farmers' organizations for africa, caribbean and pacific ... · islands farmers organization...

Farmers' Organizations for Africa, Caribbean

and Pacific - FO4ACP

Main Summary Programme Document

2

Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 4

1. Rationale ............................................................................................................................................ 8

1.1 Regional, sector context and problems analysis .............................................................................. 8

1.2 Stakeholders .................................................................................................................................... 9

1.3 Lessons learned and SFOAP self-assessment .............................................................................. 12

2. Description ........................................................................................................................................ 17

2.1 Strategy and Approach ................................................................................................................... 17

2.2 Programme description ............................................................................................................. 18

2.2.1 Target country(ies), direct and indirect target group and geographical coverage ................. 18

2.2.2 Goal and objectives ..................................................................................................................... 21

2.2.3 Components and key activities by component ............................................................................ 22

2.3 Cross- cutting Issues ................................................................................................................ 28

2.4 Complementarity actions and Donor coordination .................................................................... 29

2.5 Risks and mitigation measures ................................................................................................. 31

3. Implementation and supervision arrangements ................................................................................ 32

3.1 Implementation procedures and programme management, including implementing partners and

implementation agreements ................................................................................................................. 32

IFAD as the implementing partner ........................................................................................................ 32

Implementation responsibilities ............................................................................................................ 32

Implementation period and workplan .................................................................................................... 36

Supervision arrangements ................................................................................................................... 36

3.2 Monitoring, evaluation and reporting .............................................................................................. 37

Monitoring ............................................................................................................................................ 37

Reporting and disbursement modalities ............................................................................................... 37

3.3 Communication and visibility plan .................................................................................................. 38

3.4 Knowledge management, scaling up/uptake and sustainability ...................................................... 39

Knowledge management and learning ................................................................................................. 39

Scaling up/uptake and sustainability of grant results ............................................................................ 40

4. Budget and Workplan ....................................................................................................................... 41

4.1 Costs, Financing and Fiduciary Aspects ........................................................................................ 41

Regional Allocation............................................................................................................................... 42

4.2 Tentative workplan and timing ........................................................................................................ 44

4

Executive Summary Farmers’ and rural producers' organizations (FOs) in African, Caribbean and Pacific countries (ACP)

have a dual role of promoting the recognition of family farming and smallholder’ interests and rights, and

providing services to their members to engage on better terms with other economic players in agricultural

value chains.

FOs and their member smallholders face many constraints limiting them from fully benefitting from profitable

economic activities. These include price instability, strong competition in the market, limited access to quality

inputs, lack of infrastructure, weak support services and access to technologies, unfavourable policy

environment, climatic and environmental challenges.

The partnership between IFAD and FOs has been particularly accelerating and strengthening the focus on

national FOs and regional FO networks under the aegis of the Farmers’ Forum Process, a bottom-up

process of consultation and dialogue between FOs, IFAD and governments focused on rural development

and poverty reduction.

The design of Farmers’ Organizations for ACP is the result of the joint effort and consultations among all

stakeholders and is based on the experience and results of the Farmers' Africa programme (2013-2018)

and its two components: Farmers’ Fighting Poverty (FFP)/Africa (2013-2015) and the Support to Farmers’

Organizations in Africa (SFOAP) pilot (2009-2013) and main (2013-2018) phases.1

This Action is perfectly placed to support the achievement of the ambitious SDGs of eradicating poverty

(SDG1) and ending hunger and malnutrition, achieving food security and promoting sustainable agriculture

(SDG2).

Programme financing and partners

IFAD supervises and co-finances the FO4ACP. The European Union (EU) provides funding through IFAD.

The total cost of the programme is around EUR 42 million, which includes a contribution from the EU of EUR

40 million.

Priority Areas

The FO4ACP intervention will focus on the following priority areas:

Facilitating the integration of smallholder and FOs in value chains by strengthening the FOs

capacity to effectively provide economic services to their members and improve and access to finance and

de-risking instruments;

Supporting FOs capacity to influence policy dialogue and the governance mechanisms of the value

chains at all levels;

Supporting the institutional development of FOs through capacity building and contributing to the

financing of FOs’ core costs;

Facilitating knowledge sharing between ACP FOs through the promotion of exchanges among

peers for innovation, generation of knowledge products, replication and scaling up in the areas of production,

processing and marketing.

Objectives

The overall objective of the programme is to increase income and to improve livelihood, food and nutrition security and safety of organized smallholder and family farmers in the target areas of the Africa, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries.

With FO4ACP great emphasis is put on the FOs integration into value chains, specific objectives are as follows:

FOs and farmer-led enterprises improve technical and economic services to their members along

1 Hyperlink to the SFOAP Publication on programme results and achievements (IFAD, 2018).

https://xdesk.ifad.org/sites/pmi/RISE/FO/SFOAP%20grants/SFOAP%20II%20(Main%20Phase)/IFAD/SFOAP%20Results%20publication/SFOAP_Results_web.pdf

https://xdesk.ifad.org/sites/pmi/RISE/FO/SFOAP%20grants/SFOAP%20II%20(Main%20Phase)/IFAD/SFOAP%20Results%20publication/SFOAP_Results_web.pdf

5

the value chains in order to support i) their business ambitions, ii) ensure their profitable engagement in markets and iii) integration into value chains and make FOs competitive players.

FOs influence policies and business environments by influencing policy dialogue and the governance mechanisms of the value chains at all levels for the transformation of family farming and the development of sustainable, adaptive economic initiatives and farmer-led enterprises.

FOs accountable organisations able to effectively perform their institutional functions: i) improve their accountability to their base, ii) have solid governance, and enhance recognition of FOs by governments, value chains stakeholders and donors, for the sustainability of economic activities.

Stakeholders The programme's primary stakeholders and beneficiaries are FOs and their smallholder members in ACP countries.

① African Region - Smallholder and family farmers' member of existing local and national Farmers Organizations of

African countries, in particular the members of those NFOs that are affiliated to the 5 Regional FOs

(RFOs)members of PAFO2 (EAFF, PROPAC, ROPPA, SACAU and UMNAGRI). RFOs are membership

based organizations, they are present in 49 countries and represent over 52 million smallholders (including

farmers, fishermen, breeders, pastoralists, producers), 26 million being women.

- AgriCord is a non-profit development alliance mandated by 35 professional FOs and their

cooperative businesses from countries in Europe, Canada, Africa and Asia. Agri-agencies provide

specialized services, tools and approached developed to answer the needs of different segments of FOs.

The key partners of the programme are thus RFOs, their Apex organization PAFO and AgriCord.

② Pacific Region

- A key partner for the programme for reaching its target groups has been identified in the Pacific

Islands Farmers Organization Network (PIFON). PIFON is s an umbrella organization informally operating

since 2008 and formally registered in 2013 with 13 foundation members from 6 Pacific Island countries,

including national associations, federations and cooperatives.

③ Caribbean Region The FOs of the Caribbean countries have not constituted a single and inclusive regional apex organization. Therefore key partners for the programme have been identified at inception through a competitive call for proposals. The resulting recipients are: AgriCord and the FAO Regional Office for Latin America and Caribbean in coordination with PROCASUR.

Unifying principles throughout the programme - Ownership: FOs define objectives and activities based on their respective strategic plans

- Flexibility: The programme is adaptable to emerging opportunities, the evolution of smallholder priorities and to the international agenda for the agriculture sector

- Subsidiarity: The principle of subsidiarity guides the programme and determines the attribution of responsibilities in the implementation of activities in order to maximize synergies and complementarities between the different levels of intervention

- Coordination with complementary projects: Coordination is ensured to develop synergies between different projects and interventions at national and regional levels and to learn from their experiences

- Peer learning and inclusiveness: Peer-to-peer support and knowledge-sharing from country-level activities are promoted, and the regional and continental networks play a key role to develop linkages and

2 Members of the Pan African Farmers' Organisation (PAFO): Eastern Africa Farmers Federation (EAFF), Plateforme Sous-

Régionale des organisations Paysannes d'Afrique Centrale (Sub-Regional Platform of Farmers Organisations in Central Africa) (PROPAC), the Réseau des organisations paysannes et de producteurs de l'Afrique de l'Ouest (Network of Farmers Organisations and Agricultural Producers of West Africa) (ROPPA), the Southern African Confederation of Agricultural Unions (SACAU)

6

facilitate networking and exchanges at all levels

- Mainstream gender and youth: Focus on women and young people is at the core of the programme and special interventions are developed to promote their participation

Implementation responsibilities Funds go to regional networks, AgriCord and FAO. So that, they are responsible for the overall coordination and implementation of activities within their region and to channel funds to the NFOs, agri-agencies and sub-implementing partners. The NFOs are the co-implementers of the programme and are responsible for the execution of national activities.

7

List of Acronyms

ACP Africa Caribbean and Pacific Secretary

ACODEA Agencia de Cooperación al Desarrollo de la Agricultura

AFDI Agriculteurs Français et Développement International

AGRA Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa

ASARECA Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa

AU African Union

AWPB Annual Work Plan and Budget

CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme

CEMAC Economic and Monetary Union of Central African States

CFA Comprehensive Framework for Action

CFS Committee on Food Security

CILSS Comité permanent Inter Etats de Lutte Contre la Sécheresse au Sahel

COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa

CTA Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation

EAFF East African Farmers Federation

EAC East Africa Community

EC European Commission

ECCAS Economic Community of Central African States

ECOWAP Regional Agricultural Policy for West Africa of the ECOWAS

ECOWAS Economic Community Of West African States

ENPI European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument

FAFO Farmers’ Forum

FANRPAN Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Network

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FARA Forum for African Agriculture Research

FFP Farmers Fighting Poverty

FOSCA Farm Organization Support Centre for Africa

FOs Farmers’ Organizations

KM Knowledge Management

NFOs National Farmers’ Organizations

MDG Millennium Development Goal

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development

NFO National Farmers’ Organisation

PAFO Pan-African Farmer Organization

PAU Politique Agricole de l’UEMOA

PIFON Pacific Island Farmers Organisation Network

POW Programme of Work

PMI Sustainable Production, Markets and Institutions Division (IFAD)

PROPAC Plateforme Sous-régionale des Organisations Paysannes d’Afrique Centrale

RFOs Regional Farmers’ Organizations

ROPPA Réseau des Organisations Paysannes et des Producteurs Agricoles de l’Afrique de l’Ouest

SACAU Southern Africa Confederation of Agriculture Unions

SADC Southern African Development Community

SAPs Structural Adjustment Programs

SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation

TAF Technical Assistance Facility

UEMOA Commission del’Union Economique et Monétaire Ouest Africaine

UMAGRI Union Maghrebine des Agriculteurs

UPA DI Union des Producteurs Agricoles – Développement International

WCA West and Central Africa Division (IFAD)

1. Rationale

1.1 Regional, sector context and problems analysis

Poverty is still prominent in African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, and is particularly concentrated in Sub-

Saharan Africa (SSA) where 41 percent of the population lived on $1.90 or less a day in 2013. This implies that in

SSA 389 million people remain in extreme poverty—more than in all other regions combined.

ACP countries account for 11 percent of the world’s population. In Africa, population is especially growing fast with

an expected rise from 817 million in 2000 to 2.5 billion by 2050. African population is also young, with 60 percent

under 25 years of age in 2015.

Also, while ACP countries are urbanizing rapidly, large segments of population live in rural areas (65–70 per cent in

the majority of African countries with a share of poor exceeding 80 per cent). Agriculture remains the backbone of

ACP economies. In Africa only, it accounts for a third of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) region-wide and

employs two-thirds of the labor force, with the poorest countries most heavily reliant on this sector.

Africa is dominated by family farming, with 33 million farms of less than 2 hectares, accounting for 80 percent of all

farms. Family farms are the largest private sector group in national economies and contribute about 70 per cent of

the total food supply in Africa, feeding most of the urban populations. It is thus impossible for Africa to end hunger

and reduce poverty unless it significantly increases production and incomes on Africa’s smallholder farms.

African agriculture has enormous potential for growth. This stems from the continent’s abundant natural resources

and the large yield gap that countries can explore to increase food security and reduce poverty. A 1 per cent

increase in agricultural per capita GDP reduced the poverty gap five times more than a 1 percent increase in GDP

per capita in other sectors, mainly among the poorest people.

Farmers’ organizations (FOs) have a dual role in promoting the recognition of family farming and smallholder’

rights, and providing services to their members to profitable engagement within value chains with other economic

players, thus making evident the multidimensional environmental, economic and social added value of family

farming, for example in terms of food security, maintenance of ecosystems and rural landscapes, preservation of

biodiversity and cultural heritage and socio-economic foundation of rural communities.

FOs can indeed be significant economic players, providing a wide range of key economic services to their

members to support profitable engagement in markets, thus contributing to sustained growth processes and

tackling the challenges of reducing rural poverty.

FOs play also a crucial role in lobbying for increased investments in agriculture that can benefit family farming and

smallholders. Improving agriculture government budget allocations along value chains offers opportunities and

added-values for family farming in line with green economy principles. This includes, for example, improvement of

smallholder working conditions and opportunities for accessing new markets.

Family farming and smallholder systems face several structural and functional challenges, among them

environmental degradation and climate change impacts, hindering the goal to achieve food and nutrition security

together with increased incomes and improved livelihoods. ACP small-scale family farmers are expected to be the

worst affected by climate change, with erratic rainfall and increasing temperatures already causing crop failures

when these are not destroyed by the impacts of extreme events (flooding and droughts).

