many are now producing surpluses and some are

starting to take their surpluses to local markets. Through FARM II, activities to further strengthen and

improve agricultural marketing are being initiated. To advance the market pull strategy begun in the

earlier project, FARM II applied a three-pronged approach, including establishing buyer linkages,

designing access to finance pathways, and strengthening smallholder organizational structures, for

collective aggregation and marketing. All three categories of activities were launched simultaneously in

order to lay the groundwork for accelerating smallholder agricultural marketing while developing an

overall value chain framework to drive sustainable, market-led integration of smallholders within the value chains. All activities carried out this quarter fall under the three approaches mentioned above.

4.1 Establish Value Chain Linkages

4.1.1 Conducted Market Assessment and Stakeholder Analysis

As part of the start-up activities, FARM II conducted a rapid market assessment and stakeholder analysis

to determine key value chain players and the market position of agricultural products in the local

markets. The assessment provided the basis for identification of local traders and buyers suitable for

linkages with project beneficiaries. Since Juba markets play a significant role in determining product

prices, six key markets (Suk Libya, Custom, Jebel, Gudele 2, Konyokonyo, and Gumbo-FAMMS) within

Juba County were assessed. The assessment confirmed that almost 75% of the agricultural products,

including staples such as maize flour, are imported from Uganda. South Sudanese products are perceived

as more costly, of lower quality, and lacking in reliability in terms of supply. In addition to these three

factors going against local products, the lack of knowledge and information amongst traders vis-à-vis the

Greenbelt’s surplus production capability also played against their purchase of domestic agricultural products.

In addition, the rapid stakeholder assessment also revealed that across all six markets, the larger traders

dominating the markets are primarily Somalis, Ethiopians, and Eritreans, followed by Ugandans and

Kenyans. Many of these traders are known to import food products by the truckloads for redistribution

across the key markets in Juba, and from there to other

larger towns north and west in the country. However, given

the recent challenges emanating from currency fluctuations,

many of these traders are open to procuring domestically if the quality, volume, and cost issues are addressed.

Besides the markets in Juba, the FARM II team also visited five

weekly and daily markets in Western Equatoria to get a

better understanding of product flows and market dynamics

prevailing in the marketplace. These weekly markets draw

large numbers of traders as well as consumers from

surrounding areas within the county. As illustrated in picture

1, in these weekly markets, rural women play a prominent role in marketing both primary and processed products. Picture 1: Weekly Market in Bazungua, Yambio,

Western Equatoria.

Photo credit: Bagie

Sherchand

Abt Associates


4.1.2 Market Linkages initiated with Key Buyers

During this quarter, the project team met with several key buyers to assess the possibility of establishing

commercial partnerships with the smallholder farmers from the Greenbelt. As a result of various

meetings and discussions held with South Sudan’s key value chain players in the food and beverage

industries, partnerships to purchase/procure commodities from FARM II beneficiaries are beginning to come together. The most promising business linkages taking shape are:

World Food Program (WFP) serves as a leading player in the country for procuring food

products, especially grains and legumes, to feed thousands of refugees as well as vulnerable

families and school children. WFP procures approximately 3,000 metric ton (MT) annually and

serves as one of the largest ready markets in South Sudan. As a matter of practice, WFP

purchases the commodities it requires through vetted traders, who serve as “registered

suppliers.” To prepare project farmer groups to qualify as “registered supplier,” the project

team carried out an assessment to identify promising farmer groups and cooperatives. These

groups are currently being assisted with preparations to take on the responsibility of aggregating

maize and other products that meet the quality requirements of WFP. In total, ten farmer

groups, cooperative societies, and cooperative unions were identified and their names and

contact information have been submitted to WFP. The registration process is on-going and the

documentation requirement is comprehensive and detailed.

East African Breweries Ltd. (EABL) is keen on partnering with FARM II to engage local

farmers in the production of sorghum and cassava for their beer production in the East Africa

region, including Kenya and Uganda. The project is actively collaborating with EABL to

determine the best approach and modality of partnership given the short timeframe of the

project. EABL is open to piloting ‘outgrower schemes’ and similar models to produce and

channel sorghum to the brewery through cooperative societies and cooperative unions. Since

the company provides a strong and stable market for smallholder farmers, the team will

continue to move this partnership forward in the next quarter.

