AR-NAFAKA-TUBOCHA rev&plan July2015

From africa-rising-wiki
Revision as of 08:21, 11 December 2018 by PopoolaSamuel001 (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

First Annual Review and Planning Meeting
July 8 – 10, 2015
White Sands Hotel and Resort, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
[edit | edit source]


  1. Share updates on project activities implemented and results since inception of the project
  2. Discuss lessons learnt and reflect on these for year 2
  3. Refine project indicators and targets
  4. Training in use of M&E tools for the project
  5. Training in use of communication tools for the project
  6. Share updates on plans for expansion of project activities to Mbeya and Iringa Regions
  7. Develop team work plans and budgets for year 2 of the project
  8. Discuss operational issues affecting project implementation

Day 1 (8July)
08:30 Registration - Devotha Mawole
09:00 Participants Introduction
09:15 Overview of Agenda for the day - Jonathan Odhong
09:20 Welcome

  • Victor Manyong (Regional Director IITA, Chair Africa RISING Steering Committee ESA)
  • Thomas Carr (Chief of Party, NAFAKA)
  • Hoeschle-Zeledon (Coordinator, Africa RISING ESA and WA)

> Representing Betty Maeda (Research and Production Advisor USAID) 09:30 Overview of year 1 of project activities - Haroon Sseguya
10:00 Group photo and networking break around coffee/tea - Gloriana Ndibalema
10:30 Implementation progress of each of the teams (20 minutes presentation + 20 minutes discussion for each presentation)

12:30 Lunch Break
02:00 Implementation progress of each of the teams cont'd

At own time, participants go into groups to discuss the implications of expansion and operational issues for their activities

Presentation by TAMASA Presentation by Meru Agro-tours Ltd

04:00 Coffee / tea break

Day 2 (9 July)
08:30 Overview of agenda for the day - Catherine Njuguna
08:45 Recap of day 1 - Gloriana Ndibalema
09:00 Project indicators - Haroon Sseguya (10 minutes presentation + 10 discussion)
09:20 Feedback by teams on implications of expansion and operational issues - each group leader for the teams (5 Minutes per team)
09:50 Mapping team geographical sites - Fred Kizito
10:00 Introductory presentation on development of next years work plans - Mateete Bekunda
Participants go into their respective groups to develop work plans for the next year 10:15 Coffee / tea break
10:35 Development of team work plans cont'd
01:00 Lunch
02:00 Development of team work plans cont'd
03:00 Presentation of improved work plans (15 minutes presentation + 10 minutes feedback & discussion for each team )
04:30 Coffee / tea break
05:00 Development of team work plans (to incorporate changes based on discussion and feedback cont'd)
07:00 Cocktail

Day 3 (10 July)
08:30 Overview of agenda for the day - Catherine Njuguna
08:45 Recap of day 2 - Gloriana Ndibalema
09:00 Training on communication tools (Africa RISING Communication team to take lead) Project Management Team meeting (will be going on concurrently with both Communications)

10:00 Coffee / tea break
10:30 Training on communication tools (continued)

11:30 Training on M&E (NAFAKA to take lead)

12:40 Feedback from Management Team meeting to the whole group - Hoeschle-Zeledon
12:50 Feedback from the USAID Mission - Elizabeth Maeda, Research and Production Advisor USAID
01:00 Closing and way forward - Bekunda Mateete
01:20 Lunch & Departure

Expected outputs:

  1. Costed project work plan for 2015-2016
  2. Targets for indicators


Background materials

Notes of the meeting

Welcome remarks

  • Victor Manyong (Regional Director IITA, Chair Africa RISING Steering Committee ESA):Manyong noted there were 14 institutions represented in the meeting. This is what Africa RISING is all about. This is a major project for IITA in our ambitious strategy to lift 11 million people out of poverty. We want the technologies and innovations we are developing to be disseminated. This project is about that. At IITA we are developing upstream technologies that need organizations to adapt them and make them more user friendly for farmers. This project is about making them useable. So I am grateful to Africa RISING and FtF for providing these resources.
  • Thomas Carr (Chief of Party, NAFAKA):I have worked with Africa RISING in West Africa. And I am impressed with this operation. Impressed with communications and linkage with NAFAKA which are much better here.
  • Hoeschle-Zeledon (Coordinator, Africa RISING ESA and WA):A warm welcome to all participants to this metign and location. The project is a strategic collaboration between Africa RISING and FNAFAKa in order to achieve greater impact on farmers by building on their strengths. Some of the challenges we faced in year one: Our 3rd partner TUBORESHE CHAKULA is no longer on board as the program was not renewed after its funding phase concluded. But am happy to hear that NAFAKA will be taking on some of the activities. We also encountered floods and theft in the field. The session on presentation on lessons learnt and implementation issues are very important. We need to learn from year one as we plan for year 2. Annks to USAID mission in Tanzania for its confidence in us.A reminder White sands is birth place of AR in February 2012and holds a special place in my heart. And so we are back to where we started. Also, take time and interact after hours as effective partnership are build during social gatherings.
  • Representing Betty Maeda (Research and Production Advisor USAID):We value this exercise and the work you are doing. We hope you will come up with a good review and plan and look forward to the hearing of the good achievements.

