Extract of Agreement at Completion point

Interim evaluation¹

Introduction

The Root and Tuber Improvement Programme, (RTIP) became effective in January 1999 and was scheduled to close in December 2004. It was extended until Sept. 2005. An Interim Evaluation of RTIP was undertaken during the period May-November 2003. To oversee the evaluation process a group of individuals were identified to make up a Core Learning Partnership² . They included individuals associated with the RTIP from government, scientific institutions, civil society, and the international institutions associated with the Programme. These individuals reviewed the Approach Paper that was drafted to orient the evaluation prior to its start-up. Most met with the evaluation team before the field work in late July – early August 2003 and they participated in a de-briefing and discussion with the team upon completion of the field work. The Office of Evaluation subsequently provided them with a copy of the draft report of the Interim Evaluation for review and comments. It then facilitated the conclusion of this Agreement at Completion Point.

The purpose of the Agreement at Completion Point is to document the recommendations from the Interim Evaluation Report that the partners are willing to support and to record the Actions that will be taken in order to implement those recommendations in future related activities and investments.

Main findings

The Evaluation team found that RTIP has accomplished a number of its original objectives and made some important contributions to the development of the crops that it was designed to support. In particular, it successfully created a nationwide system for the multiplication and dissemination of planting material – widely distributing three improved varieties of cassava. Five varieties of sweet potato were multiplied and distributed in zones 1 and 5, and seven desirable local cultivars were sanitized and distributed. A further five varieties of cassava were released by the programme and are in early stages of multiplication. It has undertaken research and development for more new varieties of cassava and sweet potato that are soon to be released. It has developed and disseminated successful pest management practices, including methods to control Imperata cylindrica and Mononychelus tanajoa. It has set up seventeen Farmer Field Schools and trained more than 1 500 agricultural service staff. The recorded number of farmers who have accessed new materials was about 105 000 at the time of the evaluation. If those farmers that adopted but have not been recorded as such were counted, the number would be considerably higher. RTIP is likely to reach its targeted 720 000 farmers by the end of the project, all other factors remaining equal. At this level of outreach, the cost of the project would be a low USD 14 per beneficiary.

Two major areas of RTIP work were found by the evaluation team to be in need of improvement. Firstly, attention to the poverty reduction goal of RTIP was inadequate. If a second phase of RTIP is to benefit from IFAD-financing, it should focus more systematically on how it can contribute to reducing rural poverty. This will mean explicitly choosing those activities and investments in root and tuber crop production that will lead to increased incomes or increased food security for poorer households. Secondly, RTIP should address with vigor the wide range of issues that relate to the post harvest phase of root and tuber crop production.

recommendations from the interim evaluation agreed upon by core learning partners

Before project closure

On the basis of the evaluation findings and conclusions, the IFAD Office of Evaluation recommended a number of detailed Actions for the remainder of the RTIP implementation period. The implementation of these recommendations will be the responsibility of the Project Coordination Office.

Recommendation of the Office of Evaluation: Given the likely continued difficulties of farmers in marketing surplus output in local markets if the distribution of planting materials is continued at the current pace, it is recommended to reduce arrangements with secondary and tertiary farmers to a minimum level, except where there is a high demand for low-price cassava for large-scale processing. Under the current circumstances, this applies only to farmers supplying the Ayensu Starch Company. In other areas, normal farmer to farmer diffusion patterns should be sufficient for further dissemination of planting material, and the ordinary assistance provided to farmers through the extension service should fully suffice to assist farmers who demand new varieties.

Actions and responsibilities agreed to by the Partners: The partners did not agree to adopt this recommendation. Instead, they agreed that the Programme Coordination Office will have full flexibility to continue the distribution of planting materials at the current pace in the light of its expectations about future trends in prices, demand for outputs and the continuing need to disseminate new varieties.

Recommendation of the Office of Evaluation: RTIP should undertake to complete building works on the insectaries. In connection with the IPM component it should also distribute predators of Large Grain Borer in known hotspot areas. RTIP should also commission a study of the economic impact of the current biological control before designing future IPM investments.