4.1.3 Financial Linkages Initiated to Improve Access to Finance and Credit

Access to finance, particularly for agriculture related working capital, continues to be the biggest hurdle

all along the value chain for both production and enterprise development. Because of immediate cash

needs, although many smallholders prematurely project smallholder now belong to FBOs, cooperatives,

and cooperative unions, they largely continue to sell directly to roving rural traders given the ‘on-the-

spot’ cash payment. It is common knowledge that smallholder producers prefer instant payment (even if

price is lower) over delayed disbursement. To address this constraint, FARM II team met with four

commercial banks and three microfinance institutions (MFIs) to assess the possibility of designing a few

preliminary approaches to improve linkages to finance, which could lead to increased access to capital by

progressive smallholder farmers.

To speed up the process, the team developed and shared a concept note with one commercial bank and

two MFIs that were interested in being part of the innovative idea. The concept paper on ‘bridging

finance facility’ was well received by all three financial institutions and as a result, the three institutions

are working on developing suitable financial products to pilot during the 2015 marketing seasons. This

will open access to financing at harvest time to those smallholders who aggregate commodities through

cooperatives or associations. Aggregation of commodities will be carried out through collective

marketing at bulking points and aggregation centers. The objective is to link, for example, the WFP


‘registered suppliers’ of commodities to these financial institutions so that the farmer-members can receive on-the-spot payment for part of their delivered commodities.

4.1.4 Financial Literacy Training Module Development

The importance of financial literacy for smallholder farmers and farmer groups as borrowers was a key

theme stressed by all the lending institutions. In fact many insisted that financial literacy should be a

prerequisite for borrowing since many smallholders lack financial knowledge and have problems

managing credit. Taking this recommendation to heart, FARM II is developing and/or modifying existing financial literacy programs and modules to meet the needs of the target audience.

4.1.5 Assessed Existing VSL groups in Western Equatoria State

To better understand the status of existing village savings and loan (VSL) groups, FARM II met with five

organizations involved in establishing VSL groups in Yambio. A quick assessment indicated that in

Yambio, eight youth-led VLSs had been formed and were successful. However, the December 15, 2013

conflict derailed many of the operational village savings and loan associations (VSLA) and VSL groups and

many continue to struggle. In addition, the current economic environment is also contributing to

suppressing their growth, especially youth-led VSLs, as they are dependent on retailing and the drop in

the South Sudanese Pound (SSP) makes purchasing products difficult. In production agriculture, if they

are still active, their status remains unknown. Since many VSLs and VSLA serve as an alternative source

of financing for smallholder farmers and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in rural areas, FARM

II is assessing the value of linking VSLAs with financial institutions such as savings and credit co-operative

(SACCOs) and microfinance institutions (MFIs) and determining how best to assist them.

4.1.6 Partnering to Facilitate Industry Roundtables

FARM II is collaborating closely with the East Africa Grain Council (EAGC) to facilitate the formation

and establishment of an industry roundtable/competitiveness council in Juba to serve as an advocate of

the grain marketing industry. EAGC is funded and supported at present by the German Development Agency (GIZ) and WFP.

4.1.7 Initiated Establishment of Market Information Services

A consultant was mobilized during this quarter to help with the implementation of the project’s market

information system (MIS) prototype developed under FARM. As part of the short-term assignment, the

consultant successfully trained project technical staff on using SMS for collection and dissemination of

market price information from this system. The same technology is also providing the platform for communications between cooperatives and other stakeholders.

4.2 Improve Post-Harvest Handling and Processing

Post-harvest losses are high among farmers. Loss rates from insects, diseases, and animal pests run well

above 30 percent. Since losses occur not only on the farm, but also during the various stages of

transportation, storage, processing, and preservation, there is a strong need to provide appropriate

knowledge and skills in handling commodities. These skills are particularly important to help prevent

financial shortfalls due to diminished quality and physical losses. At its core, this activity is focused on

assisting smallholder producers and cooperative societies to better prepare their surpluses for market, both in terms of meeting product quality standard and supplying required volume.