Overview of year 1 of project activities - Haroon Sseguya

Presentation by Haroon Sseguya on the overview of year 1 activities for the project

  • The aim of the project is to improve agriculture productivity in two key value chains maize and rice then we added legumes and vegetables for nutrition security.
  • Objectives – Better crops, better practices, natural resource management and enhancing capacities of local communities.
  • Target – 47,000 households with access to improved technologies and secure food for maize & expand improved technologies to 58,000hafor rice.
  • Increase yield of crops by at least 50%
  • Region: first year operated in three regions Manyara, Dodoma and next year we expand to Mbeya and Iringa. Selection based on agro-ecological zone


  • Better crops – good job and new technologies have been identified. Next year we will do participatory selection
  • Post-harvest not much as the crops have not been harvested. The team is in the field.
  • Taking innovations to scale – dissemination and advocacy and M&E. For sustainability we are looking at national institutions. In our approach we will use mother demonstrations plots in district with learners who in turn will establish baby demos and with learners who will train others and lead to grand baby demos in districts.

Emerging issues:

  • Innovations – some activities are not linked to program objectives and indicators
  • in some areas we working with communities who are not growing the crops we are promoting. So we have to revisit the villages we have selected. We need compatibility with interests and socio-economic status of farmers. also need to involve famers in selection
  • Growing crops in sites that are not ideal for crops.
  • Knowledge management - This needs to improve. Data collection is not up to standard. We need to better capture data. Adapt from NAFAKA. Link to GIS
- Our collection of success stories are not being captured
- we need to have exchange and monitoring visits. You find farmers are better organized in some sites.
- Farmers engagement is not strong
- In Kilosa and Mvumero farmer engagements are successful. In other regions there are Innovation Platforms. Therefore teams can learn from each other.
- Partnerships: Integration of partners and team (Vegetables, rice, post harvest) on the ground needs to be strengthened. We need to work more closely more together. Also engage more with local partners more than attending field visits. Work with partners on the ground.

Comment (Irmgard): On the issue that some teams not working together and with local partners, this was one of the the issues we were grappling with AR but now its getting better. We should learn from AR how we managed to overcome these issues.

Comment (Kizito): we could capitalize on Innovation Platforms (IPs) as they bring together different actors private sector, district and local authorities. I also like the learning aspect . Also getting farmers input and farmers interest in certain crops is a good indicator. We as a project need to emphasize on economic empowerment of farmers get access to loans and inputs such as fertilizers.

Comment (Victor Manyong): We are interested in the success stories. When we are part of a team we try to emphasize on problems but we want to hear success stories. As management this is what we share with donors so we need more of these.

Comment (Mateete): We should strengthen NAFAKA and AR and avoid stop referring to each other as AR and NAFAKA as we are now a team.

Maize Team Presentation – Bright Jumbo

Presentation by Bright Jumbo for the maize team

Partners: CIMMYT, CIAT, ICRAF, ARI-Hombolo, IITA, NAFAKA, Aminata quality seeds….

Focus of the team: to deliver improved varieties, better management (good agronomic practices), and improved natural resource management

Key activities of the project:

  • Introduce and promote improved varieties – maize, groundnuts, soybean and beans
  • Demonstrated performance of organic and inorganic
  • The project is introducing/working with 9 varieties that were selected based on attributes of high yields (7 tones and above/ha), better drought tolerance and also low nitrogen tolerance.The legumes: Groundnuts, soybean and beans

Target vs. Achievements:
District Target Number Achieved
Babati 125 125
Kongwa 125 125
Kiteto 125 125
Mvomero 125 125
Kilosa 125 125

Criteria for Selecting Villages

  • Feed the future zones
  • Crop production area
  • Area potentials

The project has set up demonstrations in 5 districts


  • Protocols for setting up demos have been developed
  • Field maps and field books available
  • NAFAKA agronomists have been trained on implementation of demos plots
  • All demo sites have been set up
  • Have successfully set up good agronomic management demos
  • AMINATA to start producing seed at the next season
  • Eight field days conducted in the districts of Babati (2) Kiteteo (1) Kongwa (1) and Kilosa (4) overall the field days have been attended by 1,406 farmers
  • Master plan for managing demo plots set up
  • Draft field guide for maize soybean and beans agronomy developed


  • Severe drought in Kongwa, Kiteto and babati
  • Operational challenges in sites where our partners such as NAFAKA are not present
  • Theft of crops in the field (Maize)

Future plans:

  • Training of lead farmers in Kongwa, Kiteto, Mvomero, Kilosa and Babati
  • Profiling of groups
  • Involvement with community leaders
  • Planned field days in Mvomero District
  • Collection of harvest/yield data
  • Target to initiate soil and water conservation pilot
  • Participatory variety selection involving farmers

Question (Haroon): Why have you not cited the district government structures as partners…..what about ARI-Ilonga, Mikocheni and other important partners meeting?

Answer (Jumbo): This project came to take advantage of the networks already established by NAFAKA, but engaging local institutions is also key, I agree. I think as we proceed we’ll definitely be engaging more.