Actions and responsibilities agreed to by the Partners:

• The Programme Coordination Office will ensure completion of building works on the insectaries;
• The Programme Coordination Office will ensure distribution of predators of LGB in known hotspot areas;
• The Programme Coordination Office will commission a study of the economic impact of the current biological control methods.

Recommendation of the Office of Evaluation: While the varietal release programme continues, there should be increased emphasis, even in on-going research programmes on financial and socio-economic analyzes of proposed interventions. In addition, production of extension materials needs to be stepped up and, if possible, a web-site should be commissioned to increase the availability of information generated to eventually include relevant information from other components.

Actions and responsibilities agreed to by the partners:

• The Programme Coordination Office will emphasize financial and socio-economic analyzes of proposed interventions in on-going research programmes;
• The Programme Coordination Office will step up production of extension materials and will increase availability and exchange of information generated from all components.

Recommendation of the Office of Evaluation: To improve RTIP operations generally and to prepare for the next phase investment, RTIP should undertake a cost-benefit analyzes of alternative approaches to processing, comparison of the best set-up and scale for current village-based processing options and guidelines for processors. The same applies for assessments of markets, demand and prices for root and tuber crops and products.

Actions and responsibilities agreed to by the partners:

• The partners agreed that the Programme Coordination Office will undertake a cost-benefit analyzes of current approaches to processing, comparing the best set-up and scale for various village-based group and individual processing options including guidelines for processors;
• The partners proposed and agreed that the Programme Coordination Office will undertake a tracer study of those individuals that have been trained by RTIP in processing techniques in order to determine what was the impact of the training that was conducted and what follow up may be required to that training.
• The partners agreed that the Programme Coordination Office will begin to undertake assessments of markets, demand and prices for root and tuber crops and products.

Recommendation of the Office of Evaluation: Support to groups under the community support and mobilisation component should be concentrated on processing groups and addressing their specific requirements. In addition, in order to support the PSI further, RTIP should respond to the demand for support of groups collaborating with the Ayensu Starch Company.

Actions and responsibilities agreed by the partners:

• The partners agreed that the Programme Coordination Office will concentrate work of community support and mobilisation component on processing groups;
• The partners agreed that the Programme Coordination Office will respond to demand for support from groups collaborating with semi-industrial and industrial users of cassava including the Ayensu Starch Company.

Recommendation of the Office of Evaluation: There should be two officers in charge of the post-production and marketing component. Those staff should develop a work plan in collaboration with colleagues working in adaptive research and community support, beginning with efforts described below pertaining to an eventual phase II.

Actions and responsibilities agreed by the partners:

• The partners agreed to seek more human resources for the post-production and marketing component. Due to budgetary concerns, partners agreed to recruit one person and to consider adding more resources in future;
• The partners agreed to develop work plans for post-production marketing with colleagues working in adaptive research, community support and extension that will begin efforts – including staff training - for implementation of recommendations for Phase II.

Recommendation by the Office of Evaluation: The current M&E system would benefit from a thorough review to see where the collection, generation and processing of data on physical and financial progress can be reduced to the bare essentials. It should also assign an additional staff member full time to implement the basic M&E functions that are retained. It should review monitoring of current log frame indicators of RTIP performance and give greater thought to developing the work it has begun on evaluating impact at the household level and the use of participatory means to do so.

Actions and responsibilities agreed by the partners:

• The partners agreed to review the current M&E system to reduce collection, generation and processing of data on physical and financial progress to the bare essentials. They did not agree to recruit one M&E assistant to help implement the system;
• The partners agreed to review current monitoring of RTIP log frame indicators to develop work begun on participatory evaluation of impact at the household level;
• The partners proposed and agreed to consider how to link RTIP M&E work to the regional M&E officers and look for ways to strengthen the capacity of the latter to collect and analyze data in the second phase.

For future investments

The results of the evaluation support a second phase investment to follow up and consolidate investments and activities that have been undertaken through RTIP to date. In relation to such an eventual investment by IFAD, and to future such investments by the Government of Ghana, it makes the following recommendations for the orientation of such investments.