4.2.1 Assessed Cooperative Unions and Farmer Group Capacity for

Collective Marketing

During this quarter, the project carried out an assessment of six cooperative unions and one farmer

association to determine their operational and organizational capacity to participate in business

management and collective marketing. Together they represent 88 cooperative societies from across

the three Equatoria states; 54 additional cooperative societies under FARM II are independent and have

not yet banded together under a cooperative union. Efforts are ongoing to encourage more cooperative

societies to join these cooperative unions. All cooperative unions’ executive and management staff were trained under FARM on such topics as principles of cooperative formation and business management.

The findings from the assessments indicate that the executive members and management team all

require more training and guidance in not just organizational management, but also administrative and financial record keeping.


5. Component 2: Agriculture Productivity

The introduction of new technologies and GAP training practices under FARM will continue under

FARM II. Although this component will not target as many new farmers as in the past, it is an important component as it pushes surplus production into the market and value chain sections of Component 1.

5.1 Improve Farming Practices

5.1.1 Seed Distribution

The project purchased a total of 294 MT of seed

and 138 MT of cassava stem with the seeds being

distributed during the first weeks of June. While

most of the seed did not arrive in time for the

spring planting, farmers will plant them during

the second season in late July and August.

The first step in the seed procurement was to

inspect them in Uganda prior to final purchase.

The Ugandan vendors, Equator Seeds, Victoria

Seeds, and East Africa Seeds, then transported

the seed across three border crossing to

designated warehousing in each project-

supported county as illustrated in Table 2 below.

Sorghum (10 MT) was not purchased because

the appropriate variety (Seredo) needed by

farmers was not available; consequently, 98% of

the ordered seeds were purchased and delivered to the warehouses.

Table 2: Seed Quantities, Border Entry Points, Warehouse Locations throughout the Equatorias.

Boarder Entry

Location

Warehouse

Location

Maize Kg Beans Kg G/nuts Kg Rice Kg Sesame Kg Finger

Millet Kg Total to

Warehouse Longe 5 K132 Red Beauty Nerica 10 Simsm ll Serami ll

Eastern Equatoria State 23,150 41,780 74,770 635 4,002 3,090 147,427

Nimule Pageri 1,620 2,925 5,234 280 281 10,340

Magwi 6,716 12,116 21,684 335 1,161 804 42,816

Torit 14,814 26,739 47,852 300 2,561 2,005 94,271

Central Equatoria State 20,120 18,220 30,735

1,618

70,693

Kaya Morobo 7,070 6,134 12,517

556

26,277

Yei 6,180 5,538 8,815

498

21,031

Moyo Kajokeji 6,870 6,548 9,403

564

23,385

Western Equatoria State 16,730

44,495 9,365 2,380 2,910 75,880

Kaya Maridi 5,490

14,600 4,370 780 955 26,195

Mundri West 4,966

13,209 707 864 19,746

Yambio 6,274

16,686 4,995 893 1,091 29,939

TOTAL 60,000 60,000 150,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 294,000


As in 2014, all cassava cuttings were domestically sourced in South Sudan largely as an outcome of

previous project-supported distributions of cassava stem from Uganda. Project staff worked closely with

South Sudan authorities to inspect the cassava for disease before 138 MT were purchased and distributed.