Question (Haroon): Will the varieties change as new challenges emerge? For example striga weed or water stress etc.?

Comment (Zubeda): There as challenge on getting the seeds for Soybean or groundnuts .The varieties released by AMINATA were selected by farmers and nutrition too was a critical element in the assessment process.

Comment (Tom Carr): There is a great opportunity for us to demonstrate the drought resistant varieties in Kongwa. Farmers are asking what the drought resistant varieties are?

Answer (Jumbo): Private sector play a big role in distributing varieties that are resistant to Striga and tolerant to drought. We hope to establish stronger linkages with the private sector who we hope to commercialize some of the varieties that we are promoting and have tested.

Additional comment (Silvanus): We have been working with Meru Agro and there is a positive feedback from agro dealers who have established village based agricultural advisors. An example is a recent milestone from this arrangement is an order for maize seeds worth 8 tones.

Question (Mateete): The mission challenged us to present spill-over adoption. What are you doing to follow up the people attending field days just to follow up whether by chance they are adopting the technologies?
Answer (Jumbo): Haroon is leading efforts to study on quick adoption and spill-over

Question (Victor Manyong): It will be better next time to aggregate data presented by gender in your subsequent presentations
Additional comment (Silvanus): At NAFAKA we have a special data collection forms (DCF) form that is filled by those who attend the field days, so yes to an extent the data is available on farmers who attend field days, but are not part of our interventions. This can be a starting point for following up on spill-over adoption.
Additional comment (Swai): The data on women and men attending the filed days is available. The bigger challenge is that they keep asking about how to access the seeds and this is an answer that we have yet to give them.
Comment (Judith): At mission level we face the problem of our programs not being known at the local government level. This is very important. USAID is putting in a lot of funds to this projects, but we get very little partnership/collaboration from the local government authorities. It is important therefore to try as much as possible for project/programs to work with/involve the local government

Parking lot issues:

  • From (Freddy): The issue of partnership with all stakeholders may not be possible because they request for money. How do we develop strong partnerships at low costs?
  • From (Freddy): The issue of seed distribution networks…..How can this be made better? More discussion needed. There are possible options to be pursued.

RICE Team Presentation – Senthikumar & Gaudiose Mujawamariya

Presentation by Senthilkumar Gaudiose for the rice team

Activities in 2015:

  • Developed motorized paddy weeder – four weeders were demonstrated, two demos were done per site, 30 farmers involved in each demo. The aim was to select a model (or combination) to be developed into prototype.
  • Develop an electronic decision support tool for farmers to aid with weed management – called riceadvice. The base model has been produced
  • Showing the efficiency of soil and foliar applied micro nutrition in rice: efficiency and economic benefits. 30 on-farm demos done so far in Tanzania
  • Good Agricultural Practice demonstration done. 30 on-farm trials have been done on certified seeds, field bundling and leveling dibble sowing line and timely and best practice application of fertilizer
  • Parasitic weed management demos have been developed in Kyela

Targets vs. Achievements:
1 Number of farmers and others who have applied new technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance 625 538 exposed of which 120 applied 19% 57% 43%
2 Number of rice hectares under improved technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance 580 30 5%
3 Number of individuals who have received USG supported short-term agricultural sector productivity or food security training 725 130 18% 35% 65%
4 Number of food security private enterprises (for profit), producers organizations, water users associations, women's groups, trade and business associations, and community-based organizations (CBOs) receiving USG assistance 71 55 individuals (interviewed) 30% 70%
5 Number of rural households benefiting directly from USG interventions 775 339 43% 52% 48%
6 Number of beneficiaries with home gardens or alternate crops as a proxy for access to nutritious foods and income 149 - - - -

Key results:

  • 120 farmers, 23 extensionists, 13 engineers and 6 researchers trained
  • Elements for locally improved weeders identified
  • A decision support tools has started, expected to be ready in the 3rd quarter of 2015
  • Foliar nutrition – 30 farmers have been trained on Good Agronomic Practices , 40 farmers trained on parasitic weed control
  • Baseline survey and crop protection analyses were also completed by the team
  • The team also conducted market visits and experimental auctions. Results are available
  • Value chain work done with practical sessions on experimental auctions. The results indicate that the Komboka variety isn’t preferred by consumers due to high breakage. There fore promoting the Komboka variety isn’t very advisable

Challenges in crop protection services:

  • Reactive nature of plant health services
  • Weak linkages/ partnerships
  • Super Ifakara rice variety was not available, another local variety (mbwambili) was used instead

Key lesson learnt:

  • More training of project partners required


Comment (Swai): Put the right names for the rice varieties on the presentation

Question (Mateete): How is the rice team planning to achieve the main indicator to their activity which is the rice hectarage? So far they have only achieved 5%

Answer (Senthikumar): The 5% only represents only the hectarage achieved by Africa Rice, NAFAKA probably has more. NAFAKA and Africa Rice need to combine the hectarage. During planning for the work plan for next year we shall agree on a strategy to ensure that the combined hectarage by NAFAKA and Africa Rice to ensure the target for improved hectarage is achieved.

Question (Irmgard): Is Africa Rice doing any post-harvest work on rice?