Re-focus on increased incomes & food security

Recommendation of the Office of Evaluation: RTIP's success in making available improved planting material, leading to increased output levels has been an excellent first step toward reaching poor farmers with new technologies, however still more needs to be done to result in increased income and food security for the wide group of beneficiaries that RTIP was intended to reach. Further, IFAD investments in the development of root and tuber crops in Ghana should maintain those ultimate goals, explicitly designing every component and activity to contribute to their achievement.

Actions and responsibilities agreed by the partners: The partners agreed that IFAD and the Government of Ghana will more explicitly direct future investments in root and tuber crop development to achieve the goals of increased incomes and increased food security.

Re-think what crop development investments most help the poor

Recommendation by the Office of Evaluation: The evaluation found that there is evidence that producers of sweet potatoes and secondary multipliers increased their incomes. However, it found no clear evidence that the incomes of poor farmers had increased as a result of increased output levels achieved when using new varieties distributed by RTIP. This lack of income increases is attributed by the evaluation to the increased production costs associated with the new varieties, low output prices, and the limited options for poor farmers in terms of processing, marketing and consumption. Therefore, it recommends that designers of future investments like these that are intended to reduce poverty carefully reconsider this programme's assumptions about how crop sector development can benefit poor rural households. For example, assumptions about the mix of crops produced by poor farmers in drier areas should be reconsidered and thought be given to whether they can achieve better mixes of yam, cassava, and sweet potato crops.

Actions and responsibilities agreed by the partners:

The partners agreed that IFAD and the Government of Ghana, prior to undertaking further joint investments in the root and tuber crop sector, will study where RTIP and others have made the most significant progress in improving the livelihood systems of the poor rural households with respect to food security and income. They will use these findings in the design of the second phase of RTIP.

Make research and extension more responsive to the needs of the poor

Recommendation by the Office of Evaluation: Agricultural research and farmer field schools, or other extension activities, should be demand-led, not programmed at project appraisal. Farmer priorities must be periodically ascertained in a systematic way. They must then be given greatest weight alongside technical and agricultural policy considerations.

Actions and responsibilities agreed by the partners:

• The partners agreed that The Ministry of Food and Agriculture and IFAD, will include in the design of a second phase for RTIP, procedures for field staff to systematically ascertain the views of poor farmers, using participatory approaches for the analysis of their constraints and potential and ranking of their priorities. These procedures will be developed in harmony with the work of RELC in each region.
• The partners agreed that The Ministry of Food and Agriculture, in the second phase of RTIP and other similar poverty reduction efforts, will identify and rank research topics and for inclusion on research agendas using, among others, the following criteria: i) prevalence of the constraint or opportunity to be addressed among relatively poorer farmers; ii) type and level of benefits expected to accrue; iii) how benefits would accrue; and, iv) to whom benefits would accrue.
• The partners agreed that The Ministry of Food and Agriculture, in the second phase of RTIP and other similar poverty reduction efforts, will prepare training courses and materials to transfer knowledge, including research results, according to the priorities ranked highest by poorer farmers, with due regard to larger technical and policy issues.

Be more selective in multiplication and distribution campaigns

Recommendation by the Office of Evaluation: Overall a more selective approach to multiplying and disseminating the recently released cassava varieties should be taken. Prior to defining that approach, an analysis should be done of the costs of multiplication. Better analysis is also required of how to better match varieties to farmers and locations, taking into consideration factors such as farmer needs and preferences, storage and processing options, the absorption capacity of local markets and alternatives to marketing locally. Large scale campaigns for the multiplication and dissemination of improved varieties should be used only where the consequences of their adoption have been carefully thought through and there is reasonable certainty that assumptions about benefits will hold true. This would be the case, for example, in areas where the government PSI initiative is active and the local market can absorb a large supply response coming from adoption of high-yielding varieties.

28. Action and Responsibilities agreed by the partners:

• The partners agreed that The Ministry of Food and Agriculture, prior to the formulation of a second phase of RTIP, will analyze the financial and economic costs of RTIP-created multiplication and dissemination system.
• The partners agreed that The Ministry of Food and Agriculture, in the implementation of the second phase of RTIP and other similar efforts, will analyze how to better match varieties selected for dissemination to farmers and locations, taking into consideration i) needs and preferences of the farmers who are targeted; ii) storage and processing options; iii) the absorption capacity of local markets; and, iv) alternatives to marketing locally.