A total of 385.5 MT of seeds and cassava stem were delivered to their designated warehouse facilities during the reporting period as shown in Table 3 below:

Table 3: Seed and Cassava Distribution to the Equatorias under FARM II excluding Maridi and Mundri Counties in Western Equatoria

State/County Maize Beans Groundnuts Rice Sesame Millet Cassava TOTAL

Eastern Equatoria 23,150 41,780 74,770 620 4,002 3,090 40,000 187,412

Ikotos 6,482 11,669 21,691 1,120 865 11,200 53,027

Torit 8,332 15,070 26,161 320 1,441 1,140 14,400 66,864

Magwi 8,336 15,041 26,918 300 1,441 1,085 14,400 67,521

Central Equatoria 20,120 18,220 30,675 0 1,618 0 60,360 130,993

Morobo 7,070 6,134 12,517 556 13,000 39,277

Yei 6,180 5,538 9,363 498 16,120 37,699

Kajokeji 6,870 6,548 8,795 564 31,240 54,017

Western

Equatoria 6,270 16,266 4,995 893 1,091 37,600 67,115

Yambio 6,270 16,266 4,995 893 1,091 37,600 67,115

Maridi 0

Mundri 0

TOTAL 49,540 60,000 121,711 5,615 6,513 4,181 137,960 385,520

Due to violence in Maridi and Mundri West during this quarter, distribution to warehouses and

subsequently to relevant FBOs will be done during the next quarter as shown in Table 4 below. As

distribution was still in progress during the time of reporting, verification forms have not yet been

received so the total number of farmers who received seeds and cassava cuttings, total number of FBOs,

total number of bomas, and the gender of the farmers will be included in the next report.

Table 4: Seed and Cassava Cutting Awaiting Distribution to Maridi and Mundri Counties

County Maize Beans Groundnuts Rice Sesame Millet Cassava TOTAL

Maridi 5,490 14,600 4,370 780 955 32,800 58,995

Mundri 5,350 13,200 - 707 864 29,600 49,721

TOTAL 10,840 27,800 4,370 1,487 1,819 62,400 108,716

5.2 Strengthen Producer Organizations

5.2.1 Identification of New payams

Geographically, FARM II continues to operate in the same three counties in each Equatoria State and in

the same three payams in each county as under the initial FARM project. However, FARM II will add an


additional payam in each county, bringing the total to 36 as shown in Table 5 below. An assessment is

currently underway in each new payam using focus group discussions to identify their needs, although

this has been hampered by the current security situation in some areas.

Table 5: FARM II’s Geographical Coverage

State/County Payams Started under FARM New Payams

Eastern Equatoria

Torit Iyere Imurok Ifwotu Kudo

Ikotos Lomohidang North Ikotos Central Katire Loshite

Magwi Magwi Pageri Pajok Lobone

Central Equatoria

Yei Mugwo Otogo Lasu Tore

Morobo Gulumbi Kimba Wudabi Nyepo

Kajo-Keji Lire Kangapo 1 Kangapo 2 Panyume

Western Equatoria

Yambio Yambio Ri-rangu Bangasu Gangura

Maridi Maridi Mambe Landili Kozi

Mundri West Mundri Kotobi Bangallo Amadi

In addition to Table 5, below are maps of each state showing FARM II’s service area including old and

new payams as described above.


5.2.2 Demonstration Plots

Activities were organized at Farmer Participatory Learning Centers

(FPLCs) during the reporting period. Each demonstration plot in the 9

old payams in Central Equatoria conducted three field days showing

farmers from new FBOs GAP in areas such as land preparation,

proper planting, and weeding techniques for a total of 27

demonstrations with 514 participating (199 males and 315 females).

Although, land for demonstration plots were identified in EES and

WES and some ploughing was underway, activities were hampered by a dry spell.

5.2.3 Yield Assessment

Project partner, Norman Borlaug Institute -Texas A&M, began their

study to determine yield

assessment of project crops.

Initially, FARM used maize

yield as a proxy for all crops and through the life of this project,

yields often tripled or quadrupled from the 800 kg/ha baseline

established at the beginning of the project. Borlaug’s task was

the development of a more rigorous yield assessment and their

focus not only includes maize, but also beans, cassava, and

groundnuts and will include counterfactuals. At this stage, a

random sample of 405 farmers was created using the 2014 seed

distribution list, the old data collection tool reviewed, a new

tool developed and piloted, and the extension agents are in the

process of collecting the baseline data at the payam level.