Answer (Senthikumar): No, there is currently no work on post-harvest by the team.

Comment (Kennedy): You can get numbers on hectarage through the seed companies by calculating the quantity of sales against the number equired per hectare. Most seed companies are promoting SARO5

Question (Veronica): Is there a provision to adopt the app to be adopted for the local conditions e.g. for usability of framers. How will the farmers be able to use it? What are you doing to make it usable?

Answer (Senthikumar): The app only needs internet during installation only, after that no internet is required. It will be in local Kiswahili language. The operators will be the agro-dealers, and they will use it during purchase of fertilizer where the app will be able to print out on fertilizer application rates etc.

Vegetable Team Presentation – Andreas Gramzow

Presentation by Andreas Gramzow for the rice team

Key activities:

  • Established demo plots and home garden trials – The selection of the home garden trials was done with extension officers at district and village level. Training of Trainers done for 149 farmers who have started their baby trials. Currently there are 517 grand baby trials out of this
  • IPM training was done in June 2015
  • Field day and food safety training planned for July 2015
  • Post-harvest and seed reproduction training to be done in August 2015
  • Yield data expected to be collected

Targets vs. Achievements:

Number of farmers and others who have applied new technologies or management practices 625 Not yet available - - - - - -
Number of individuals who have received USG supported short-term agricultural sector productivity or food security training 725 149 21.0% 36.2% 63.6% 40
f/m (%)

(15: 85)

f/m (%)

50 : 50)

f/m (%)

(35.6 : 64.4)
Number of community-based organizations (CBOs) receiving USG assistance 71 9 (informal farmer groups) 12.7% - - 3 3 3
Number of rural households benefiting directly from USG interventions 775 666 85.9% 44.0% 56.0% 118
f/m (%)

(21.1 : 78.8)

f/m (%)

65.9 : 34.1)

f/m (%)

(37.8 : 62.2)
Number of beneficiaries with home gardens or alternate crops as a proxy for access to nutritious foods and income 149 149 100% 36.2% 63.6% 40
f/m (%)

(15: 85)

f/m (%)

50 : 50)

f/m (%)

(35.6 : 64.4)

Important tables to look out for in the presentation:

  • Adoption rate of 26 direct beneficiaries in the Babati District (in %)
  • Preliminary yield results from the demo plots
  • Profit margin of traders in Babati in % of (share of traders’ margin in total selling price)
  • Willingness to cooperate among traders and farmers in the Babati District 9trader and farmer survey)

Challenges and Constraints faced by team:

  • Gender – low participation of women in Babati district
  • Floods and droughts – interfered with some of the demo plots
  • Power struggle in some of the project villages, therefore affecting the work
  • Inputs – availability of adequate chemicals

Activities that need improvement:

  • Market access activities
  • Improving group dynamics – joint purchase of inputs and sale of products
  • Women participation
  • Access to seed, fertilizers and chemicals

Plans based on lessons learnt:

  • Work further on market access training to improve farmers negotiation power and access to market information
  • Improvement of women quota
  • Careful selection of group leaders
  • Site selection/careful selection of demo plots


Comment (Kenneth): Be cautious in use of the term “adoption” What strategies do you put in place to cushion farmers from disease attacks? E.g. Tuta absoluta? What is your next plan to ensure farmers get more control on markets?

Answer (Ndunguru): We initially linked up with the Ministry of Agric to work against diseases like Tuta absoluta. Now we have trained our farmers on this and equipped them

Answer (Gramzow): Perishability of crops is not the main issue in the project site, because the value chain is very short. This was discovered through the market survey done. The farmers / traders cited market (places of selling) as a bigger issue. Possibly therefore we should link them to hotels and more big consumers etc. This implies that probably engage/develop farmer groups etc.

Question (Judith): You mentioned that the extension staff were motivated . What is the secret to this for your team? The marketing component wasn’t focused on at project start. What is your experience…did you face any post-harvest loses because of this?

Answer (Gramzow): We keep the village extension workers informed and work more closely with them than the district extension workers. They are better.

Comment (Haroon): We need to see more success stories from the vegetable team

Question (Gaudiose): Can you consider working closely with Tanzania Horticultural Association (TAHA)? Perhaps they can help with the issues regarding farmer markets.

Answer (Gramzow): Yes, we will consider working with TAHA

Question (Haroon): What are the plans for sustainability as AVRDC is planning to have final visit to Babati villages?

Answer (Gramzow): We will select 3 villages of the old pilot villages and do the market trainings as we move to the new 9 villages that we are going to. We may not be able to continue providing the trainings to the original villages plus the old villages.

Question (Mateete): How are you collaborating with Africa Rice?

Answer (Gramzow): We have selected 3 villages in Kilombero (where Africa Rice) are also working. However it is not very easy to grow vegetable after rice. So this is ongoing in the next year.

Comment (Irmgard): There is no consistency in the scaling approach….something needs to be done?

Comment/parking lot issue (Irmgard):
I did not hear of the other team doing a baseline study…..what is the consistency between the teams? There is also very little overlap in the project sites where the teams are working?

Comment (Haroon): There are teams in common location, but others don’t even know each other.