Farmer field schools – up or out?

Recommendation by the Office of Evaluation: Farmer Field Schools are successful, but there are too few of them to reach the number of farmers and make the nationwide impact that RTIP seeks. They may represent a good option for farmer training and extension. However, before investing in their replication and up-scaling throughout the country, a study should be undertaken to compare the relative costs and benefits of Farmer Field Schools per farmer beneficiary versus normal extension practices and selected new approaches being carried out in some districts such as "participatory technology development and extension". The programme can then make an informed choice about whether to replicate and up scale the Farmer Field School approach and set down a rationale and strategy for the transfer of knowledge to farmers via training and other means.

Action and Responsibilities agreed by the partners:

• The partners agreed that The Ministry of Food and Agriculture, prior to the formulation of a second phase of RTIP, will commission a study to compare the relative costs and benefits per farmer beneficiary of Farmer Field Schools versus normal extension service practices at the district level.
• The partners agreed that The Ministry of Food and Agriculture and IFAD, in the formulation of the second phase of RTIP, will include a rationale and strategy for the transfer of knowledge on root and tuber crops to farmers via training and other means that includes: total number and type of farmers to be targeted, amount and level of knowledge to be transferred, time frame, human and financial resources required, and expected benefits.

Support entire production chain – research station to market

Recommendation: Future investments by the Government of Ghana in support the development of particular crops, as in RTIP, should be designed to support the entire chain of production, with more balanced investments in each link of the chain.

Action and responsibilities agreed by the partners: IFAD, in the design of the second phase of RTIP, will propose activities to promote active collaboration between technical staff in various MOFA Divisions and staff from other responsible ministries to share knowledge and pool resources on selected product lines or outputs, through task forces or other means.

Shift emphasis from beginning to end of chain

Recommendation by the Office of Evaluation: Future investments for reducing poverty through investment in root and tuber crops should shift emphasis from research and production to processing and marketing.

Action and responsibilities agreed by the partners: The partners agreed that IFAD, the Government of Ghana and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, in the design and implementation of the second phase of RTIP, will identify and make available increased amounts of expertise and resources for investments to develop the processing and marketing of root and tuber crops in Ghana.

Additional recommendations from Core Learning Partners agreed upon for future investments

Improve institutional arrangements for programme management and implementation

Recommendation by the partners: Create a social science capacity at a senior level, (by adding a new post, or by substituting or changing requirements for an existing post) within the Programme Coordination Office to address the issues of targeting, communities and farmer organisations, research priority setting, and post-production issues as well as the needed improvements in M&E and impact assessment.

Recommendation by the partners: Establish officers by zones in the country, as in other IFAD projects, to facilitate management and outreach, for the northern and southern sectors.

Recommendation by the partners: The arrangements for the function and location of the Financial Controller, now posted in Accra, should be discussed with the formulation team during the design of RTIP phase II, together with other ways to improve the design of financial management practices.

Recommendation by the partners: Efforts to improve RTIP monitoring and evaluation and its contribution to programme management should include linking RTIP up with regional M&E officers and strengthening their staff and facilities to fulfil RTIP support functions.

Action and responsibilities agreed by the partners:

• The partners agreed that IFAD, the Government of Ghana and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, in the design and implementation of the second phase of RTIP, will require the appointment of at least one senior social scientist amongst the PCO staff. Such a person will be made responsible for ensuring that the Programme addresses issues of targeting, research priority setting, and post-production issues as well as the needed improvements in M&E and impact assessment.
• The partners agreed that IFAD, the Government of Ghana and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture will establish zonal offices.
• The partners agreed that IFAD, the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, and the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, will discuss with the formulation team for the second phase of RTIP the arrangements for the function and location of the Financial Controller of RTIP, as well as other ways to improve the design of financial management practices and propose concrete measures to improve financial management practices in RTIP's next phase.
• The partners agreed that IFAD, the Government of Ghana and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, in the design of RTIP phase II, would foresee Actions to improve RTIP monitoring and evaluation and its contribution to programme management including linkages with regional M&E officers and strengthening of regional staff and facilities to fulfill RTIP support functions.