FOs (and extension services) represent a major opportunity to bring social learning on adaptation from the

community-level to the national level, promoting mainstreaming institutional and organizational approaches that

allow key principles of sustainable agriculture and value chains to be part of regional and national policies,

reflecting the challenges of ensuring a sustainable agricultural production for food security and increased incomes

and improved livelihoods. Thus, mainstreaming sustainability principles and adaptation is more than scaling up of

specific ecological and adaptation practices or knowledge, it is about mainstreaming institutional and organizational

approaches that allow this knowledge to be generated.

9

The role of FOs as representatives of the farming community at the national, regional and international levels is

also increasingly recognized today. The United Nations (UN) declared 2012 as the International Year of

Cooperatives and 2014 as the International Year of Family Farming. On 20th December 2017, the UN General

Assembly proclaimed 2019-2028 the UN Decade of Family Farming encouraging all States to “develop, improve

and implement public policies on family farming” and inviting Governments and other relevant stakeholders,

including international and regional organizations, civil society, the private sector and academia, to actively support

the implementation of the Decade. This achievement was the result of a campaign driven mainly by family farming

organizations.

These events acknowledge the invaluable role that FOs play as chain stakeholders to support market integration of

smallholders and in in shaping policies for agriculture and sustainable development, providing services to

smallholders, generating employment and social integration, reducing poverty and enhancing food security.

1.2 Stakeholders

The program's primary stakeholders and beneficiaries are FOs and their smallholder members in ACP countries.

The selection of FOs that will be supported will be made at inception (see more below) or defined in the course of

implementation.

IFAD, a specialized agency of the UN, is selected as implementing partner given its unique expertise, extensive

partnerships and dialogue with FOs and AgriCord, and its role as the leader of an alliance of partners in support of

FOs.

The experience and lessons learnt in the partnership between IFAD and FOs has been particularly accelerating

and strengthening the focus on national apex FOs and regional FO networks under the aegis of the Farmers’

Forum Process, a bottom-up process of consultation and dialogue between FOs, IFAD and governments focused

on rural development and poverty reduction. Launched in 2006 and fully aligned with IFAD's strategic objectives,

the Forum was established as a permanent process with a Global Meeting in conjunction with the IFAD Governing

Council every other year. The Forum process is fully institutionalized within IFAD and is rooted in concrete

partnership and collaboration at the country and regional level (for further information:

http://www.ifad.org/farmer/index.htm). In 2016 the Farmers Forum process was further decentralized with a

regional segment taking place between global meetings at IFAD HQs every four years.

The direct beneficiaries of the programme are the following:

African region

The primary beneficiaries of the programme are the smallholder and family farmers member of existing local and

national Farmers Organizations of African countries.

The key partners of the programme are thus RFOs, its Apex organization PAFO and AgriCord.

RFOs are membership based organizations representing and grouping together 69 national FOs in their respective

regions, including women organizations, federations, commodity associations, cooperatives, unions and advocacy

based organizations.

They are present in 53 countries and represent over 52 million smallholders (including farmers, fishermen,

breeders, pastoralists, producers), 26 million being women.

Since their creation in the 2000s, RFOs recorded substantial growth. They gained sound experience and capacities

in technical and financial management and have built fruitful collaboration with development partners.

In particular the members of those NFOs that are affiliated to the 5 Regional FOs – RFOs - networks (EAFF,

PROPAC, ROPPA, SACAU and UMNAGRI) members of PAFO:

http://www.ifad.org/farmer/index.htm

10

i. Eastern Africa Farmers Federation:

Eastern Africa Farmers’ Federation is a Regional Farmer Organization (RFO) whose membership comprises

24 apex farmer organizations in 10 countries in Eastern Africa (Burundi, Djibouti, DRC, Eritrea, Ethiopia,

Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Uganda, and United Rep. of Tanzania). The Eastern African Farmers

Federation was formed in 2001 and since its creation, EAFF has been playing its role to voice legitimate

concerns and interests of farmers of the region with the aim of enhancing regional cohesiveness and social-

economic status of the farmers.

ii. Plateforme Régionale Des Organisations Paysannes D'Afrique Centrale

Plateforme Sous-Régionale des organisations Paysannes d'Afrique Central (PROPAC) is a regional

organization founded in 2005, bringing together 10 farmers’ organizations in the countries of the Economic

Community of Central African States (ECCAS) region – Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, the Central African

Republic, Chad, the Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and Sao Tome

and Principe. The PROPAC has a vision of "family farming being enterprising, sustainable and modernized in

order to ensure the economic, social, cultural and ecological functions for food security and sovereignty." Its

purpose is to harmonize the strategies and actions of Central African NFOs to address their concerns in the

development, implementation and evaluation of policies and strategies for agricultural and rural development

at all levels.

iii. Réseau des Organisations Paysannes et de Producteurs de l'Afrique de l'Ouest

ROPPA is a membership based organization including 13 national farmers' organizations (Benin, Burkina

Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Sierra Leone,

Togo) and associate member farmers' organizations (Cape Verde, Nigeria). Since its creation in June 2000,

ROPPA has been positioning itself as the vehicle for advocating and promoting family farming, which is the

main agro-pastoral production system in West Africa.

iv. Southern African Confederation of Agricultural Unions

SACAU’s core membership consists of national general interest apex farmers’ organisations. Membership

currently stands at 17 farmer organisations in 12 countries in southern Africa (Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho,

Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe). The

vision of SACAU is to bring about a vibrant, prosperous and sustainable farming sector that ensures food

security and contributes to economic growth in Southern Africa. Its mission is to be the main voice of farmers

and to promote and ensure strong and effective farmers/producers’ organisations in all countries in Southern

Africa.

v. Union Maghrébine Et Nord-Africaine Des Agriculteurs UMNAGRI

UMNAGRI is the regional professional organization of North Africa established in 1989. Its membership includes seven national FOs in North African countries – Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Sudan and Tunisia. The UMAGRI aims to ingrain team spirit among FOs in the region towards the consolidation of cooperation and coordination of efforts and action programs in light of economic developments at regional and international levels, including those related to agriculture. The UMAGRI must support the intensification of intra-regional cooperation in order to address the challenges facing the agricultural sector in the region.

Thanks to improved institutional capacities, they effectively conducted advocacy initiatives to promote family

farming and developed strategies to influence agricultural policies at all levels. Members of various task forces and

consultative bodies on sector policies, they are championing youth in agriculture, and are key strategic partners of

regional integration institutions such as the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the Southern

African Development Community (SADC), the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the

Alliance for Commodity Trade in Eastern and Southern Africa (ACTESA). Further, they collaborate with the

CAADP.

The organizations successfully positioned, regionally and globally, as the main voice of African farmers in the

respective regions.

11

The PAFO is the Apex platform of African FOs and a key partner for the programme. Based on the decision of the

five RFOs, PAFO was created in 2010 with the support of the SFOAP and under the sponsorship of the African

Union. PAFO is Africa’s first continent-wide FO.

In the last years, PAFO strengthened partnership with the AU in the framework of CAADP and with other

international partners including the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), IFAD, the EU and the Technical

Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA). Today PAFO is recognized as a key player in the policy arena

and will have an important responsibility to ensure farmers’ interests and aspirations continue to be reflected in

Africa’s development initiatives, policies and strategies.

AgriCord. AgriCord is a non-profit development alliance mandated by 35 professional FOs and their cooperative

businesses from countries in Europe, Canada, Africa and Asia.

AgriCord has official development assistance status with the OECD, and operates via its 12 member agri-

agencies3, non-governmental organizations for development cooperation specialized in FOs capacity building and

operational in the field. Agri-agencies provide specialized services, tools and approached developed to answer the

needs of different segments of FOs.

AgriCord and agri-agencies bring experience and know-how from the implementation of Farmers Fighting Poverty,

operating since 2007 and supporting more than 600 FOs per year in more than 50 developing countries.

Pacific Region

The direct beneficiaries of the program in this region are the smallholder and family farmers members of existing

local and national FOs of Pacific countries.

A key partner for the programme for reaching the programme target groups has been identified in Pacific Islands

Farmers Organization Network (PIFON).

PIFON is s an umbrella organization informally operating since 2008 and formally registered in 2013 with 13

foundation members from 6 Pacific Island countries, including national associations, federations and cooperatives.

Since 2013, PIFON is the Regional Implementing Agency for MTCP 2 guiding five of their national members (from

the Fiji, Samoa, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Tonga) in the implementation of the programme.

Caribbean Region

The direct beneficiaries of the program in this region are the smallholder and family farmers members of existing

local and national FOs of Caribbean countries. The FOs of the Caribbean countries have not constituted a single

and inclusive regional apex organization of the region. Therefore key partners and recipient for the programme

have been identified through a competitive call for proposals launched during the inception phase.The resulting

recipients in the region are: AgriCord and FAO Regional Office for Latina America and Caribbean.

The program in the Caribbean region will be implemented by the following partners and key stakeholders:

- AgriCord, the grant recipient, is an alliance of 13 agri-agencies. Four of its member agri-agencies (AA),

Acodea, Afdi, Trias, and Upa Di will implement this action together with their FO partners at the national,

subnational and local levels. AgriCord will operate in collaboration with CLAC, the Latin American and

Caribbean Network of FairTrade Small Producers and Workers (CLAC).

- FAO´s Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean will operate in consortium with Corporación

PROCASUR.

Under a specific governance mechanism to coordinate the implementation of the activities, the program will focus

on strengthen FOs capacities and improve their access to services for their members, special with rural women and

youth, while fostering their institutional development. This will be reached by provinding direct technical assistance

to the FOs, investing on innovative solutions for commercialization and market access, generating information on

3 Acodea (Spain), Aev (Italy), Afdi (france), Agriterra (the Netherlands) , Aha (Germany), Asiadhrra (Asia), Asprodeb (Senegal), Csa (Belgium), Fert (France), FFD (Finalnd), Trias (Belgium), Upa DI (Canada), We Effect (Sweden)

12

family farming in the Caribbean region and key value chains. At the same time, the program will foster cooperation

activities between FOs, in order to exchange experiences and build synergies at national and regional level, in

order to facilitate their political incidence in different decision-making process.

1.3 Lessons learned and SFOAP self-assessment

The design of Farmers’ Organizations for ACP is the result of the joint effort and consultations among all

stakeholders and is based on the experience and results of the Farmers' Africa programme (2013-2018)

implemented with the support of the EU and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), and in

particular on the lessons learnt in the implementation of its two components:

Farmers’ Fighting Poverty (FFP)/Africa (2013-2015)4, implemented by AgriCord;

The Support to Farmers’ Organizations in Africa (SFOAP) in its pilot (2009-2013)5 and main (2013-2018)6

phases, implemented by the Pan-Africa Farmers’ Organization (PAFO), the five African regional farmers’

organizations (RFOs)7 and their members at the national level (NFOs).

Also, the design of the programme, integrates the experience gained from the implementation of the Medium-term

Cooperation programme with Farmers' Organizations in Asia-Pacific (MTCP) in its phase 2 (2013-2018), funded by

the EU and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and implemented by IFAD, AgriCord and FOs

from Asia-Pacific countries.

The design, also takes into account the results and recommendations emerging from several assessments and

evaluation conducted since 2009, including the EU led final evaluation of the SFOAP pilot phase8, the 2015

SFOAP and FFP/Africa Mid-Term Reviews (MTR)9, the 2017 FFP/Africa evaluation and the assessment led by

RFOs and conducted by independent consultants in 2018.

Overall, conducted assessments and evaluations underline the relevance of the support to FOs and the need for its

continuation. In particular, the 2018 assessment led by RFOs in 2018 highlights the relevance of the SFOAP and

its effectiveness in supporting FOs evolving into strong organizations able to provide services to their members

(see table 1 below).

4 The programme cost was EUR 20.2 million including a contribution of EUR 11.9 million from the EU 5 Financed by the EU and IFAD with an overall budget of EUR 6.1 million 6 Financed by the EU, IFAD, the Swiss and French Development cooperation agencies with an overall budget of EUR 19.9 million 7 East African Farmers Federation (EAFF), Plateforme Sous-régionale des Organisations Paysannes d’Afrique Centrale (PROPAC), Réseau des

Organisations Paysannes et des Producteurs Agricoles de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (ROPPA), Southern African Confederation of Agricultural Unions (SACAU), Union Maghrébine et Nord-Africaine des Agriculteurs (UMNAGRI)

8 The summary of the evaluation report is available here: http://www.sfoap.net/fileadmin/user_upload/sfoap/KB/docs/EC_brochure_8pages_Summary_evaluation_report_EN_bd.pdf

9 The SFOAP MTR report is available here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5ILmiijGdcAQW9KMmZDdnZNR0k/view?usp=sharing

13

Table 1. 2018 SFOAP assessment (summary) against OECD criteria

OECD evaluation

criteria

Assessment

Relevance The relevance of SFOAP has been very strong. The capacity building of FOs at all levels

enabled them to become key actors involved in the main challenges affecting African

family farming. The leverage effect sought in the promotion of economic activities

involving local and national FOs has resulted in concrete cases of scaling up.

Effectiveness SFOAP enabled an undeniable consolidation of the capacities of FOs, particularly at the

national and regional level, with technical teams able to implement strategic plans

validated by their governance. The exchanges between regional networks (inter and intra)

have further consolidated the sense of belonging within FOs.

Efficiency The cumbersome administrative and financial procedures required for the use of public

funds may have affected implementation. However, the high level of financial

management capacity of the regional networks enabled a good rate of disbursement

reaching up to the level of local organizations, thus complementing funds mobilized locally

(leverage effect). Efficiency is considered relatively good, with an overall good rate and

pace of disbursements over the entire implementation period.