Although this tool has been digitized and is available on the

extension agent’s smartphones, we do not expect a switch from

pencil and paper for the baseline as training has not yet been

undertaken. Constraints affecting both the baseline and

measurement during the harvest season are identified as 1) the

locations and number of farmers may change depending on the

security situation and 2) lack of availability of crops as drought is

being experienced in some areas.

5.2.4 Postharvest Activities

During FARM, 6,000 hermetic bags were delivered and used successfully to eliminate post-harvest grain

loss and FARM II is in the process of procuring 40,000 additional hermetic bags to be distributed as a

grant through the cooperative unions at a subsidized price for this year’s final harvest season. Table 6 shows how many each cooperative union will receive:


Table 6: Planned Distribution of Hermetic Bags through Cooperative Unions in the Three Equatoria States.

State/Cooperative Union Number of Bags

Central Equatoria State 15,000

Yei Cooperative Union 5,000

Morobo Cooperative Union 5,000

Kajokeji Cooperative Union 5,000

Eastern Equatoria State 10,000

Magwi Cooperative Union 7,000

Baalu Cooperative Union 3,000

Western Equatoria State 15,000

YAFA Cooperative Union; 5,000

Maridi Cooperative Union 5,000

Mundri West Cooperative Union 5,000

TOTAL 40,000

6. Component 3: Capacity Building

The capacity building component focuses on two important outputs on which all planned activities are

aligned: private sector development and strengthening the enabling environment.

6.1 Private Sector Development

6.1.1 Formation, Establishment and Training of New FBOs

FARM II visited both old and new

FBOs to ensure that land for

cultivation indeed existed and

determined which farming groups

were prepared to benefit from seed

and cassava cutting grants. As a

result, Trainer of Trainers (TOTs)

were organised and conducted on

Good Agronomic Practices (GAP)

through cooperative unions to new

FBOs to 500 farmers (202 female) in

CES and 276 farmers (160 female) in

WES. GAP trainings have proven to

have a significant impact on

increasing smallholder productivity

and production and are significant behavior change activities.

Cooperative Union members were

also trained on safe seed handling

and distribution, and proper usage of hermetic bags and silos. Training statistics are shown for both in Table 7 below:


Table 7: GAP and Post-Trainings Handling Trainings Conducted to New FBO Farmers, Extension Workers, and Cooperatives.

Type of Training State Males Females Total Extension Total

GAP Training of Trainers CES 298 202 500 0 500

WES 116 160 276 0 276

Sub-Total 298 202 500 0 500

Post-Harvest Handling for

Coops

CES 40 8 48 6 54

WES 26 8 34 8 42

Sub-Total 66 16 82 14 96

TOTAL 364 218 582 14 596

7. Grants

FARM II managed to successfully undertake a total of 411 grants in support of the distribution of the seeds and cassava stems to selected FBOs.

In support of the issuance of upcoming grants, the project conducted a needs assessment of the

cooperative unions, developed preliminary criteria for a seed-multiplication public-private partnership

grant, and a business delivery service grant. A grants training and strategy session was also given which included senior-technical level project personnel from all three states.

8. Cross-Cutting Activities 8.1 Youth

Making Cents, one of FARM II’s consortium partners, conducted a Youth in Agricultural assessment in

all three Equatorias to achieve an understanding of youth’s current participation in the agricultural value

chain and capacity building needs, and the assessment of market segments affording the greatest

opportunities for increasing their income. They found that FARM had been youth neutral – neither

promoting nor obstructing youth participation – and as youth awareness grows, youth participation in

the project is promising.

Youth are keen to move away from subsistence agriculture, but do want to support staple crops and the

family farm as they see this as critical to their individual and family’s food

security. All interviewed youth indicated that the two biggest barriers

limiting agricultural production were the high cost of clearing land and the

lack of high quality local seeds. Some youth saw these barriers as

representing opportunities for them to become service providers so as to

promote growth in the agricultural sector in their communities. They see

their elders as an impediment in their learning new technical agricultural

skills and they would prefer a combination of classroom and practical

experience as the best approach to learning these new skills. They also

prefer to work in youth-only FBOs that are comprised of both female and

male. The assessment also found that many of the youth require

foundational life skills and many need basic numeracy training before they

can move on to technical, entrepreneurship, and business skills.