Comment (Swai): The Africa RISING has got the Innovation Platforms as a means of involving important stakeholders (District Agricultural Officers) in the work of project. However sometimes it is impossible to achieve that there is better information flow within the government officials who attend the platform meetings.

Post-harvest Team Presentation - Ibrahim Shabani

Presentation by Ibrahim Shabani for the post-harvest team

  • Post harvest objective is to to reduce food from research huge losses from waste and spoilage. For grain and legumes losses are 20 – 40 during harvest, 5% during shelling and 15 – 25% transportation and markets while vegetables losses are about 30. While technologies exist, they remain un adopted due to lack of skills to use them.
  • We need to provide innovative management technologies. We did studies on a.) farmers knowledge gaps – huge gaps included on moisture measurement, use of pesticide proper storage and insect identification. And on b.) Post harvest control practices where artificial control and pesticides uses were high.

'T'arget beneficiaries

1 Number of farmers and others who have applied new technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance 625 KITETO 43 6.6% 67 33
^ ^ ^ KONGWA
2 Number of rural households benefiting directly from USG interventions 775 KITETO 85 10.9 14 15
^ ^ ^ KONGWA 85 10 12 14
^ ^ ^ MVOMERO 85 10 13 15

Output: We need trainings on improved methods for storage, and ensure public health safetey investiagions.

Key achievements

  • Trainings on improved drying technologies
  • Promoting hermetic bags
  • Training farmers processors on fortification


  • Wrong expectations – some expected food aid so they doctored responses
  • Long dry season which caused crop failure.

Overall, it is important to note that post-harvest activities just started and hence more results will be gathered and presented by the team after the upcoming season


Comment (Irmgard): Clarify on the numbers for target of achievements by teams. And for lying numbers – check with social scientists for indirect questions. Answer (Abass): It’s something we encounter when we ask farmers questions. They may not be correct but they help in identifying trouble areas.

Question (Senthikumar): What recommendations are we asking on weed control? Pesticides?
Answer (Abass): We’re not recommending the use of pesticides. The hermatic bags do not have oxygen and all pests die. From farmers we have seen they use pesticide heavily. They do not know how to use pesticide. They overdose without knowing implications.

Question (Chaacha): Public safety issue should include mycotoxins especially at harvest . We have statistics and baselines from other partners indicating that the level of mycotoxin contamination are very high. Are we considering doing something about this?
Answer (Abass): There are colleagues already working on that. We are leaving them to it.

Question (Freddy Baijukya): Legume farmers such soybean and groundnuts farmers are market driven when producing these crops. One issue they all ask is markets. So are we planning to expand on markets.
Answer (Abass): Yes we have to extend value addition to other crops.We also need to strengthen our work with other teams to add value

Comment (Bekunda): We need to stop this kind of institutionalized thinking and start thinking as one team

Discussion of expansion and operational issues - Silvanus Mruma

Presentation by Silvanus Mruma on expansion and implications

  • NAFAKA objectives are poverty reduction, income increase, women and youth inclusion in value chains in rice and maize. NAFAKA is all about staple value chain – key activities demo plots, ToTs for extension agents, lead farmers and agro-dealers

Expansion to Mebya and Iringa:

  • Iringa: there are rice and maize. Majority is maize production. We have identified millers to work with.
  • Mbeya – 3 districts. Scaling up activities – scale up trade and market efficiency. Project has identified hub-agro-dealers in Mbeya and Iringa. We are proposing input supplies network starting from big agro dealers who will supply to hub dealers and down to local dealers to associations farmers women, youth
  • To create demand we will use mother demos. And baby demos by farmers. We will produce small packs for demo plots. Also identified key crops target for each district.
  • Identified partners. (RUDI, MVIWATA, FIPS and MVIWATA). We are focussing on trade and marketing


Question (Mateete): NAFAKA, we are supposed to go together I see NAFAKA has planned identified sites and gone ahead . how do we plan together as a team?

Comment (Fred): These are thoughts on way forward. How can we modify and go together. Based on resources available and how many systems are involved. Link in the economics but we need to plan what resources are available. On sites – there’s a chance of spreading ourselves thinly. As too many sites have been selected.

Question (Swai): SAGCOT has done a lot of investment. So we explore this before we duplicate. We need to have synergies. Answer (Silvanus): We have contacted them and some of our partners, RUDI, has a big project under Big Results Now. We also know weaknesses, where they reach and where it does not reach.

Presentations by TAMASA and Meru Agro-Tours

  • TAMASA is a new project working in (Tanzania, Ethiopia and NigeriaI key partners are CIMMYT, IITA (Nigeria). its aim is to close attainable yield gap. Use modern large data to get to attainable yield. Collect all available information and identify what is missing. Project is looking forward to generating open access database increasing seeks to add value to what partners are doing. There many tools that will be used for nutrients, yield etc. We will work in Northern and southern highlands .

Presentation by Meru Agro-tours Ltd

  • Working in Mwanza, Mbeya and Iringa. has 45 employees. its partners include CIMMYT,AGRA etc. Lessons – demos and field days, small pack and agric shows. Good planning is important demo plot planting and good field days organizations. Farmers are risk averse they have to see to believe

Question (Haroon): (For Meru Tours) Do you have any experience in organizing farmers in group experience?
Answer (Chacha): Yes working in Patient Purchasing Program (PPP) and will use farmers groups established by WFP.