Impact The impact of SFOAP is visible at the regional level where networks have become key

actors able to contribute to policies that are relevant to them, centers of knowledge and

coordinators/managers of projects implemented by their members, able to support them

e.g. in the selection, monitoring and financing of economic pilot projects and initiatives.

Sustainability The maturity level being reached by regional networks that have also acquired a great

capacity for resource mobilization are a signal of FOs sustainability. Farmers leaders are

fully involved in the governance of FOs at different levels and the technical teams have

become increasingly competent with a good capacity to provide services.

A wealth of lessons further emerged both from the implementation of the above mentioned programmes and their

assessments and evaluations, and guided the design and formulation of the Farmers’ Organizations for ACP. The

main lessons learnt embedded in the programme are summarized in the table 2 below.

Table 2. Main lessons learnt

Main lessons learnt Input for design

Three main areas

of support

Farmers’ Africa focused on three main areas of support these being economic services provision,

policy engagement and institutional development. Components contributed to fostering

sustainability by supporting FOs to evolve into well-functioning institutions, able to provide

services to their members, influence policy environments and gain recognition from stakeholders

in the sector.

Programme components remain relevant and valid for a new

programme. Nonetheless, emphasis should be placed on FOs

integration into value chains.

Institutional

support

The programme component on institutional development is the one that brought more value for

money. The financing of core costs, capacity building and communication had multiplier effects

by increasing FOs membership (e.g. about 500,000 new individual members recorded by FOs

supported through SFOAP Main Phase), facilitating FOs involvement in policy processes, and

leveraging additional resource mobilization to the benefit of whole farming communities (e.g. over

USD$12,000,000 raised from donors or financial institutions by SFOAP Main Phase supported

FOs). Evidence can be found in all regions and countries.

A programme supporting FOs should keep financing FOs’ core

functions.

Ownership Financially supporting the existing strategies of FOs enabled the development of a rich diversity

of instruments to improve the capacity of FOs to respond to members’ needs. Farmers’ Africa

success very much relies on FOs’ ownership and ability to decide how best to use resources.

The importance given to each component can vary from region to

region and budget allocations should be at the discretion of FOs.

Programme

steering and

coordination

The coordination and interaction between the programme interventions and stakeholders was not

adequate. Coordination between RFOs and AgriCord happened mainly at the yearly General

Assembly of AgriCord or through AgriCord’s participation in the SFOAP Steering Committee.

Concrete interaction and the development of synergies were also weak. In particular, the two

experiences in which the interaction between RFOs and Agri-agencies was set by design didn’t

succeed (e.g. in Central Africa, where UPA-DI supported PROPAC in the implementation of the

component on economic services provision; or in Northern Africa where the programme followed

a twin approach with Fert and UMNAGRI conducting complementary interventions aiming to

redynamize the network).

Farmers’ Africa should be a unique programme and an

effort made to ensure better coordination and interaction at

various levels. Steering processes should be revised and be: (i)

joint; (ii) open to a large number of FOs and agri-agencies

benefiting from the programme; (iii) strongly oriented to

knowledge management (KM) and strategic guidance. Also, an

emphasis should be placed in developing sharing mechanisms,

KM and lessons learning in order to improve programme

efficiency and effectiveness.

Performance by

implementing

partners

Although results achieved in the implementation of the programme are satisfactory, performance

was not uniform in the different regions. RFOs, PAFO and AgriCord showed different absorption

capacities and needs emerging from the programme were not necessarily the same.

To ensure an efficient use of funds and stronger impact, the

allocation of funds should be based on results/performance and

emerging needs by FOs. Also, the annual allocation of funds

made available for programme implementation (from the EU and

15

IFAD) should be flexible enough to respond to FOs needs,

absorption capacity and pace of development.

Gender Ensuring that women and young farmers can have equal access to services that respond to their

specific requirements was a key concern FOs, reflected in their strategies and interventions.

Nonetheless, weak results were recorded in terms of improved women’s leadership within FOs

and no direct or limited support was provided to women-led initiatives. youth leadership and voice

in policy dialogue.

Gender should be mainstreamed and support provided

to women’s initiatives, including in terms of budget.

Complementarities The distinction between the RFOs and AgriCord operations was the level of intervention (local for

AgriCord and from national to continental for SFOAP). Implementation was consistent with the

approach, though some duplications were observed. Nonetheless, a stronger focus on value

chains requires more emphasis - both from RFOs and AgriCord - at the subnational level, the

most appropriate for economic services delivery.

The distinct operational level should remain but more

efforts should be made to ensure synergies and minimize

overlaps. Further, with the aim of reaching stronger impact, the

programme should avoid rigidity in terms of the levels of

interventions of the two actions and will have a stronger focus on

the national and subnational level.

Knowledge

management

Efforts were undertaken by FOs to share and systematize knowledge within their regions.

Nonetheless this didn’t happen adequately across networks and regions.

Knowledge generation and sharing need to be more systematic

and should not rely solely on events but should be more

interactive. More opportunities for exchange should be sought

including with the promotion of peer learning and exchange

initiatives and opportunities. This approach is considered key for

institutional development and should become a central

mechanism to accelerate the learning process by peers

Monitorin

g and Evaluation

(M&E)

Notwithstanding significant advancements by RFOs, M&E was affected by: (i) the lack

of a baseline to appreciate changes; (ii) a too complex logframe including too many indicators

which were often difficult to measure. Collecting sex-disaggregated data was patchy.

M&E should be improved and funds earmarked for the

development of a baseline survey.

IFAD as

implementing

partner

IFAD was selected as implementing partner for both actions given its expertise, partnership and

dialogue with African FOs and partnership developed with AgriCord in support of FOs. During the

programme, IFAD conducted over 55 support and supervision missions in more than 32

countries. This direct support focused on assessing results, addressing issues, providing

implementation support and ensuring proper financial management by partners. Nonetheless, the

possibility for IFAD to provide tailored and programmatic support was hindered by the limited

human and financial resources available.

IFAD plays a key role in ensuring coordination and support to

FOs. Based on the above, it was confirmed as implementing

partner. Additional resources should be earmarked to enable

IFAD to effectively play its role.

16

Flow of funds More flexible and light rules for reporting and disbursement adopted for the SFOAP main phase

compared to the pilot phase (based on the pilot phase evaluation findings) proved to be effective.

This approach should be kept.

As was the case for the SFOAP main phase, requests of payment

from IFAD to the EU will be based on IFAD reporting and planning

(based on supervision missions' reports) completed a few months

later by the full annual technical reporting and planning.

Synergies with

other interventions

There were very limited synergies between FOs and IFAD-supported and EU-financed projects

and initiatives. Also, in the absence of a baseline, improvements were difficult to measure.

Concrete initiatives to ensure synergies should be considered

during inception. The baseline survey to be conducted at

programme inception should take into account also this aspect.

Sustainability Institutional support, long-term partnerships and a strategic dialogue between main stakeholders

and the FOs vision, on their pathway to autonomy and regarding their priorities, are seen crucial

for the sustainability of the results achieved.

The new phase reinforces these points.

2. Description

2.1 Strategy and Approach

The identification of detailed activities to be carried out at the continental level and in each of the regions is entrusted to PAFO, RFOs and their NFOs members, AgriCord and FAO Regional Office and it is based on different approaches in the regions. However a number of common strategic orientations will guide programme implementation at all levels. Ensure ownership: as was the case for the SFOAP programme, all programmed activities, systems or strategies that will benefit from FO4ACP resources will be based on PAFO, RFO/NFO and AgriCord strategic plans. However, the programming exercise also preserves flexibility in the course of implementation with a view to adapt detailed programming to results achieved in the course of the programme, but also to emerging opportunities, to the evolution of smallholder priorities or to the international agenda for the agriculture sector. There will be no parallel structures, mechanisms or activities specific to FO4ACP implementation. Rather, programme activities and systems will be embedded in existing structures, which will contribute to enhanced ownership and stronger impact. A corollary of this orientation is that administrative and financial procedures used in implementing FO4ACP resources will be harmonised as much as possible with general procedures applicable to all of the activities of recipient organisations (provided they respect commonly admitted standards). In parallel, the strengthening of RFOs and AGriCord capacities in terms of reporting and the development of an effective M&E system will be considered key to enable participating FOs to report on results achieved through the support of the Programme. Subsidiarity. The principle of subsidiarity will guide programme implementation and determine the attribution of responsibilities in the implementation of activities under programme components in order to maximise synergies and complementarities between the different levels of intervention. For this to be possible, subsidiary levels should be clear. Information on programme implementation at local, national, regional and continental levels will be shared and considered as mutually supportive. Coordination and consultation between national, regional and continental levels will be maintained through programme implementation to develop synergies, generate stronger impact and to ensure overall coherence. Build for the future: FO4ACP resources target activities that contribute to structuring recipient organisations by setting up major building blocks required to support their institutional development: strategies, procedures, accounting and M&E systems. This will strengthen them as professional organisations able to provide economic services to members, increase their effectiveness and sustainability, and also facilitate further mobilisation of resources with other development partners. Coordinate with complementary projects: Coordination will be ensured during FO4ACP implementation also with a view to develop synergies between different projects and to learn from their various experiences. All National and Regional Farmers Organizations supported by this program have an established linkage with IFAD through the Farmers Forum process, at national, regional and global levels. In Africa and in Asia-Pacific this process is now decentralised and delivered concrete national Action Plans that will further strengthen partnerships and collaborations within IFAD country programs. In most countries, national FOs are closely associated with IFAD COSOP formulations and project designs. This programme is also complementary to: (i) the ASEAN FOs Support Programme, a sister programme implemented by Asian FOs and AgriCord with support from IFAD and the EU in ASEAN countries ; and (ii) the ABC Fund (SIF) which IFAD is planning to establish to invest in smallholder organizations and rural agricultural businesses. Open –amongst others - to all ACP countries, the ABC fund aims to generate positive and measurable social impact for actors in agricultural value chains together with financial return for investors; (iii) the CAADP and the National Agriculture Investments Plans; (iv) the Agreement between AgriCord and FAO "Developing smallholders’ capacities to tackle climate change and improve livelihoods", FO-MAPP interactive online database providing geo-referenced information on local smallholders', family farmers' and

FO4ACP – Main Summary Design Document

18

producers' organizations in Africa, Asia and Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean. This is an IFAD –WRF joint initiative and it is a work in progress. Peer learning and inclusiveness. The development of peer-to-peer support and knowledge sharing from country- level activities to the continental and across – regions (ACP regions) will be considered key for FOs institutional development, Kwnoledge generation and dissemination. RFOs, AgriCord and FAO will play a key role to develop linkages and facilitate networking and exchanges at all levels. Inclusiveness will be promoted, supported and encouraged.

2.2 Programme description

2.2.1 Target country(ies), direct and indirect target group and geographical coverage

FO4ACP target groups consist of:

- Small holder and family farmers affiliated with the five African RFOs and their national

members in 53 countries, which represent about 52 million small farmers, of which more

than 26 million are women (see table 3 below). They will all benefit from FOs increased

capacities and professionalism to influence investments and policies in their favor. 69 NFOs

in 53 countries would financially benefit from the FO4ACP while all members of the five

RFOs would benefit from regional and continental level activities. The NFOs that will directly

benefit from the Programme may vary in the course of implementation on the basis of

indications coming from RFOs, supervision mission and the Mid-term review.

- Smallholder and family farmers affiliated with the member and partners of the Pacific

Islands Farmers Organization Network (PIFON) in 11 countries in the pacific area

- The smallholder and family farmers member of the national and local FOs supported

AgriCord, non-profit development alliance and 9 member agri-agencies whose interventions

with local farmers' organisations also strengthen NFOs in most cases (Africa and

Caribbean);

- In the Caribbean, this project will implement activities in Belize, Cuba10, Dominican

Republic, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, and Saint Lucia and will emphasize on working

with Family Farmers organizations and cooperatives from these countries. Family farmers in

general will benefit from the activities as FOs strengthen their capacity to access and

provide rural services. Special attention will be given to Rural Youth and Women, in order to

empower them and allow their socio-economic authonomy. The project will also have a

regional component that will emphasize on generating policy dialogue spaces in regional

integration organizations such as CARICOM. This will create an enabling environment for

developing the planned activities andosteri the exchange of experiences between

organizations and the development of a common policy framework in those spaces.

10The activities involving Cuba are funded by IFAD resources since Cuba is member of the ACP Group, but it is not

signatory of the Cotonou Agreement. Therefore, Intra-ACP Funds are not entitled to finance action in Cuba. The funds allocation is subject to the internal IFAD approval process.