An interesting finding is the youth’s perception of themselves as they see themselves as a failure if they

stay as agriculturalists, but they also see themselves as immobile, undereducated, and fit for nothing else.

This finding is significant as it may be the cause of youth not being engaged in farming and moving to

urban areas as soon as they can. But it was also found that they are still tied to their families and much

of their urban income is used to purchase commodities for families, money is taken home, and they still

participate in farming during busy seasons such as planting and harvesting.

Due to the short-term nature of FARM II, the project is exploring the possibility to pilot a few youth

group activities into existing project activities planned through the remainder of the project.

9. Monitoring and Evaluation

Upon submission of the draft Workplan and PMP to USAID, the M&E Department has been revising and

developing appropriate data collection instruments. This is an ongoing process as the project picks up

on field activities. M&E staff members are also engaged with seconding STTAs on assignment such as the

Norman Borlaug Institute-Texas A&M (yield data collection on maize, beans, groundnuts, and cassava)

and Making Cents (Youth Assessment).

9.1 Technology

Considering new data collection technologies, FARM II ventured to train M&E and Marketing staff in the

use of smartphones and the integration of data collected into a web-based dashboard. FARM had

previously piloted a market price data collection scheme using smartphones with data reported on a

web-based platform and FARM II is in the process of enlarging both the areas market prices collection

and distribution. The ambition is to limit, if not eliminate, paper and pencil data collection which is

rampant with the possibility of errors into a mostly error-free ‘right now’ or ‘almost right now’

electronic data collection system.

10. Security

The armed conflict and the ensuing worsening economic situation are affecting the implementation of

FARM II. Although the conflict is mainly confined to the North, the South has become part of the tribal struggle between the Dinka and the Nuer.

The disruption of oil production and export has had an economic impact throughout the country with

the South Sudanese Pound (SSP) in rapid decline against other stable currencies and causing hardship to

import food, fuel, and other commodities into the country. The following is an outline of how these

insecurity issues are playing out within the Greenbelt region where FARM II operates.

10.1 Eastern Equatoria State

The project is currently working in three of the eight counties in EES: Magwi, Ikwotos, and Torit. In

general EES is subject to intra- and inter-communal conflicts; seeing disputes mostly between agro-

pastoralists groups over natural resources, traditional cattle raiding, and revenge killings. These disputes do not have a direct impact on FARM II activities.


However, EES is susceptible to ongoing political tensions and divisions. There is a strong drive for

federalism which is regarded as a threat to the central government. This in turn feeds into a tradition of

mistrust being fostered between the Dinka and the local communities. Historically, the Dinka have

always been regarded as interlopers. Should the Dinka ever become openly dominant in EES, this could

lead to future confrontation. The main risks to the project currently emanates from the emergence of

criminal gangs in the Torit area and acts of banditry on roads near Kapoeta. Currently, by following

basic risk mitigation protocols, these can easily be managed. From a project implementation perspective, EES has been assessed as the safest Equatorian State.

10.2 Central Equatoria State

The worsening economic situation has undoubtedly propelled crime in Juba. Some individuals are now

turning to crime to survive and over the last 3 months incidents of break-ins and armed robbery have

risen steeply. This has directly impacted on another USAID financed project implemented by Abt. On

July 14, the Health Systems Strengthening Project (HSSP) compound and office were broken into by a

group of armed intruders resulting in the theft of project assets.

Also of concern is the increasing number of indiscriminate, random armed robberies occurring on

Central Equatorial State arterial roads. The Juba-Yei road is particularly favored by opportunistic bandits

due to the high frequency of traffic travelling between the two towns. It is probable that the robberies

are being conducted by local security force personnel. Most local security personnel are not paid

regularly and some have not been paid in four months. As a result of the robberies and accompanying

murders, FARM II, like many programs and NGO’s, has stopped using the road. These security

restrictions are now impacting program planning and operations. For safety reasons, FARM II

management has requested approval for all staff supporting the Yei hub to fly between Juba and Yei and for logistical items to be air freighted to Yei.