Question (Victor Manyong): This is an information sharing session on what are doing but no one is sharing their budget?
Answer (Imgard): AR/IITA has received grant of 2.2 million for year one. Shared through subcontracts to CIMMYT, Africa Rice, IITA etc. are not putting additional money.
Answer (Silvanus): NAFAKA – Is a 30 million USD for 5 years. Our contribution is in kind we are working same areas and same target groups. Unless it’s an added activity we have incorporated new technologies.

Comment (Bright): This project would like take opportunities to work with Private Companies. We worked with Chacha in the QPM varieties released and also with AMINATA on another one. Release process is tedious so the opportunity is good.

Question (Fred Kizito): I see clearly linkages with TAMASA in terms of timelines when is it kicking off? Potential collaboration and sharing of resources
Answer (Chacha): 6 months inception ended in April. Current activity is yield baseline in southern highlands TAMASA budget to Tanzania is 3.4 million for five years.

DAY 2 ( 9 July, 2015)

Operational Issues –Haroon Sseguya

Presentation by Haroon Sseguya on the operational issues

Issues that need to be clarified/ improved during group discussions based on yesterday’s discussions:

  • Are we scaling up or out in the teams?
  • How to involve local (especially district agriculture) institutions
  • Monitoring data collections (DFCs, Success stories)
  • Exchange visits….need to be encouraged within the project
  • NAFAKA Presence….How do we deal with this within the project. For example in Babati where we don’t have NAFAKA presence we need to think about how to get better outcomes operational wise

Question (Senthikumar): We need clarity on the resources (human, financial and time) available for scaling? What will each partner contribute?

Answer (Mateete): Africa RISING responsibility is mainly to demonstrate the technologies and train the extension team. Africa Rice was supposed to use the technologies they put in the proposal to work with NAFAKA and train extension people to advance those technologies. NAFAKA role is to take lead farmers. What is expected from Africa Rice is indicators on rice hectarage under improved rice technologies.

Comment (Kizito): We need to be aware that the lead farmers need something to keep them motivated as Trainers of Trainers. So as we work in groups we need to consider this.

Group Feed backs on expansion on operational issues:

Maize Team – Fred Kizito

Three issues raised by the team:

  • Gaps noticed on who the team partnered with e.g. SAGOD initiative, green reference group, USAID, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, AGRA, FIPS etc…..possibilities of getting additional funding also exist with some of these institutions
  • There were clear challenges on lack of presence on the ground by some partners
  • NAFAKA proposals about on-ground agronomists – leaving the agro-dealers alone on ground to do the work may not provide the best results .Options add local residents/VBAAs (someone with great technical knowledge).
  • Expansion in south – TAMASA already has baseline data that could be used to help the team as it does the expansion


Comment (Silvanus): We have two types of sub-contractors e.g. FIPS and MVIWATA. FIPS provides agronomy support while MVIWATA provides the association support work. The bigger challenge comes in certain areas where you don’t have sub-contractors like FIPS, but we need to set up trials in those areas. The options therefore left are probably for Africa RISING to support an agronomist employed by the agro-dealers.

Comment (Freddy): Much as you have the NAFAKA people on the ground they may be overloaded by the responsibilities.

Way forward (Mateete): We need to put these challenges as justifications for asking for more money from the donor. During group exercise, let us put these challenges in writing. Another important question to the teams is whether they have really spent all the money in their account?

Post-Harvest Team- Ibrahim Shabani

Presentation by Ibrahim Shabani on feedback from the post-harvest team

Issues on expansions and operational issues:

  • Plan to synchronize some post-harvest activities with the other teams requires joint planning. How will we achieve that
  • Change of the plans mid-season needs to be agreed and understood by all the teams e.g in year 1 the beans group in Africa RISING changed plans mid-way , but this was never communicated to us. This is a vital lesson we learnt from Africa RISING and we are alerting the rest about this.
  • Expansion will mean increase project expenditures and costs

Comment (Abbas): We’d like to have a scaling diagram for post-harvest and then we get names of farmers from the NAFAKA. Secondly, we need another category of people like marketing specialists and not only agronomists to work with / train on post-harvest.

Vegetable Team – Andreas Gramzow

Presentation by Andreas Gramzow on feedback from the vegetable team

General approach and issues:

  • We plan to keep our general approach, but maybe add some activities and include in our current program post-harvest technology support. We intend to add post-harvest techs like ZECC or small scale onion storage.
  • We plan to visit the 9 villages more regularly than we had initially planned so as to maintain contact and monitor progress. However we may not have intensive training with them like we did in the first year

Expansion issues:

  • We selected three new pilot village together with Africa Rice….we will identify the best vegetable to be grown AFTER RICE HARVESTS. The villages are Msfini, Ichonde, Kisaswa or Idete in Kilombero district. We plan to use residual moisture after rice harvest.
  • We plan to select three additional villages in Iringa together with NAFAKA (3 in Kilolo and 3 in Iringa District)

Mapping team geographical sites - Fred Kizito

See the template for mapping the team geographical sites presented by Fred Kizito

  • We need to think about the What ( better crops, better crop management, conserving natural resources, improving household nutrition, reducing food wastage and spoilage…etc)
  • We need to think about How (Tools and technologies, targets engaged, partnerships
  • We also importantly need to focus on the where? These are the key potential sites where each of the teams will be working. This will help us to better synchronize our activities as the teams and NAFAKA. Each of the four groups are therefore (during the planning session) supposed to fill in a template that shows where they work. This template will show the sites and partners where each of the team to synchronize

Comment (Muthoni): We need to possibly to develop a template for mapping the success and failure of interventions with variables for success/failure.