19

Tab 3. FO4ACP target and geographical coverage

Continental

platform

Regional Farmers

organisations (RFOs)

70 National Farmers Organisations

(NFOs in the countries)

Local Farmers

organisations

(LFO)*

African Region

Pan African

Farmers

Organisation

(PAFO)

Eastern Africa : EAFF

(Eastern African Farmers

Federation)

21 within 10 countries (Burundi,

Djibouti, DRC, Eritrea, Ethiopia,

Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan,

Tanzania, Uganda),

LFOs from 14

NFOs

Central Africa : PROPAC

(Plateforme régional des

organisations paysannes

d’Afrique Centrale)

10 within 10 countries (Angola,

Burundi, Cameroun, Congo, Gabon,

Guinée Equatoriale, RCA, RDC, Sao

Tome e Principe, Tchad)

LFOs from 5

NFOs

Western Africa : ROPPA

(Réseau des Organisations

Paysannes et des

Producteurs Agricoles

d’Afrique de l’Ouest)

14 within 14 countries (Bénin, Burkina

Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambie, Ghana,

Guinée, Guinée Bissau, Libéria, Mali,

Niger, Nigéria, Sénégal, Sierra Leone,

Togo)

LFOs from 14

NFOs

Southern Africa : SACAU

(Southern African

Confederation of Agricultural

Unions)

17 within 12 countries (Botswana,

Eswatini, Lesotho, Madagascar,

Malawi, Mozambique, Namibie,

Seychelles, South Africa, Tanzanie,

Zambie, Zimbabwe,

LFOs from 7

NFOs

Northern Africa :

UMNAGRI (Union

Maghrébine et Nord-Africaine

des Agriculteurs)

7 within 7 countries (Algérie, Egypte,

Lybie, Maroc, Mauritanie, Soudan

Tunisie)

LFOs from 5

NFOs

AgriCORD 1 agri-agency at multi-country

level in Western Africa in link

with ROPPA

9 Agri-agencies working in 11

countries (Benin, Burkina Faso,

Burundi, Guinée, Kenya,

Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Senegal,

Tanzania, Uganda) in linkage with 8

NFOs

150 LFOs from

11 countries

Pacific Region

PIFON 22 within 11 countries (Cook Islands,

Fiji, New Caledonia, Papua New

Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands,

Timor L’Este, Tonga, Vanuatu,

Kiribati, Marshall Islands)

TBD

* LFO identified to directly benefit from the Project

http://eaffu.org/

http://infopropac.org/

https://roppa-afrique.org/

http://www.sacau.org/

http://www.umnagri.com/


20

Figure 1. FO4ACP – Recipient and geographical coverage in the African Region

EAFF

PROPAC

ROPPA (Nigerian NFO in the process of becoming member)

SACAU

UMNAGRI


21

Regional

Recipients Partners

70 National Farmers Organisations

(NFOs in the countries)

Local Farmers

organisations

(LFO)*

Caribbean Region

AgriCord Acodea, Afdi, Trias, and Upa

Di

6 FOs in 2 countries (Dominican

Republic and Haiti)

TBD

FAO PROCASUR FOs in 8 countries (in Belize, Cuba,

Dominican Republic, Grenada,

Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, and Saint

Lucia) (identified after the mapping

exercise)

TBC

Figure 2. Map of FO4ACP countries in the Caribbean region

2.2.2 Goal and objectives

The overall objective of the programme is to increase income and to improve livelihood, food and

nutrition security and safety of organized smallholder and family farmers in the target areas of African

countries .

The programme’s specific objectives are:

SO # 1: FOs and farmer-led enterprises improve technical and economic services to their

members along the value chains;

SO # 2: FOs influence policies and business environments for the transformation of family

farming and the development of sustainable, adaptive economic initiatives and farmer-led

enterprises;

SO # 3: FOs are accountable organisations able to effectively perform their institutional

functions.


22

2.2.3 Components and key activities by component

The Programme comprises five major components around which activities will be organized.

Component 1: Delivery of economic services along priority value chains

Component 2: Enabling the business environment

Component 3: Institutional development of FOs

Component 4: Communication and Visibility

Component 5: IFAD Programme Coordination and M&E

Knowledge management will be featured in all the components.

Each component is subdivided into 3 subcomponents related to the RFOs core functions to support

their NFOs members.

The Programme has been co-designed with FOs and their direct technical partners, the AgriCORD

network and FAO regional office. It recognises that FOs, from local level to national (generally

through national platforms), regional levels (through the regional platforms who constitutes the

recipient of the large grants) and for Africa a continental level (through the Pan-African platform of

farmers organizations constituted by RFOs), are the main implementing partners and beneficiaries of

the Programme.

As horizontal peer platforms11, RFOs mandate regarding their respective NFOs members is

threefolded and basically aims at i) upgrading NFOs capacities (allowing them to do better what they

usually do); ii) upstreaming NFOs perspectives (allowing them to do differently what they usually do);

iii) upscaling NFOs outreach (allowing them to do bigger than their usual impact area).

Such understanding is also supported by the way through which RFOs interacted with NFOs

members during SFOAP implementation when they used to differentiate, i) direct funding to NFOs for

them to better implement their national activities, ii) direct RFOs backstopping to NFOs for them to

improve their performance through cross pollination amongst peers and iii) direct dunding to RFOs

for them to implement regional activities that allows NFOs to reach out this level.

RFOs agreed that programme activities are to benefit to NFOs for them to develop needed services

identified by producers either through direct implementation (described in sub component 1 for each

of the 4 component) or through specific backstopping activities provided by RFOs (described in

subcomponent 2 for each of the 4 component), or lastly regional activities will implemented by RFOs

(as described in subcomponent 3 for each of the 4 component) as shown in the following

recapitulative table.

Most programme activities (at least 70%) will directly benefit NFOs and their members in their

respective countries either through a direct NFO implementation or through RFO managed activities

when it comes to backstopping. In respect with of the principle of subsidiarity, at regional level RFOs

implement regional activities comprising the management of the programme.

The structure of programme activities around the four components is constant in the three regions

(Africa, Caribbean and Pacific).

11 Adapted from Cees Leeuwis, Reconceptualising Participation for Sustainable Rural Development: Towards a Negotiation

Approach, Development and Change Vol. 31 (2000), 931±959. # Institute of Social Studies 2000. Published by Blackwell

Publishers, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK


23

Likewise, also with regard to non-regional FOs recipients (AgriCord and FAO in the Caribbean) the

main focus is maintained, this implies that the activities per component have the objective to support

the national and subnational FOs identified in the countries. The structure of the components

assumes consequently an organization based on the regional, national and local level in line with the

nature of the activities and level of implementation.

Tab.4. Components and sub-components.

Component / core functions

(i) Upgrading NFOs capacities: direct funding to NFOs

(ii) Upstreaming NFOs perspectives: RFOs backstopping to NFOs

(iii) Upsclaling NFOs outreach: direct dunding to RFOs


Subcomponent 1.1 Subcomponent 1.2 Subcomponent 1.3








Component 1 will support FOs to improve their capacity to provide economic and technical services

to their female and male members in order to support their business ambitions, ensure their

profitable engagement in markets and integration into value chains based on the social and

environmental sustainability and resilience of the method of production and transformation. It is

expected that about 625,000 family farmers will benefit from their FOs having developed economic

services.

These services will enable smallholders to foster partnerships with larger market actors, access and

mobilize financing from the private sector, increase productivity, reduce risk, manage their produce,

create employment and increase incomes. Collective action through FOs will provide economies of

scale and thus reduce costs and promote innovation. It will also improve their bargaining power and

access to market information, and help to overcome inequalities faced by young and women farmers.

It is expected that 1,000 FOs will provide on a viable basis at least 2 economic services to the family

farming community (members and beyond). It is foreseen that, all value chains included, 620 000

tons of agricultural products will be marketed by family farmers as FOs members for an estimated

value of EUR 7,1 million. This will definitely contribute on the one hand to increase the flows of

agricultural products to demanding urban areas and on the other hand to better spread monetization

of rural areas craving for more decent livehoods.

This will be achieved by a large range of activities based on FOs needs, priorities and opportunities12

and including the following:

Facilitating market access through: the development of market information

systems/studies/analyses; capacity building for collection sales/purchase and contracts

negotiation; B2B; the organization of/participation to fora/events; value chains analysis;

12 identified through regional workshop during the inception period


24

training/advisory services; peer learning events/exchanges; green and circular economy

approaches and principles of eco-entrepreneurship; promotion of agro tourism and south-

south exchanges between FOs far accelerating adoption of sound business approaches

Facilitating access to finance through: training; the development of business plans; the

facilitation of linkages with banks/investors; the mobilization of expertise FO-FO; de-risking;

value chains based financing; contracts negotiation; It is expected that EUR 11,3 million will

be mobilized through other financial partners by leverage effect. As shown during SFOAP,

the RFO backstopping of NFO economical activities proved to be very valuable especially

through market intelligence development and specific accompaniment to local FOs to

negotiate the financing of partly funded developed business plans.

Facilitating sustainable increase of production and value addition through: the facilitation of

linkages with research/academia; technical digital/on situ training and demonstrations; the

establishment of sustainable extension networks on agroecology and sustainable

techniques focusing on family farming and smallholder; facilitating the adoption of/raising

awareness on the use of environmentally sensitive/climate smart technology and

techniques; the establishment of systems to facilitate access to inputs; the facilitation of

peer/twinning exchanges and learning; support standardization, certification and labelling of

agriculture/agro-food products; the facilitation of collective purchase of inputs/services,

support to improve food safety, post-harvest handling, storage and processing.


Component 2 will help to draw the attention of sector stakeholders, including civil society, private

sector, governments and donors, onto smallholder needs, especially in areas that are key to ensuring

a conducive business environment for women and men smallholder. These include support of

agriculture policies that favor smallholder farming, creation of new green jobs, issues surrounding

land tenure (taking into account the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure)

and agricultural credit for smallholders, trade policies promoting the access of smallholders products

to markets, focusing development programmes on investments in family farming (taking into account

the Principles for Responsible Investments in Agriculture and Food Safety) and through FOs,

influencing value chains governance mechanisms, and lobbying for the implementation of the

Maputo declaration of investing 10 per cent of the annual national budgets in agriculture. This can

have positive and sustainable impact on the orientation of policy decisions and regulatory

frameworks relevant for family farming. It is expected that 210 different policies and processes will be

influenced by FOs. Around 160 position papers across value chains and countries will influence the

business context to become more conducive for family farmers and their organizations. FOs will

proactively integrate or create around 815 multistakeholders platforms to influence decision makers.

FOs will also take pro-active role in doubling women and youth members (+100%) to be chosen as

FOs delegates in these platforms to introduce more inclusive perspectives. More specifically related

to value chains, FOs will be strengthened to stand in 415 interprofessional organizations to improve

their say and their share of added value in the main targeted value chains mostly at local and

national levels.


25

The main activities supported under this component include the following:

Conducting of studies and analysis;

Development of policy positions;

Participation to policy consultations/fora/events;

Policy consultations among FOs;

Participation in value chains governance mechanisms; promoting principles provided by the

Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure through multi-stakeholders’

platforms in order to contribute in land policy processes;

Advocacy and lobbying including the production of lobbying and advocacy

products/supports.

Organization of exchange meetings, backstopping missions, peer to peer support and

consultations among FOs. A particular emphasis will made to foster inclusivity (gender, youth…) and

peer exchanges will mostly focus on women and youth for them to fully integrate the farmers'

movement.


Under Component 3, resources will target activities that contribute to structuring organizations by

setting up major building blocks required for their institutional development (strategies, tools, M&E).

This will strengthen them as qualified organizations, and increase their effectiveness in serving their

members while expecting from their members a citizen engagement in their movement to promote a

vivid organized rural civil society. Since the programme is focused on strengthening FOs capacity to

deliver economic oriented services, most of the selected FOs to benefit from the project are already

in existence and it is not expected to rocket up membership. The quality of services will attract new

memberships rather that externally motivated increased membership. It is therefore expected that

from the current 1, 4 million members, FOs reach 2,2 million members equivalent to a more than

40% increase. A particular monitoring of female and youth membership will be done as well as the

position of female and youth in leadership positions. Although such decisions rely upon members

'vote during the election of their leaders, FOs will proactively prepare women and youth to stand for it

with an objective to multiply by 3 this number, from 50 to 150 leaders.

With this understanding, institutional support through capacity-building, including in financial

management, will enable organizations to improve their accountability to their base, have solid

governance, and enhance recognition of FOs by governments, value chains stakeholders (public and

private buyers) and donors, all of which are necessary conditions for the sustainability of economic

activities. Institutional strengthening is thus closely linked and instrumental to the good functioning of

economic services as it enables FOs to efficiently implement their activities and make them effective

economic partners and players in the market. It is expected that around the double of FOs, from 155

to 285 will be in a position to produce audited annual accounts at all levels with a focus on national

levels. During the project, RFOs, whose financial management capacities tremendously increased

during the previous SFOAP, will play crucial roles to backstop NFOs and LFOs. It is also expected

that thrice more FOs, from 180 to 560, will develop and update their institutional strategic documents

(strategic plan, performance oriented and annual report, manual of procedures).

The main activities supported under component 3 include the following

Organization of statutory meetings; training for staff and leaders;


26

Development of FOs organizational, strategic and financial tools/plans;

Contributions to FOs equipment, staffing costs, operating costs (office rent, utilities,

stationary etc.) on the basis of a simplified allocation method, provided the allocation method is

compliant with the specific and general conditions of the Grant Agreements between IFAD and the

recipients of the Action;

M&E and KM related activities; these activities will be given a high importance in the

programme. Even if all levels are encouraged to document their progress and lessons learnt

to share it with peers, specific efforts will focus on regional and continental level (for Africa).

It is expected that PAFO, in close collaboration with AgriCORD, become the continental

resource centre for FOs and belonging to FOs that it aspires to be. It is expected that 335

good practices and lessons learnt will be documented and disseminated though electronic

and physical means. Peer to peer apprenticeship always constituted a basis in the farmers'

movement. It is expected that more 440 such exchanges will be supported by FOs within

FO4ACP. In the Caribbean, it is expected that FAO in collaboration with PROCASUR and

AgriCord will support knowledge generation, sharing and dissemination at regional level,

through peer visits, learning routes and round tables. Moreover, to ensure regional

dynamics in terms of knowledge sharing, learning from experiences and best practices

dissemination IFAD will provide a small grant to Cuban FOs to support their involvement in

the inter-regional learning processes.13

project coordination and management; organization of annual audits.