Some disputes over land boundaries have arisen in Central Equatoria because land owners regard

encroachment from the suburbs of Yei into rural areas will lead to a reduction of land for agricultural

production. The influx of mostly Dinka IDPs into the Yei area and the surrounding communities has

resulted in some fear developing within the host communities. However, to date the Dinka IDPs and the

local communities have co-existed peacefully. This is attributed to the fact that the County

Commissioner has distributed land to the Dinka pastoralists, which lies outside of the agricultural belt.

The project continues to operate in Yei, Morobo, and Kajo-Keji counties.

10.3 Western Equatoria State

The Farm II project is currently operating in three of the 10 counties in WES, Maridi, Mundri West, and

Yambio. The historical risks to these counties from the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) raiding parties are

now greatly diminished in that LRA now appears to be a spent force. The greatest risk currently

emanates from the Dinka IDP pastoralists, who as a result of the civil war, have migrated from Unity

State and the Greater Bahr Al Ghazal Region to WES. The Dinka pastoralists and their cattle continually

encroach upon local agricultural land and this has led to clashes. To compound matters, the Dinka

dominated SPLA units stationed in WES collaborate with and protect their fellow Dinka pastoralists.

The Dinka SPLA also regard the local militia, ‘the arrow boys’ as a threat to Dinka encroachment and

possible settlement of Dinka herdsmen in Maridi and West Mundri and are intent on curbing the

operational capability of ‘the arrow boys’. Fighting between these two groups erupted in Maridi and

West Mundri in June of this year. This prompted the relocation of the HSSP team from these areas. This

resulted in a severe disruption to FARM II program planning and project operations as the seed and


cassava distribution was delayed. The teams only recently returned to Maridi and West Mundri following

an improvement in the security situation. However, tensions between the SPLA and ‘the arrow boys’

still exist.

11. Personnel

The following Table 8 list newly arrived staff members:

Table 8: New Staff Joining FARM II (from April 16 to July 15, 2015).

No Category Staff Names Position Post Start Date

1 Abt- Expat Stig Hansen COP Juba 28 June 2015

2 Abt- Expat Sandra Basgall M&E Manager Juba 29-Apr-15

3 Abt- Expat Bagie Sherchand Agricultural Value Chain Director Juba 11-May-15

4 Abt- Expat Kamille Beye State Coordinator Yei 9-May-15

5 Abt- LCN Alex Taban Office Assistant Juba 13-May-15

6 Abt- LCN Esther Gbanima Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist Juba 25-May-15

7 Abt- LCN Moi Francis Alex Finance & Admin Manager Yambio 8-May-15

8 Abt- LCN Tabule Noah Capacity building Coordinator Yei 2-Jun-15

9 ACDI/Voca - LCN Levi Mogga Yona Marketing Specialist Juba 25 May, 2015

10 ACDI/Voca - LCN Ivu Charles Kenyi Agriculture Production Coordinator Torit 13 July, 2015

The following Table 9 list staff that have left the project:

Table 9: Staff Who Left FARM II (from April 16 to July 15, 2015)

No Category Staff Names Position Post Start Date

1 Abt- Expat Tyrone Gaston COP Juba 27 May 2015

2 RSM- LCN Michael Boboya Driver Yei 15 July 2015

This makes a total of 82 staff at all locations of which 28 are ABT staff; 33, AAH/I; 14, RSM; and 7,

ACDI/VOCA (Table 9).

Table 10: Current Staffing by Location and Organization.