Project indicators - Haroon Sseguya

Presentation by Haroon Sseguya on the project indicators

Emerging issue from the presentation: How do we measure the spill-over adoption?

Comment (Victor Manyong): Develop a working group to look at how the project teams can report on the spill over adoptions.

Members of working group to give way forward on spillover adoption:

  1. Haroon Sseguya
  2. Freddy Baijukya
  3. Gaudiose Mujawamariya
  4. Andreas Gramzow
  5. Silvanus Mruma
  6. Francis Muthoni

Next action: Haroon to convene a virtual meeting with members of the working group to agree on a way forward that will be communicated to all.

Introductory presentation on development of next year's work plans - Mateete Bekunda

After Presentation by Mateete Bekunda, all the teams proceeded to engage in group work and develop their work plans. They then presented this in plenary and received the comments below:

Questions & Comments for the Rice Team

Question (Freddy): Why are baselines needed? Why not use available data? If moving to Mbarare why are you not involving ARI-Uyole? Answer (Senthikumar): We need the baselines to understand the prevailing situation in the regions. Regarding working with ARI Uyole, Yes if they are there, we will work with them.

Comment (Mateete): This i just to remind teams that our aim as a project is to reach the target numbers we committed to in the proposal. So regarding the activities like baselines etc. You can keep doing them as long as they continue to help you meet the target numbers we have, otherwise if they don't add to you meeting the target numbers, I would advise you don't concentrate on them.

Comment (Silvanus): NAFAKA has been working in rice districts in Mvomero and the concerns are water management interventions. You will be doing GAP demonstrations involving varieties. I would also recommend demonstrations on water managements as we have logging and increased salination(Mbozi, Iringa Rural):

Answer (Senthikumar): Point taken. but we want to work in locations where there is water control. There are technologies where water is not controlled. But with budget and resources we want where water is controlled.

Additional comment (Silvanus): First you control water then you manage it. So we are going to Dakwa irrigation , Mikindo and Mvomero irrigations schemes and Mbarari. In Kilombero it’s a big problem water is not controlled. When it rains it floods.

Questions & Comments for the Vegetables Team

Comment (Mateete): The placement of training and capacity building elsewhere other than community development. So when we get numbers we know number of capacity building and also number of people using technologies. Most of technologies are training on IPM. So revise where you put numbers. Answer (Gramzow): Noted, we will change this

Question (Abass): Please can you explain some of the post-harvest technologies planned by the team? Answer (Gramzow): These include preparing vegetables for transportation after harvesting. Technologies include the cooling chambers and onion storage. We are testing 3 kinds of onion storage to see the most successful. Each village will get Sac.. Farmers said they’re close to markets so they don’t need storage farmers

Follow-up comment (Abass): Technologies depend on volume. So if we are encouraging intensification we will need these technologies. If we want them to expand markets to Dar es Salaam etc. availability of technologies it will enable them produce more and transport longer. Fruit and vegetables storage and packaging is the biggest constraints. Answer (Gramzow): Yes, that is why I said we have to see farmers in the villages and see what they need. I fully agree but most PH is on transportation. So we will not put technologies in the villages and farmers will not use them.

Questions & Comments for the Maize Team

Comment (Fred): This is a question for all the four teams. We need to decide what happens to the mother trials in year 2. We need to come with narrative to justify resources for supporting mother trials.

Answer (Gramzow): For the vegetables team, we are visiting the old farmers or call them and see what they did.

Comment (Mateete): This is one way of measuring adoptions by looking what mother demos are doing. As a project how do see if there are uptakes? What types of technologies will be would like to go back and check. For maize team conduct post-season assessment with farmers when farmers are selecting varieties. Also, after farmers field day farmers have made selections we need to follow them up. For mother trials we can have many innovations but as we go down farmers will select what they want and technologies will reduce to even one.

Question & Comments for the Post-harvest Team

Comment (Hassan): At AVRDC we have vegetable soybean with groundnut flavor. We can share these varieties

Answer (Freddy): This is wonderful. But have they been released?

Comment (Sylvanus): In Kilolo and Mbozi there will be cooperation with VIWATA. We have farmers association in Kilolo. for the the vegetable soybean, Dr Zubeda can help with release process. For legumes’ there are no private company producing seeds.

(Mateete): The maize team is planning to do warehousing. Will the post harvest team be involved? These are the kind of activities that will help us reach the target numbers

Answer (Abass): We did not include warehousing in our activities, but we will add it. I would also just urge the other teams to look at our proposal for every crop to ensure they support the work they are doing. Hermetic bags go very well with warehousing. We have ordered 1,500 bags. We will introduce that.