Under Component 4, resources will be allocated for activities related to the Communication and

Visibility of FO4ACP to improve the overall programme communication of positive results of the

partnership and the impact of the action’s results.

FOs and AgriCord at all levels will ensure that adequate visibility is acknowledged to the EC and

IFAD as co-financers, in line with the programme Communication and Visibility Manual.

This will be done e.g. through press releases, FO4ACP website, participation and presentations in

the relevant international meetings and events, brochures, newsletters, other media supports.

Visibility of the Programme and of the donors will be also effectively promoted by FOs, AgriCord and

FAO Regional Office mainly during the implementation of the activities. Throughout the workshops

and events organized the support provided by the FO4ACP donors will be further acknowledged and

effectively communicated.

The component Communication and Visibility is completely funded by the European Commission.

Component 5: IFAD Programme Coordination and M&E

Under Component 5 IFAD will ensure the overall coordination, monitoring, and day to day

management of the programme including the flow of funding to RFOs, PAFO, AgriCord and FAO

Regional Office. For this purpose, IFAD will establish grant agreements with direct beneficiaries and

channel funds to them.

IFAD will supervise the programme through annual supervision missions in all regions and provide

technical support to address implementation issues and ensure an effective implementation of the

13 The activities involving Cuba are funded by IFAD resources. The IFAD funds allocation is subject to the

internal IFAD approval process. Tentatively, the small grant for activities in Cuba will amount to USD 70 000.


27

programme and transparent management of resources. The Mid-Term Review led by IFAD will be

key to assess programme performance and make the necessary adjustments to ensure better

impact.

Also, IFAD role will be relevant to ensure programme visibility and communication and to facilitate

KM process through - amongst other - the organization of learning routes, workshops and events for

cross learning and replication purposes.

The coordination of the Programme will be provided through a unit within IFAD Sustainable

Production, Markets and Institutions Division (PMI) of the Strategy and Knowledge Department

(SKD) and will be ensured by a PMI Lead Technical Specialist (part time) that would be assisted by a

Programme Assistant (part time) for the duration of the programme14.

The budget for this component will cover the costs for Knowledge Management activities, Visibility,

M&E responsibilities, Annual Supervision and Implementation support missions in the three regions

(Africa, Caribbean and Pacific), for the five years of the programme also with the support of experts

and consultants for backstopping activities to RFOs.

Resources for programme coordination and supervision will also be used by IFAD to: (i) establish

Grant Agreements with the identified Recipients for effective, efficient and accountable use of

resources channelled; (ii) channel funds to the RFOs, AgriCord, FAO and other implementing

partners and ensure that the use of such funds is planned and implemented in accordance with the

grant agreements; (iii) ensure the quality of narrative and financial progress reports and annual work

plans for the overall programme to be submitted to donors; (iv) ensure effective supervision during

the implementation of the Programme through annual supervision missions and implementation

support missions including the participation to the Programme Steering Committees; (v) undertake a

mid-term review to assess programme progress in the different regions and consider possible

readjustments; (vi) set up of a result-oriented monitoring framework in cooperation with all partners;

(vii) ensure visibility of the programme and of the donors contributions.

The Technical Coordination and day-to-day Programme Management require the recruitment of two

fully dedicated Project Staff (one at P3 and one at P2 level) for the entire duration of the programme.

Overall, this complementary support through the five components will enable FOs to evolve into

professional and credible institutions that are able to provide services to their members, influence

policies and gain recognition from stakeholders in the agricultural sector. It will have a leverage

effect, better positioning FOs to negotiate contracts, enter into partnership with value chains

stakeholders and leverage additional financing for the benefit of the farming community. This is

expected to contribute to FOs sustainability, sustained growth and to tackling the challenge of

reducing rural poverty.

Expected outputs and outcomes, utility for the target group

The expected outputs are:

O1: Improved capacity of FOs to deliver technical and economic services and connect their members

to markets;

O2: Improved access of FOs to financial services;

O3: Improved business environment and smallholder competitiveness;

O4: Strengthened institutional capacities and professionalism of FOs;

14 Not included in the direct costs of the component 4 of the Programme.


28

O5: Enhanced knowledge and dissemination among peers for replication and scaling-up.

Innovations promoted

Although many local technical innovations will be supported by the programme through pilot micro

projects, three main innovations characterize the programme:

i) The promotion of LFOs economic initiatives is entirely left in the hand of a farmer movement

through an in-built RFOs support set-up. Supporting NFOs to be in a position to capacitate their local

FOs through high level business development services already proved to be a way to explore. The

Project will provide a new opportunity to explore this crucial area and better measure what are the

impact on the volume and value of the agricultural product on the one hand in contributing to feed the

urban areas and on the other hand in bringing incomes the rural areas that remain cruelly under

monetarized. This shall constitute the first innovative pole of the programme.

ii) NFOs are at the centre of national dynamics to influence changes of the national business context

with a legitimacy rooted in their constituency made of small-scale holders and their credibility rooted

in their involvement in local pilot economic activities. This position is key to influence change of

national business context. The project will support RFOs to backstop NFOs on specific issues

peculiar to each country. Backstopping goes beyond traditional capacity building through training and

consists in a long term accompaniment by RFOs. This will be considered as the second innovative

pole of the programme.

iii) RFOs as founding members of PAFO wish to rely on it as a continental resource centre for

knowledge in market oriented family farming and farmer leaded enterprises. The emergence of this

resource centre in collaboration with continental and international stakeholders (FARA, CTA, FAO)

will constitute the third innovative pole of the programme.

Iv) In the Caribbean Region, the program will focus on creating synergies for a cooperation agenda

among the FOs in the region, with the objective of sharing practives and create an agenda for

political incidence in national and regional level. The link with regional integration spaces will be key

to positionate the family farming sector in the centre of the development agendas that are led by

these actors. Also, through specifc activities, the program aims to engage rural youth in FOs by

generating the conditions for their empowerment in the decision making process and promote their

economic inclusion.

2.3 Cross- cutting Issues Four major cross-cutting issues are considered of relevance by stakeholders and will be promoted

during the overall programme implementation.

Gender. Women producers and their membership of women-only or organizations mixed

organizations account for a significant proportion of FOs’ membership. Participation of women in the

programme activities will be prioritized and women- led initiatives will be supported as well as

activities that target or benefit women.

Gender considerations will be mainstreamed into programme activities to ensure that FOs promote

gender equality and the economic empowerment of women in: (i) the selection of key value chains

and provision of services that address the different needs and opportunities of their female and male

members to increase competitiveness, value addition and market engagement; (ii) influencing

policies and business environments for transforming family farming and developing farmer-led

enterprises which are gender-inclusive; and (iii) women’s representation in FO membership and

leadership to better represent and serve their members. Further, gender disaggregated data will be


29

collected and disaggregated indicators included in the logframe. The above approaches will help

ensuring that rural women and men have equal access to economic benefits of the Programme and

to longer-term FO activities.

Youth. The design and the implementation of the program takes cognizance of the important role

also youth could play in the agriculture sector and in strengthening the role of FOs in particular.

Youth are in fact an important pillar for agricultural development and the youth-focused initiatives

currently supported in Farmers Africa in the Central and Southern Africa regions will continue.

FOs will be further supported to develop targeted interventions that promote the participation of

youth, and encouraged to disaggregate data and impacts by both sex and age. Attention will also be

paid to the specific needs of, and creating opportunities for, young rural women. Youth engagement

will also inform the choice of key value chains.

Environmental sustainability and climate change. Through FOs policy engagement this action will

contribute to the development of sustainable environmental and climate change policies responsive

to farmers’ concerns. Also, the action will strengthen FOs’ capacities to provide services related to

climate risk management in relation to inter alia drought, and flooding, also through the promotion of

environmental sustainable approaches like agroecology, low impact agriculture, green economy and

compliance with environmental and food safety regulations.

During the last years, FOs have developed clear positions regarding family farming and climate

change. The programme will support FOs in mainstream these policy positions in their operative

activities and continue lobbying in favor of family farming and smallholder. The focus will be in the

recognition that mainstreaming adaptation in agriculture needs to go beyond ‘climate-proofing’

agricultural development, should focus to the access to value chains and towards tackling the

underlying drivers of poverty that exacerbate vulnerability and constrain adaptation.

The programme will support FOs in spreading key principles of green economy for family farming

and smallholder in its two first components. Green economy promotes the concept of decent jobs,

aligning with the goals of the FOs, looking for the recognition of the rights of farmers and peasants.

Principles of eco-entrepreneurships for family farming and smallholders in the value chains are key

for providing new sustainable solutions, like low-carbon impact and circular economy, creating added

value to agricultural productions and improving the skills of the producers and cooperatives involved.

Nutrition: Nutrition is an emerging concern amongst Farmers Organizations that become more and

more conscious of the importance of both feeding urban population with good quality products and

also to improve the diet of the rural population. This transpires in some of the RFOs regional strategic

plans where nutrition is discussed both from the quality of the products perspectives and fro the

processing of agricultural products perspectives adding value to agricultural raw products. Pilot

initiatives will be documented within the project particularly within the RFOs Women and youth

regional branches.

2.4 Complementarity actions and Donor coordination All National and Regional Farmers Organizations supported by this program have an established

linkage with IFAD through the Farmers Forum process, at national, regional and global levels. In

Africa and in Asia-Pacific this process is now decentralized and delivered concrete national Action

Plans that will further strengthen partnerships and collaborations within IFAD country programs. In

most countries, national FOs are closely associated with IFAD COSOP formulations and project

designs. The purpose is to directly involve all NFOs (or their local members) as implementing

partners in most IFAD investment projects across the regions (in particular all agricultural and value


30

chain development projects), which in turn will benefit from the enhanced institutional capacities of

the FOs as well as from their capacity to provide economic services and link with the private sector.

The FOs, thanks to the support received from the SFOAP and now reinforced with the FO4ACP, will

be further empowered to influence and improve agricultural policies, agricultural research agendas

and partnership with value chains actors, all key objectives of IFAD country programmes. In most

cases the NFOs (almost 100%) are already involved in COSOP design process, on the other hand, a

still challenging point is for FOs to have a more central role in their implementation. FO4ACP will

support NFOs in terms of institutional strengthening and economic services. A particular linkage will

be strengthened with all projects and initiatives promoting the inclusion of rural youth in agriculture

and value chains, an objective which is at the top of African FOs agenda.

In each country, interaction will be sought by NFOs with the Ministry hosting IFAD co-funded

investment projects with the aim to influence these investments from design to supervision and

evaluation through informed participation in joint missions, project steering committees and COSOP

formulation processes. NFOs will inform RFOs and PAFO when it is thought that they can provide a

specific thematic support to national investment projects. Once a year, IFAD country directors will

also be systematically invited to attend an NFO event when the Project activities in the country will be

presented. Finally, during IFAD supervision missions, a debriefing session with the IFAD relevant

authority (CPO, Country Director, and Chief of regional Hub) will take place.

Synergies and complementaries can be created with other IFAD initiatives operating in the region:

- FO4ACP will have strong linkage with the ABC fund co-funded by the same donors

(generating pipeline from NFOs and from Agri-agencies, contributing to due diligence and

advisory services to investees).

- FO-MAPP interactive online database providing geo-referenced information on local

smallholders', family farmers' and producers' organizations in Africa, Asia and Pacific, Latin

America and Caribbean. This is an IFAD –WRF joint initiative and it is a work in progress.

- The Platform for Agricultural Risk Management PARM, a multi-donor partnership led by

IFAD, focusing on risk management tools.

Farmers’ Organizations for ACP is also complementary to a number of EU-funded projects and

initiatives including the CTA such as the following:

- MTCP phase 2 (2013-2018), and notably the implementation through the PIFON and the

five NFOs directly involved in the MTCP2 project for the Pacific;

- The Fit for Market programme (2016-2021) which promotes access for FOs in ACP

countries to international and domestic fruit and vegetable markets;

- The Intra-ACP Commodities programme, an interagency initiative aiming to improve the

competitiveness of small producers cultivating cocoa beans, coconuts and roots/tubers

through greater regional integration of relevant markets and intensification of production;

- The European Investment Plan (EIP), that will encourage investments in Africa and promote

inclusive growth, job creation and sustainable development and so tackle some of the root

causes of irregular migration. The EIP has a specific window on sustainable agriculture,

rural entrepreneurs and agribusiness;

Further, clear linkages and complementarity can be established between Farmers’ Organizations for

ACP and many national and regional EU-funded actions in the three regions in the framework of the

National and Regional Indicative Programmes as well the interaction with the Jobs and Growth


31

Compacts developed by the EU Delegations. Complementarities and synergies will be also sought

with other programmes funded by EU Members States, the International Financial Institutions, and

UN agencies.

2.5 Risks and mitigation measures A number of risks that can affect programme implementation where identified together with mitigating measures. These are summarized in the table 5 below.

Table 5. Programme risks, assumptions and mitigation measures.

Risk level (H/M/L)

Mitigating measures

Unwillingness of national governments to establish a constructive dialogue with representatives of smallholder farmers / Not conducive policy environments for supporting smallholder farmers.

Medium Smallholders’ organization in national and regional FOs enables them to agree on key messages to governments. Supporting their institutional development will improve their credibility and capacity to advocate for the needs of their members. The UN Decade of family farming (2019-2028) further provides the momentum for FOs to effectively engage in the policy arena.