Tackle problem of soil fertility depletion

Recommendation by the Partners: With continually growing demand and further improvements in processing and marketing it is expected that root and tuber production levels will increase in the future. Soil fertility research should be undertaken with better links between the Programme, producers and researchers.

Action and responsibilities agreed by the partners: The partners agreed that IFAD, the Government of Ghana and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, in the design and implementation of the second phase of RTIP, will seek to place more emphasis on soil fertility and seek to form stronger links between producers and researchers on areas of soil fertility and other areas of major concern to poor producers.

Explore new possibilities for rtip support to secondary multiplication and distribution of improved planting material

Recommendation by the partners: In order to promote the development of the private sector in the production of planting material and ensure the maintenance of planting material quality standards, the second phase of RTIP will study possible areas for greater private sector involvement in its production while facilitating the access of tertiary farmers to materials from secondary multipliers through agricultural extension services and other means.

Action and responsibilities agreed by the partners: The partners agreed that IFAD, the Government of Ghana and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, in the design and implementation of the second phase of RTIP, will study possible areas for private sector involvement in the production of planting material. It will also make explicit provisions for helping tertiary farmers to access the improved materials produced by secondary multipliers.

Step up work on seed yams, coco-yams fra-fra potatoes and sweet potatoes

Recommendation by the partners: The heavy concentration on cassava during RTIP should be counter-balanced by intensified work on yams, coco-yams, fra-fra potatoes and sweet potatoes in the future. These crops are also widely grown and hold a potential for raising the household food security conditions of the rural poor that should be exploited.

Action and responsibilities agreed by the partners: The partners agreed that IFAD, the Government of Ghana and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, in the design and implementation of the second phase of RTIP, will significantly increase the resources and attention dedicated to root and tuber crops other than cassava.

This Agreement was concluded on 13 May 2004 in Kumasi amongst the following partners to the evaluation:

Mr. Kwaku Owusu Baah, Chief Director, MOFA
Mr. J.A. Poku, Director, Crops Services Directorate, MOFA
Mr. C. D. Anyomi, Director, External Resources Mobilisation, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning
Mr. Felix Amoako, Desk Officer IFAD, External Resources Mobilisation, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning
Mr. Akwasi Adjei Adjekum, National Programme Coordinator, RTIP
Mr. J.N.O. Azu, Programme Technical Advisor and Deputy Country Director, OIC
Mr. Yeboah Asuama, Farmer Wenchi District
Ms. Habiba Yusif, District Development Officer, Bibiani District
Mr. William M. Wiafe, Deputy Regional Director, MOFA
Mr. Robert Asiedu, Plant Breeder, International Institute for Tropical Agriculture
Ms. Patience Mensah, Task Team Leader, World Bank
Mr. Mohamed Manssouri, Country Programme Manager

---

1/ This agreement reflects an understanding among partners to adopt and implement recommendations stemming from the evaluation. The agreement was formulated in consultation with the members of the Core Learning Partnership (CLP).

2/ The Core Learning Partnership was composed of Mr. Kwaku Owusu Baah, Chief Director, MOFA; Mr. J. A. Poku Director, Crop Services Directorate MOFA (replacing Mr. Francis Ofori); Mr. C. D. Anyomi, External Resources Mobilisation, Ministry of Finance; Mr. Owusu-Bennoah, Acting Director General, CSIR; Mr. Akwasi Adjei Adjekum, National Programme Coordinator; Mr. J.N.O. Azu, Programme Technical Advisor and Deputy Country Director, Opportunities Industrialisation Centre, (OIC); Mr. Yeboah Asuama, Farmer, Wenchi District; Ms. Habiba Yusif, District Development Officer, Bibiani District; Mr. William M. Wiafe, Deputy Regional Director, MOFA; Ms. Patience Mensah, Task Team Leader, World Bank; Mr. Mohamed Manssouri, Country Programme Manager; Mr. Robert Asiedu, Plant Breeder, International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA); Mr. Douglas Wholey, Technical Advisor (Agronomy), IFAD; Mr. Alessandro Meschinelli, Technical Advisor (Research), IFAD; Mr. Nebambi Lutaladio, FAO.