Partner Juba Yei Yambio Torit TOTAL

ABT 16 3 5 4 28

AAH/I 2 12 11 8 33

RSM 6 2 3 3 14

ACDI/VOCA 4 1 1 1 7

TOTAL 28 18 20 16 82


12. Key Activities Planned for Next Period

12.1 Component 1: Agricultural Markets

1. Continuing interaction with both the WFP and EABL to advance partnerships;

2. Continuing interaction with the three financial institutions to finalize the financial products;

3. Training on crop conditioning and crop quality will be rolled out;

4. Training on financial literacy and access to credit and finance will be rolled out;

5. Training on collective marketing will be rolled out;

6. Organizing a preliminary stakeholder meeting/industry roundtable to sensitize the grain industry

participants on forming a competitiveness council in Juba;

7. Conducting at least one Farmer Trader Forum at the State level;

8. Training of Cooperatives in the use of SMS for collection of Market Price Information;

9. Conducting consultations with mobile operators/Companies (VivaCel, MTN and Zain) in provision

of bulk SMS services for Cooperative Unions use;

10. Concluding the capacity assessment of Cooperatives;

11. Participating in processing of in-kind grants for Cooperative Unions.

12.2 Component 2: Agriculture Productivity

1. Finalizing seed distribution to beneficiaries - especially cassava in Mundri and Maridi;

2. Conducting yield assessment from selected beneficiaries;

3. Conducting assessment of new payams to identify production potential;

4. Finalizing demonstration plots in EES and WES;

5. Conducting field days to FPLCs in EES, CES, and WES;

6. Distributing hermetic bags to farmers through cooperative unions;

7. Conducting trainings on postharvest activities, especially the use of hermetic bags and postharvest

equipment.

8. Conducting Public Service Announcement and Alternative Communications Assessment through

BBC Media Action 9. Conducting Seed Multiplication Assessment

12.3 Component 3: Capacity Building

1. Advancing the Organizational Capacity Assessment of Unions;

2. Reviewing curriculum to improve public service extension;

3. Training on crop conditioning and crop quality will be conducted;

4. Facilitating policy dialogue trainings;

5. Training on financial literacy and access to credit and finance;

6. Training extension workers (public and FARM II Project);

7. Training on collective marketing;

8. Training of Cooperatives in the use of SMS for collection of Market Price Information;

9. Concluding the Public extension and Payam level Assessments;

10. Improving business, management and service provision skills of private sector, including MSME’s;

11. Improving capacity of public sector for development of enabling environment (policy, legislation,

regulatory) to support market-led agriculture;

12. Strengthening the public sector’s capacity to provide quality services;


13. Conducting cooperative trainings for selected FBOs to strengthen their capacity to increase

aggregation and market;

14. Conducting post-harvest handling (crop conditioning) training in all three States;

15. Launching of a Business Development Service Provider grant in order to identify and select one BDS

to receive business development services to improve management and technical capacity over the

life of the program;

16. Conducting meetings/trainings on public policies and enabling environment in all three States;

17. Launching a Competitiveness Council to effectively improve the dialogue between stakeholders in

the agriculture sector.

18. Delivering a Do-No-Harm Training to Juba and field staff.

12.4 Grants

1. Issuing of a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) grant to a local seed multiplication company;

2. Issuing of a Business Development Services (BDS) grant to a local organization capable of providing

business development services to the project’s client base;

3. Issuing of in-kind grants for hermetic bags in support of the Cooperative Unions, as a proven

measure to reduce post-harvest loss;

4. Issuing of pilot in-kind enterprise grants to introduce processing, drying, and other potential

equipment with the aim to focus on value-added activities that can be scaled up. Likely to occur at

the Cooperative level. However, whenever appropriate, enterprise driven grants will be identified;

5. Upon the completion of needs assessment conducted on the public extension service, the Innovative

Grant Fund (IGF) will seek to grant, likely in-kind grants, to amplify the reach of public extension agents into small-holder farmer’s plots.

12.5 Monitoring and Evaluation

1. Continuing to develop data gathering tools for use in the project;

2. Digitizing those tools that the technical staff sees useful to collect data electronically;

3. Integrating data, coop, FBOs, lead farmers, beneficiary farmers, and others onto project maps using

AcrGIS;

4. Training staff in the use of smartphone and other types of data collection;

5. Visiting the field to assess how well extension agents are using both digital and paper and pencil data

collection tools; 6. Training staff on M&E and gender.

farm ii quarterly report april-july 2015

Documents