Unwillingness of other value chains stakeholders to develop their business through partnership with FOs

Medium The support of the programme in terms of institutional development and capacity building will enable FOs to generate mutual trust and become effective and reliable partners for value chains stakeholders

Socio-political conflicts in some countries Medium The monitoring and evaluation process and the phased planning approach that will be implemented will allow for regular adjustments to activities and areas of intervention. Increasingly, the measures implemented by the various countries and regions affected by the conflicts and sanitary crises bear fruit and allow the development of economic activities.

Internal governance issues / cases of corruption within FOs.

Low The SFOAP experience demonstrated that these risks can be mitigated. Good governance is an integral part of the programme. Institutional development is expected to generate increased FOs’ accountability to members and ability to transparently implement their mandates. Mechanisms to guarantee organizations are well-governed and accountable in managing financing are also in place.

Weak participation of and benefit for women and youth in programme initiatives.

Medium Gender and youth will be mainstreamed in all programme related activities. Also, specific initiatives in support of women and youth will be supported and budget allocated for this.

Inadequate human and technical resources for the coordination and supervision of a complex programme involving many stakeholders.

Low Sufficient resources have been earmarked for programme coordination and implementation from the direct and indirect costs under EC funding.

Procedures for disbursement of funds are too restrictive

Medium Based on the practice experienced in the previous phase, a smooth and light system for reporting and flow of funding will be set up.


32

3. Implementation and supervision arrangements

3.1 Implementation procedures and programme management, including implementing partners and implementation agreements

IFAD as the implementing partner

IFAD is the implementing partner of the programme because of its unique expertise, extensive

partnership and dialogue with FOs. The experience and lessons learnt in the partnership between

IFAD and FOs has been particularly accelerating and strengthening the focus on national apex FOs

and regional FO networks under the aegis of the Farmers’ Forum (FAFO) Process, a bottom-up

process of consultation and dialogue between small farmers and rural producers' organizations, IFAD

and governments, focused on rural development and poverty reduction. Launched in 2006 and fully

aligned with IFAD's strategic objectives, the FAFO was established as a permanent feature of the

IFAD Governing Council (GC) and operationalized through IFAD-funded investment projects and

grant programmes. The FAFO process is fully institutionalised within IFAD and is rooted in concrete

partnership and collaboration at the country and regional level.

Since 2016 the FAFO process has been regionalized and now global meetings alternate in

conjunction with IFAD Governing Council, with Regional meetings in each of the five IFAD regions of

operation. The FAFO brings together national and international FOs leaders and IFAD staff and

management to share views of evolving challenges in agriculture and rural development and in IFAD

development effectiveness. Each global meeting of the FAFO triggers a new set of initiatives and

collaborations on the ground. FO4ACP that can be considered a ‘component’ of IFAD’s strategy

unfolded with the FAFO to increase direct partnership between IFAD and FOs (for further

information: http://www.ifad.org/farmer/index.htm ).

IFAD is also engaged in the development of knowledge management tools and instruments to foster

partnership with FOs. One of these is the Farmers’ and Rural Producers Organizations Mapping (FO-

MAPP), an initiative born within the context of the FAFO and the IYFF (www.fo-mapp.com) and

implemented in partnership with the WRF.

FO-MAPP is an interactive online database that provides geo-referenced information on local

smallholders', family farmers' and other rural producers’ organizations in Africa, Asia and the Pacific,

Latin America and the Caribbean. It was designed based on the need expressed by FOs participating

in the FAFO to support their efforts to improve their visibility and engage in markets and sustainable

development partnerships. Fed by FOs themselves, FO-MAPP contains information about FOs

status, membership, geographical outreach, services provided and agricultural products. The

database is currently being finalized and it is expected to be fully operational in 2019.

Implementation responsibilities

The programme will be coordinated and supervised by IFAD in its capacity of implementing partner.

For this purpose, IFAD will enter into grant agreements with the regional networks of Farmers'

Organizations member of PAFO, PAFO itself, the regional network of FOs in the Pacific region

(PIFON), AgriCord and FAO Regional Office fro Latina America and Caribbean to implement the

programme.

http://www.ifad.org/farmer/index.htm


33

Programme level

An overarching Programme Steering Committee (PSC)15 will be established and composed of ACP Secretariat and EU as Members, while IFAD, PAFO, RFOs, AgriCord, and selected coordinators from the Caribbean and Pacific will be observers. The Committee will be responsible for (i) Providing advice and strategic guidance on the execution and implementation Programme; (ii) Overseeing and monitoring programme implementation (iii) ensuring programme activities are in line with stated objectives and (iv) approve the global allocation of ACP/EU Financial resources to the ACP Regions.

Programme steering will be articulated taking into account that there are three distinct sub-

programmes, the one for Africa and two sub-programmes for Caribbean and Pacific regions.

Therefore, the steering of the three sub-programmes will be respecting regional differences and will

consist of an African Steering Committee and bilateral steering between IFAD and FOs for both

Pacific and Caribbean regions.

A. African Region

The programme activities will be implemented at different levels as follows:

Regional level. RFOs at the regional level are responsible for the coordination of activities

within their region and for the implementation of regional activities, in accordance with the

Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWPB) and within the specifications of the agreement

signed with IFAD. Complementary to the work at regional level, PAFO will be responsible

for the implementation of Pan-African activities. Given that, currently there are not the legal

and fiduciary conditions for signing a grant agreement with PAFO, during the inception

phase it will be identified one of the RFO that will sign the grant agreement with IFAD for the

implementation of Pan-African activities.

National and subnational levels. For the Africa region national FOs are key partners and

co-implementers of the programme and are responsible for the implementation of national

and sub-national level activities, based on sub-contract to be signed with RFOs. PAFO,

RFOs and national FOs will implement the programme following a programmatic approach

based on their strategic plans.

AgriCord will focus the support on FOs at local, district, provincial and national levels in

Africa, (cooperatives, cooperative unions and national FO platforms of organizations

specialized in the production of specific agricultural commodities), in some case in a cross-

border context. The identification of AgriCord support will be demand driven and based on

FOs strategic plans while the overall management of the Project Cycle16 in Africa will be

the responsibility of AgriCord, following existing and established procedures (internet-based:

www.agro-info.net) and governance mechanisms (General Assembly and Advisory

Committee). A Project Committee17 ensures the quality of the proposals, coherence with

programme criteria and the relevance and quality of the proposed advisory services.

15 There will not be any reporting to the PSC other than those already planned for the regional steering committees and to the EU. 16 AgriCord Project cycle. Farmers’ organisations can submit their project proposals to AgriCord via one of the member agencies (the

supporting agri-agency). The overall project cycle is as follows: (i) project Idea (led by an FO); (ii) project Identification (led jointly by (FO & supporting Agri-agency); (iii) eligibility for funding (AgriCord programme manager); (iv) submission of application (FOs and supporting Agri-agency); (v) detailed project definition (FO & supporting Agri-agency); (vi) project eligibility within FFP programme and relevance of advisory services (AgriCord Project Committee); (vii) approval (AgriCord Board / Project Committee Chair); (viii) contracting (Farmers’ organisation, agri-agency, AgriCord secretariat); (ix) Implementation, reporting & monitoring (FO & supporting Agri-agency); (x) Evaluation (internal – external). Following assessment of proposals by the Project Committee, the Board of AgriCord decides on allocation of funding, taking into account the specific requirements of each donor government or technical/financial partner involved, such as geographical focus, thematic priorities, duration of the funding agreement, timing. 17 AgriCord’s Project Committee reviews the proposals of farmers’ organisations for their coherence with the principles of Farmers Fighting

Poverty. Since each agri-agency is represented by a senior staff member, all information on new proposals is transparently available within the alliance, allowing for exchanges on related experiences and approaches. The Project Committee is an electronic platform, but also

http://www.agro-info.net)/


34

RFOs and AgriCord will set-up knowledge and coordination committees at all levels to ensure

coordination, synergies, complementarities and regular exchange of information among all

stakeholders in the spirit of subsidiarity. For this purpose, collaboration committees will be

established at both the regional and national levels bringing together agri-agencies and RFOs and

NFOs respectively. A facilitation mechanism to support the efficient functioning of these committees

and a regular information flow between the committees will be jointly decided by AgriCord and the

FO’s at regional and national level. Specifically, for the Africa region two sets of ‘collaboration

committees’ will be set up:

- Regional collaboration committees. Regional collaboration committees will be mandated

to: (i) facilitate collaboration between RFOs and agri-agencies; (ii) share information and

exchange of experiences between agri-agencies operating in the region and members of

RFOs; (iii) capitalize experiences and project achievements; (iv) generate and coordinate

spaces for sharing programme results with the participation of other stakeholders (e.g.

regional institutions, research institutions, other FOs and CSOs networks in the region).

Each regional collaboration committee will be chaired by the concerned RFO.

- National collaboration committees. National collaboration committees will be set up

initially in countries where the collaboration and dialogue between FOs and agri-agencies

are already structured/advanced. During implementation and based on lessons learnt,

additional collaboration committees might be established in other countries. National

committees will be mandated to ensure the sharing of information and experiences at the

national level between the national FOs, agri-agencies, FOs implementing programme

actions and other stakeholders (e.g. public institutions, sector national authorities, other FOs

and CSOs). Each national collaboration committee will be chaired by the NFO member of

the relevant RFO in the concerned country.

The set-up of such frameworks for collaboration between AgriCord and RFOs will be progressive,

based upon the potential for articulating win-win partnerships that will eventually benefit the primary

stakeholders of the programme, i.e. smallholder farmers. Hence it won’t be neither a pre-requisite for

operating in given countries but it would rather unfold where there are promising conditions for such

collaboration to be developed. A facilitation mechanism will be jointly decided by AgriCord, its agri-

agencies and the FOs at regional and national level.

An African Steering Committee (SC) will be established to define the strategic orientations of the

programme and facilitate KM and lessons learning. It will meet once and year and will be composed

of RFOs, PAFO, AgriCord and donors (including IFAD, EU and the ACP Secretariat). Also, the SC

will be open to a large number of FOs and agri-agencies benefiting from Farmers’ Organizations for

ACP.

Taking into account the distinct modus operandi of AgriCord, PAFO and RFOs, the Steering

Committee will be responsible for the following:

• Overseeing and validating the overall strategic direction of the programme;

• Establishing mechanisms for more in depth KM and lessons learning;

• Approving the Programme of Work following programme inception (2019) and MTR findings

(end of 2021)

meets in-person twice a year. Based upon its weekly screening of incoming proposals, the Project Committee formulates recommandations to the Board of AgriCord. The Project Committee thus focuses on (a) the quality of the proposal and its coherence with Farmers Fighting Poverty; (b) the relevance of the proposed advisory services (farmer-to-farmer exchanges and advisory services proposed by the supporting agri-agency). Within the network of agri-agencies, procedures for planning, monitoring and evaluation are operational. Information flows are transparent (Agro-info.net). Over the past years, the Agro-info.net internet platform has proven to be a powerful and

dynamic tool for project planning, monitoring and evaluation, and a reliable international networking environment.


35

Figure 2. Implementation and legal arrangements – African Region.

B. Pacific Region

Regional level. The Programme involves transnational intervention. As such, PIFON – the umbrella

organisation for farmers' organisations in the Pacific Region has the responsibility for the

implementation of the programme in the region and the coordination with the national partners.

PIFON will ensure the timely establishment of agreements with the Implementing Partners, detailing

respective duties and responsibilities with respect to the FO4ACP in line with the grant agreement

signed with IFAD.

National level. The main Implementing Partners, with whom PIFON will establish formal agreements

and who will develop individual AWPBs for the Programme activities they will undertake, to be

included in the consolidated Programme AWPB, will be:

Farmers Organizations in each country, which will lead and assist farmer groups and

individual farmers in the promotion, preparation and implementation of initiatives under the

components of the Programme.

The National Implementing Agencies (NIA) that will be responsible for coordinating the

activities of the Farmers Organisations in each country, be the Focal Point for the

Programme in each country and be the link with PIFON. The NIAs will be the conduit for

organizing farmers and disseminating technical and market information, facilitating services,

and training farmers in the business aspects of the value chain.

Pacific Regional programme steering committee (RPSC). The overall programme management

will be guided by the leadership of a regional steering committee, which is responsible for the

following: (i) overall guidance on regional, and national platforms/forums’ operations where

applicable, (ii) coordination between national platforms/forums, and with other stakeholders involved

in programme implementation, (iii) endorse regional AWPBs at inception and MTR and review annual

progress reports, and (iv) coordination of joint actions such as strategic consultations, lobbying and

representation and avoiding overlapping and duplications, and (iv) guiding the programme


36

implementation in policy and strategy matters. It will be composed of PIFON, national members and

partners and donors (including IFAD, EU and the ACP Secretariat).

Given the role already played by PIFON for Pacific Islands, it will explored with the players of the

regional programme for Asia and the Pacific regions, AFOSP and MTCP, mechanisms to associate

the steering of the Pacific sub-programme with the existing steering of MTCP and AFOSP, with the

aim of reinforcing existing integration processes at regional level.

C. Caribbean region

Regional level. AgriCord and FAO Regional Office for Latin America and Caribbean are responsible

at regional level for the coordination of activities within their region (in the countries of their

competence) and for the implementation of regional activities, in accordance with the Annual Work

Plan and Budget (AWPB) and within the specifications of the agreements signed with IFAD.

The Caribbean Regional Steering Committee will be established to define the strategic

orientations of the programme and facilitate complementarities, coordination and KM and lessons

learning. It will meet once and year. It will be composed of FAO, AgriCord (and agri-agencies),

PROCASUR, CLAC with the participation of involved FOs and EC, ACP Secretariat and IFAD and

other important stakeholders in the Caribbean region will be constituted at the beginning of the

project. This is key for ensuring coordination among different activities and projects from other

partners in the region, but also to create an institutionalized space for dialogue and exchange of

experiences and practices.

Regional collaboration committees. FAO Regional Office and AgriCord will set-up a coordination

committee at regional level to ensure coordination, synergies, complementarities and regular

exchange of information among all stakeholders in the spirit of subsidiarity. For this purpose, the

collaboration committee will be established at regional level bringing together FAO, AgriCord and the

implementing agri-agencies, CLAC, PROCASUR and all FOs involved. A facilitation mechanism to

support the efficient functioning of this committee and a regular flow of information will be jointly

decided by FAO Regional Office and AgriCord.

Regional collaboration committees will be mandated to: (i) facilitate collaboration between FAO,

PROCASUR and agri-agencies; (ii) share information and exchange of experiences between agri-

agencies operating in the region, FAO, PROCASUR and FOs in the region; (iii) capitalize

experiences and project achievements; (iv) generate and coordinate spaces for sharing programme

results with the participation of other stakeholders.

Implementation period and workplan

The implementation period of the Action is aligned with the EU Delegation Agreement: years 2019-

2023 up to max 60 months (completion date in November 2023).

Supervision arrangements

IFAD will ensure the overall coordination, monitoring, and day to day management of the programme

including the flow of funding to RFOs, PAFO, Agricord and FAO Regional Office. For this purpose,

IFAD will establish grant agreements with direct beneficiaries and channel funds to them.

Annual supervision. IFAD will supervise the programme through annual supervision

missions in all regions to assess the progress in terms of implementation and allignement

with the approved work plan and budget and the identified objectives. Moreover, IFAD will

provide technical support to RFOs, PAFO, AgriCord and FAO Regional Office to address

implementation issues and ensure an effective implementation of the programme and


37

transparent management of resources. IFAD will provide specific recommendations to the

Recipients, if needed, the implementation of which will be monitored during the subsequent

months. In addition, IFAD will monitor progress of implementation at both national and

regional levels. This will be done in liaison with the main Recipients.

Mid-term review. A mid-term review of the programme will be undertaken by IFAD at the

end of 2021. It will aim at assessing programme implementation and the M&E framework

and will contribute to adapt the programme if needed.

Final evaluation. A final independent evaluation of the programme may be carried out. The

final evaluation may be carried out and financed by the European Union and possibly other

donors.

3.2 Monitoring, evaluation and reporting

Monitoring

A result-oriented M&E system is articulated at programme inception to define impact indicators of

programme outputs and outcomes (logical framework attached).

The monitoring system will be set up with a view to: (i) measure the extent to which implemented

activities concur to the achievement of programme objectives; (ii) improve project effectiveness and

relevance by providing information on the results and outcomes of activities.

The system will be organized as follows:

• At programme level, IFAD will be responsible for ensuring the overall monitoring of project

implementation, based on the consolidated logical framework. To this effect, it will undertake

regular supervision missions and will prepare annual progress reports;

• At the regional level, M&E will be addressed carefully by the RFOs, AgriCord and FAO

Regional Office. Together with their members, they will set up programme M&E systems and they

will prepare annual progress reports.

Reporting and disbursement modalities

Flow of funds from IFAD to RFOs, PAFO, AgriCord and FAO Regional Office.18 Flow of funds

between IFAD and Recipients will be established in the grant agreements. However, the overall

approach will be of keeping the flow of fund from IFAD to the Recipients approved by the Programme

Steering Committee for each of the two programme phases only (at inception and MTR level) and

then managed between IFAD and each recipient based on annual work plan and budgets, on

absorption capacity and achievements of physical and financial triggers. Such approach would de-

link the work of strategic orientation of the Steering Committee from the flow of funding that will be in

turn managed bilaterally by IFAD on one side and RFOs and AgriCord on the other side.

Reporting and planning RFOs, PAFO, AgriCord and FAO Regional Office to IFAD. Each RFO,

PAFO, AgriCord and FAO Regional Office will submit an AWPB for year n+1 and annual technical

and financial report on year n to IFAD. In addition, the Recipients can be asked to submit a 6-months

report or/and a report on the implementation of the supervision missions recommendations.

18 As per deliberation of the Overarching Programme Steering Committee (March 2019), the large grant agreements with

the programme recipients will include the 80% of EU funding at the start of the implementation per each recipient. The remaining 20% of EU funding will be made available and disbursable after MTR based on performances. This deliberation doesn't affect the IFAD funding which will be fully allocated per each grant agreement and made available and disbursable for all recipients upon signature of the agreement.


38

IFAD reviews and ensures quality of regional AWPBs and technical reports and disburses funds in

accordance with the conditions established for each grant agreement.

Table 6. Reporting and planning

1. Reporting and planning IFAD – EC and request of payment for year n+1

- Every year IFAD will submit a request of payment to the EC, that will be accompanied by the following documents:

Year 1 : - Progress report (9-months Jan – Sept) - A financial report on legal commitments as well as costs incurred by

IFAD for the period. Following years: - Annual report (12-months Oct /Sept) of activities based on IFAD

supervision mission reports and recipients reports. - A financial report on legal commitments as well as costs incurred by

IFAD for the period. - A tentative simplified annual work plan and budget for year n+1, based

on IFAD annual Supervision Mission reports.

2. Reporting and planning RFOs to IFAD

- Each RFO, PAFO, AgriCord and FAO Regional Office submits an AWPB for year n+1 and annual technical and financial report on year n to IFAD

- IFAD reviews and ensures quality of regional AWPBs and technical reports and disburses funds in accordance with the conditions established for each grant agreement.

3. Reporting and planning of the regional Steering Committees mechanisms

- IFAD will receive yearly reports that each RFO, AgriCord and FAO Regional Office will submit at the end of each year of programme implementation. The reports will be reviewed and then finalized with the RFOs, AgriCord and FAO Regional Office and consolidated in the programme report for the entire programme, structured in three sections: for Africa, the Caribbean and Pacific regions.

- The consolidated programme report will be then shared within each regional Steering mechanisms for overall guidance on progress achieved.

3.3 Communication and visibility plan

IFAD role will be relevant to ensure programme visibility and communication and to facilitate KM

process through - amongst other - the organization of learning routes, workshops and events for

cross learning and replication purposes.

Visibility of the programme and of the donors will be also effectively promoted by the Recipients

during the implementation of the activities related to policy dialogue. Throughout the workshops

organized, the support provided by the programme donors will be further acknowledged and

effectively communicated.

A Communication and visibility Plan (covering the visibility issues for all donors) has been already

elaborated as annex of the Delegation Agreement with the EU.

The Communication and Visibility Plan (CVP) has be developed in line with the EC Communication

and Visibility Manual for the FO4ACP to improve overall programme communication of positive

results of the partnership and the impact of the action’s results and set guidelines to ensure the

visibility of programme donors.

In particular, the main objectives of the CVP are:

- To provide visibility of the IFAD – EU to the programme activities through strategic

communications and the utilisation of context specific and locally adapted tools


39

- To present programme achievements and impacts of the implemented activities

- To ensure the visibility of implementing partners and donors

- To highlight opportunities available to stakeholders

- To allow FO4ACP actors to be able to better communicate achievements and results to

peers (NFOs/RFOs), Agri-Agencies and Asian FOs involved in other similar initiatives such

as FO4ALA (FOs for Asia and Latin America) and to IFAD Country offices and EU

delegations and be integrated in the Farmers’ Forum process.

The CVP outlines a set of main communication activities and tools to ensure the visibility of the

programme, build up awareness among stakeholders on the carried out activities and their results,

support the involvement of partners and stakeholders into the project implementation and carry out

proper information dissemination.

A specific programme component has been dedicated to the activities related to "Communication and

Visibiliy" at recipient level completely funded by the European Commission funding.

3.4 Knowledge management, scaling up/uptake and sustainability

Knowledge management and learning

KM and peer learning are a central feature of the programme for the development of good practices,

replication and scaling up. One of the programme priority area is in fact: "Facilitating knowledge

sharing between ACP FOs through the promotion of exchanges among peers for innovation,

generation of knowledge products, replication and scaling up in the areas of production, processing

and marketing".

Resources can otherwise be lost in developing solutions in isolation from good practice and lessons

learned elsewhere. The development of peer-to-peer support and knowledge sharing from country-

level activities will be considered key for FOs institutional development and RFOs will play a key role

to develop linkages and facilitate networking and exchanges at all levels. KM will be promoted

through several tools and strategies including the documenting and sharing of experiences and

practices, the organization of learning visits, south-south (with a focus on intra ACP exchanges) and

north-south exchanges, learning routes as well as continental KM events including all RFOs and

national members. Inclusiveness will be promoted, supported and encouraged.

The SFOAP programme enabled FOs to develop peer-to-peer support and to share knowledge and

experience generated from country-level activities. This approach will be kept and expanded as a key

strategic approach for FOs institutional development.

RFOs will play a critical role in technical backstopping and the programme will allocate adequate

resources at regional level to enable RFOs’ technical staff to travel and advise NFOs on regular

basis. Specifically, RFOs will engage the NFOs based on demand from them and will provide

technical support based on the needs expressed by them. This exchange system between all FOs

levels should become a central mechanism to accelerate the learning process by peers.

Consulting mechanisms from the national up to the continental level, whether they are part of FOs’

regular governance systems (annual general assemblies and executive boards) or whether they are

specific to the Programme (programme SC, collaboration committees and peer supervisions) will

offer venues where programme achievements and good practices will be shared so that positive

experiences do not remain within one single region but are communicated throughout the networks.


40

In particular, the annual SC and the collaboration/coordination committees will enable stakeholders

to review performance, discuss possible deficiencies, decide on mutual assistance measures,

facilitate coordination, support exchange of information and experience between all stakeholders and

develop linkages, synergies and complementarities between the various regions.

KM products will be developed and disseminated at different levels: case studies, good practices or

successful examples under the three components will be jointly elaborated by the Regional and

national FOs.

In order to improve the visibility of FOs participating in FO4ACP and foster knowledge generation

and sharing on and among FOs, synergies with FO-MAPP (see more – paragraph 3.1) will be

promoted. In particular, RFOs (and PAFO) are expected to engage in the promotion of FO-MAPP

and facilitate the involvement/participation of FOs by inviting their members to register in the

database. Similarly, NFOs are expected to promote the database among their affiliates at the

subnational level. The participation of RFOs in the initiative in terms of FO-MAPP contents quality

review might be explored in the future. IFAD annual supervision missions might also serve as a

venue to promote the initiative among FOs. These activities will complement the efforts by IFAD and

WRF to facilitate the outreach and dissemination of the database for its wide use in the coming years

Scaling up/uptake and sustainability of grant results

The scale of the program in terms of outreach is potentially enormous considering that its institutional

set up is anchored in the local-to-regional –to- continental structures of FOs (the individual members

of the PanAfrican Farmer Organization are estimated at 52 millions). FO4ACP has remarkable

scaling-up potential related to the following areas: (i) stronger organizational structures and

enhanced professionalism of FOs at all levels; (ii) stronger partnerships that lead to enhanced

participation of FOs in value chains and enhanced access to policy design and policy influence that

have impacts on all farmers’ environment. Furthermore FO4ACP has a particular focus on its

component 1 - economic services for members, with strategic visions on inclusion of smallholder in

value chains. FO4ACP will build on the results and good practices of SFOAP for scaling-up, in

particular through levering of private and public finance (banks, VC finance, donors etc.)

4. Budget and Workplan

4.1 Costs, Financing and Fiduciary Aspects

The total cost of the Action is estimated at EUR 42.5 million and includes a European Commission's

contribution of EUR 40 million and co-financing by IFAD of US$ 3 million (approximately EUR 2.5

million19). As per the agreement with the co-founding partner (EU), FO4ACP is a multi-donor action and

the contributions will be not earmarked.

The IFAD grant will have duration of 4.5 years and will be distributed by project components

accordingly.

The programme costs are in line with the allocation as per Annex III of the Delegation Agreement

between IFAD and EC. The Programme comprises five major components around which activities will

be organized:




Component 4: Communication and Visibility (funded only by EC)

Component 5: IFAD programme management and coordination

Tab 7. Total Costs of the Action by component and financier Tentative budget allocation as per Annex III of the Delegation Agreement. (EUR)

Components IFAD* EU Total

1. Delivery of economic services along priority value chains 1 250 000 20 160 000 21 410 000

2. Enabling the business environment 500 000 5 760 000 6 260 000

3. Institutional development of FOs 750 000 8 580 000 9 330 000

4. Communication and Visibility 1 500 000 1 500 000

Total Grants- related Direct Cost 2 500 000 36 000 000 38 500 000

5. IFAD programme management and coordination 1 383 000 1 383 000

Total Direct Costs 2 500 000 37 383 000 39 883 000

Indirect Costs 2 617 000 2 617 000

Grand Total 2 500 000 40 000 000 42 500 000

* IFAD contribution is equal to USD 3 000 000, at the moment of the elaboration of the Delegation Agreement, the IFAD contribution was converted approximately in EUR 2 500 000. The formal exchange rate will be defined at the date of the president report approval and this will be applied for the grant agreements with the recipients. The recipients of the IFAD contribution will be exclusively the Regional FOs in Africa.

19 The exchange rate officially applied will be that one of the effective date of the grant agreements.


42

Regional Allocation The Overarching Programme Steering Committee met at the inception phase to deliberate about the

allocation of resources by regions (Africa, Caribbean and Pacific).

The method to be applied for defining the allocation has been defined as follows:

80% of EU/ACP total resources will be allocated at the design phase;

The remaining 20% of EU/ACP resources will be allocated after the MTR based on performance

assessment.

Given that the 10% share managed by IFAD (IFAD coordination and management and indirect costs for

legal and financial services): EUR 28.8 million will be allocated at start-up, EUR 7.2 million swills be

allocated at MTR.

The PSC decided to allocate the 80% of EU/ACP resources available at start up on the basis of 2/3 for

Africa and 1/3 for the Caribbean and Pacific regions on equal share:

Africa EUR 19.2 million

Pacific EUR 4.8 million

Caribbean EUR 4.8 million

IFAD will contribute with an amount of US$ 3 million (approximately EUR 2.6 million20) entirely allocated to

African RFOs (EAFF, PROPAC, ROPPA, SACAU, UMNAGRI) and PAFO. The IFAD contribution will be

100% available to be allocated at inception phase.

The initial amount of the large grant agreements with the recipients will include the 80% of EU/ACP

resources and IFAD resources as indicated above. This amount will potentially be amended at MTR on the

basis of performances to include some top up from the 20% remaining from EU/ACP funding.

However, the design work has been carried out considering the entire implementation period 4.5 years so

on the basis of the amount of the large grant agreements at start-up (including 80% of EU resources) and

the potential top up from the 20% of EU/ACP funding remaining (design with gap, using as working

assumption the same relative share or less).

Following the PSC decision, and after in-depth considerations, the resources allocation by regions and by

recipient will be as explained below.

AFRICA

Tab 8. Resources allocation in the African region at start-up.

AFRICAN REGION / EU-ACP Resources Allocation- EUR

Recipients

Agricord 40% RFOS and PAFO 60% Total

80% start-up

7 680 000.00 11 520 000.00 19 200 000.00

The EU –ACP resources allocated to African region are further apportioned to RFOs and AgriCord

according to the following percentages:

- Agricord 40% of EU/ACP resources allocated for the African region corresponding to

approximately EUR 7.6 million

- Sub-Saharan RFOs and PAFO will receive 60% of EU/ACP resources allocated to Africa,

corresponding to approximately EUR 11.5 million.

20 The exchange rate will be defined the day of the agreement signature.


43

Tab 9 Resource allocation by recipient for design, at start-up and potentially at MTR (tentative). Recipients African Region

IFAD EUR EU/ACP EUR 80% Grant Agreement at start-up

Remaining 20% of EU funding

TOTAL Grants 100%

EAFF 442 500

2 605 000 3 047 500

651 250

3 698 750

PROPAC 442 500

2 605 000 3 047 500

651 250

3 698 750

ROPPA 442 500

2 605 000 3 047 500

651 250

3 698 750

SACAU 442 500

2 605 000 3 047 500

651 250

3 698 750

PAFO 100 000

1 100 000 1 200 000

275 000

1 475 000

UMNAGRI 800 000

- 800 000

800 000

AgriCord 7 680 000 7 680 000

1 920 000

9 600 000

TOTAL 2 670 000 19 200 000 21 870 000 4 800 000 26 670 000

Tab. 11 African Region Design – Tentative Costs allocations by recipient (to be confirmed at MTR).

Costs allocation by Programme Components Total EUR

EAFF

C1. Economic Services 2 044 669

C2. Enabling Environment 622 130

C3. Institutional Development 830 989

C3 - Inception Phase small grants 90 000

C4. Communication and Visibility 110 963

Total 3 698 750

PROPAC






Total 3 698 750

ROPPA




C3 - Inception Phase ROPPA-PAFO small grants 210 000


Total 3 818 750

SACAU






Total 3 698 750

UMNAGRI

C1. Economic Services 442 240


44



C4. Communication and Visibility

Total 800 000

PAFO




Total 1 355 000

AgriCord

C1. Delivery of economic service 6 240 000

C2. Enabling Business Environment 960 000

C3. Institutional Development 1 920 000


Total 9 600 000

PACIFIC

Following the same approach the 80% of resources available at the start-up of the programme, the

amount allocated for the Pacific region is equal to EUR 4.8 million.

PIFON is at its first direct grant from IFAD. Consequently IFAD put in place some measures to mitigate

potential risk in line with IFAD standards. As prudential procedures a step-by-step programming

approach will be adopted:

- PIFON first Grant Agreement will be for 24 to 30 months and include an amount of EUR 2 400 000. At MTR and subject to demonstrated absorption capacity and performance the second tranche of same amount (or more or less according to performance) will be object of a second grant with possible adjustment of the program duration.

Tab 10. Tentative budget allocation first Grant PIFON. COMPONENTS THE PACIFIC REGION (EUR)

EUR %

Component 1: Delivery of economic service 1 200 310 50

Component 2: Enabling Business Environment 479 883 20

Component 3: Institutional Development 635 921 26

Component 4: Communication and Visibility 84 216 4

Total Programme: Phase 1 2 400 329 100

CARIBBEAN

The amount allocated to the Caribbean region is EUR 4.8 million ( 80% of EU-ACP) resources that will be assigned by means of a grant agreements to the Recipients succeeded in the selection process, as presented in the table below. IFAD will provide a small grant for the activities involving Cuban FOs to support their participation in the inter-regional learning processes to ensure regional dynamics in terms of knowledge sharing, learning from experiences and best practices dissemination. The activities involving Cuba will be funded by IFAD resources21. Tentatively, the small grant for activities in Cuba will amount to USD 70 000. Table 11. Tentative Budget Allocation Grants FAO Regional Offcie and AgriCord.

The Caribbean region (EUR)

Programme Component AGRICORD FAO TOTAL

Component 1: Delivery of economic service 683 948 1 969 492 2 653 440

Component 2: Enabling Business Environment 123 178 684 182 807 360

Component 3: Institutional Development 292 874 854 326 1 147 200

Component 4: Communication and Visibility 192 000 192 000

Total 1 100 000 3 700 000 4 800 000

21 The IFAD funds allocation is subject to the internal IFAD approval process.


45

4.2 Tentative workplan and timing The FO4ACP will have an overall duration of 4.5 years. The implementation of activities at the regional level will start in the last trimester of 2019 according to regional programmes of works and AWPBs. The workplan covers:

- Signature of the Contribution Agreements with donors (4 January 2019) - Signature of the Grant Agreements between IFAD and FO4ACP recipients for the Programme Inception

Phase (April 2019) - Design activities during the inception phase (May – July 2019) - Organisation of the programme start-up workshop (year 1 – July 2019) - Signature of the Large Grant Agreements with the FO4ACP Recipients (July – August 2019) - Organisation of yearly Overarching Steering Committees regional Steering committees and KM events

– also in video conference if needed. - Implementation (2019-2021). Based on the full formulation the financing agreements signed with IFAD

and the regional programmes of work RFOs and AgriCord will implement the programme - Annual Supervision missions (April – July every year). - Reporting from IFAD to back donors will be made on the basis of 9 months narrative and financial report

for the first year (January – September 2019) and for the following years on the basis of 12 months (October - September). The report will be based on the annual supervision mission reports and RFOs/AgriCord annual reports including a financial report on legal commitments as well as costs incurred and a tentative/ simplified work plan and budget for the next implementation period.

- Mid-term review (second semester 2021) - Implementation 2022-2023. Based on the MTR PAFO RFOs and AgriCord will implement and complete

the programme - Final evaluation - Final reporting (2023)


46

Annex 1: Results-based Logical Framework22

Results Hierarchy

Hiérachie des résultats

Indicators / Indicateurs Means of Verification / Moyen de

vérification Hypothèses/Risq

ues

Assumptions/

Risks

Name

Description

Baseline

Référence

YR[X]

An

MTR

RMP

End

Target

final

Source

Source

Frequen

cy

Fréquen

ce

Resp.

Overall Objective / Development Objective: Objectif de développement To increase income and to improve livelihood, food and nutrition security and safety of the ACP family farming in the target areas of the project

OO 1. # and % of smallholder rural producers (M/F/Y)

in participating countries with improved income, food

security and livelihoods

TBD 2019 NA +30% survey Twice at

inception

and final

IFAD No major

environmental or

political crisis

Outcome 1: Effet 1 SO # 1: FOs and farmer-led enterprises improve technical and economic services along the value chains

SO.1: # of individual producers benefiting from

FOs/FLEs economic initiatives (M/F/Y) (per value

chain)

170,000

2018 NA 625,000 Reports

RFOs

/LFOs

Annual IFAD

PAFO

RFOs

Legal context

provide safe

environment for

FOs to operate

Outputs: Résultats 1.1 Improved capacity of FOs to deliver economic services

1.1: # of FOs/FLEs providing at least 2 economic

services to their members (N, L)

330 2018 580 1,000

Reports

RFOs

/LFOs

Annual

RFOs /

LFOs

PAFO

No major

economic crisis

Availability of

affordable agric

inputs at national

level

including # of supported economically matured

FOs/FLEs having increased business volume in a

viable way

60 2018 180 360

# of emerging FOs/FLEs having activated approved

business plans

270 2018 400 640

1.2 Improved capacity of FOs to connect their members to markets

1.2: volume of marketed products (all value chains)

by FOs/FLEs members (in tons)

475,000 2018 530,000 620,000

LFOs

books Annual

LFOs

NLOs

Governments

guarantee fair

access to agric.

markets

value of marketed products (all value chains) by

FOs/FLEs members (in million EUR)

3,50 2018 5,20 7,10

1.3 FOs/FLEs improved access to supplementary financial sources (leverage effect) (improvement access to financial services)

1.3: Amount of private sector/other sources

investments mobilised through bankable business

plans (total amount) (in million EUR)

3,10 2018 6,60 11,30 LFOs

books

annual LFOs

NFOs

RFOs

Financial partners

are willing to

engage with FOs

Outcome 2: Effet 2 SO # 2: FOs influence policies and business environments for the transformation of family farming and the development of sustainable, inclusive economic initiatives and farmer-led enterprises;

SO2: # of sector policies and programmes

influenced by FOs

84 2018 NA 210

Base line

and final

reports

Twice at

start and

at the

end

IFAD

PAFO

RFOs

Governments and

business partners

are willing to

devlop inclusive

policies

Outputs: Résultats 2.1. Improved participation of FOs in shaping business environment and smallholder competitiveness in the

2.1: # of policy consultation frameworks /

committees / task forces / processes in which FOs

are participating

300 2018 500 815 List of

attendanc

e

annual

NFOs

RFOs

PAFO

Agric. business

stakeholders are

willing to co-

22 Some baseline data as well as targets will be updated by FAO Regional Office after the finalization of baseline and mapping exercise.


47

Results Hierarchy

Hiérachie des résultats

Indicators / Indicateurs Means of Verification / Moyen de

vérification Hypothèses/Risq

ues

Assumptions/

Risks

Name

Description

Baseline

Référence

YR[X]

An

MTR

RMP

End

Target

final

Source

Source

Frequen

cy

Fréquen

ce

Resp.

agriculture sector # women/youth delegates 100 2018 200 200 manage markets

2.2 FOs contribute to the strengthening of interprofession / consultation platforms

2.2: # value chains coordination platforms and inter-

professions involving members FOs (all value

chains)

50 2018 220 415 National

register annual NFOs

RFOs

All stakeholders

respect adopted

rules

2.3 FOs produce common stands integrating value chains development with cross cutting issues

2.3 # position paper related to value chains

including focus on W/Y contribution (launched at

MTR and disseminated at final)

3 2018 80 160 List of

position

paper

MTR

and final

NFOs

RFOs

PAFO

Expertise is

available to

support FOs

Outcome 3: Effet 3 SO # 3: FOs are accountable organisations able to effectively perform their institutional functions. professionalism of FOs

SO3: FOs membership increase (M/F/Y) 1,400,000 2018 NA 2,200,000 Register

books

Referen

ce and

final

NFOs

RFOs

PAFO

Adhesion to FOs

is free and

voluntary

Outputs: Résultat 3.1 Strengthened governance capacities and representativity

3.1: # farmers/ members attending statutory

meetings

1,600 2018 3,200 7,800 Attendanc

e list

annual LFOs,

NFOs,

RFOS,

PAFO

FOs call statutory

meetings on time

Election are held

in due time

# women 400 2018 900 2,600

# youth 100 2018 500 1,800

# of Women and Youth in leadership positions 50 2018 90 150 List of

elected

3.2 FOs improve their staturory financial accountability 3.2: # of FOs audited annually 150 2018 200 285 Audited

books

annual NFOs

RFOs

PAFO

Auditing capacities

exist

3.3 FOs develop appropriate management tools 3.3: # developed tools (Strategic Plan, performance

oriented annual report, Manuel of procedures) by

FOs (at all levels)

180 2018 320 560 Strategic

doc

Specific expertise

support exists to

assist

3.4. Enhanced knowledge and dissemination among peers for replication and scaling-up

3.4.1: # of good practices, lessons learnt and

experiences documented and shared

30 2018 150 335 List of doc Annual

3.4.2: # peer-to-peer visits/exchanges/events

(region, global)

- 2018 200 440 List of

particip.

Annual RFOs

PAFO

Resources are

available

Outcome 4: Effet 4 OS Enhanced visibility of FO4ACP in the national and regional context including FOs presence on social media (multimedia) (pic, post, videos…)

4.1: # public references quoting the programme/FOs

(press release, articles, social media)

- 2018 200 415 Public /

social

media

At MTR

and at

end

All Public media are

interested in the

sector

farmers' organizations for africa, caribbean and pacific ... · islands farmers organization...

Documents