Comment (Chacha): For vegetables registration is not mandatory. we can find out if they can go straight to market. On question of seed companies to produce legumes seeds-as long as we are assured of market, we will produce it.

Question (Victor): In Morogoro we have an investor who buys parboiled rice. Is it a post-harvest technique that we can incorporate in plans?

Answer (Abass): We decided not to go into rice for now. We should not ignore this new soybean variety it’s important for under 5 due to difficult of nutrition. So test it under AR and by year 3 maybe we can be ready for registration and to ensure we do not loose these material.

Comment (Irmgard): I have seen some project activities are starting in August and September. However, this project closes at the end of September. I do not, yet have information - from USAID about second year funding so we may get this information by end of Sept. But we cannot renew contracts if we do not have the go ahead from the USAID mission. So if we submit our proposals by end of July, we can hope they will make up their mind by end of August.

Question (Kizito): Do we have to write a proposal every year?

Answer (Irmgard): No but we have to give new work plan and budget. And it depends on funds from congress. We are facing the same challenge in the mother Africa RISING project.

DAY 3 (10 July, 2015)

Training on communication tools

M&E training

Presentation on M&E by Alvin Massawe (NAFAKA)

M&E is designed to gather and manage information; reflect critically on what we are doing. It is based on Resluts Framework linked to a hypothesis or theory of change. What are indicators? They are measurable index of results to be used as evidence to evaluate if a project is moving in the right direction guided by the project objectives Indicators: we have output (such as no of trainings held and farmers trained), outcomes (farmers change behavior) and impact (increased income)

At NAFAKA we have two types of Project Management Plan (PMP) – document to execute project

  1. The narrative PMP also called data collection framework. It shows indicators, methods, frequency timing reporting
  2. Data matrix

- Data collection is carried out routinely using Data Collection Forms (DCF) or through the annual outcome survey to collect information on outcome indicators.
- Routine data – is collected by project technical staff who are expected to report on activities against targets.
- Annually beneficiary outcome-based survey helps to see whether activities are bringing the intended changes to the beneficiary. Help management to inform future decision.
- We use a database sharepoint Office365

Questions & Comments:

Question (Irmgard): Africa RISING has its own M&E, IITA and now NAFAKA do as well. How we will coordinate all this?

Question (Abbas): Can we all be able to access all this data and information we are providing as we will want to use it? On data flow mechanism, how will all the information be collected and passed on to the next person?

Answer (Haroon ): Richard presented and M&E plan for NAFAKA. We need to develop our own M&E and appoint someone to be responsible for M&E for the project. All members will get these data collection forms and see how info is carried on to the database manager.

(Silvanus): It took us a while to get all the indicators from the USAID mission after the activities had started. We started last year but got indicators this year. We have done all these activities but we had not captured all information needed.

Way forward: NAFAKA will submit all the forms to Haroon to forward to teams to collect information. Every person is an M&E person. All target groups have to be registered and where we have individual farmers –we have to register them. Also Alvin Massawe to conduct a three day training on data quality and data collection and audit and analysis. The training will include demonstrations for filling in the DCF for participants at demos and for home gardens. Each team to nominate someone for the training and Haroon and Silvanus to follow up on the organization of the training.

Review of all Parking Lot Issues

  1. Seed distribution networks and availability

Comment (Freddy): We request Project management to link with other initiatives working on seeds as this is a small grant. E.g. AGRA ISST are giving grants. Can we convince them to give money in the areas we are working?

Question (Mateete): Do we have adequate seeds for this season especially legumes?
Answer: Yes, at AMINATA we will have one ton of beans and soybean, ground nuts. (Jumbo) Maize is not a problem as it will be supplied by seed
companies. Rice and vegetables are also not a problem.

Question (Swai): Will we be able access fertilizers on time?
Answer (Chacha): I have visited YARA in Mbeya and they had a lot of fertilizers. It’s a question of contacting their agronomists in the field on time.

Answer (Victor Mgoo): At NAFAKA there’s no problem we assign agro-dealers to supply fertilizers in the in areas we are working.

2. Success stories
Question: Do we need a framework /guidelines?
Answer: We were informed there are guidelines on how USAID wants in the success stories. We will analyze this and share widely

3. Learning from each other: (Jonathan) Yes its planned for though the annual meetings and also use communication tools.

4. Integration – (Jonathan) also covered in the joint planning we did and the info we are starting

5. Expansion vs.impact: (Jonathan) Are we spreading too thinly. The way forward is we plan and budget and justify expansion and if budget is not expanded then expansion will not be possible. We do not have this information. Let’s plan and wait and see.

6. Consistency in scaling approach – we agreed it is not a must for all the teams to be consistent the scaling approach but document their approach.

Report from the Project Management Team Meeting – Irmgard

  • Minutes of the PMT meeting will be posted on Wiki for this project.
  • Data and M&E discussion – We also have our M&E plan and were adviced to put this project under this framework. Were advised to hire a database manager –Francis nominated. NAFAKAA will have access to this data and we will see how to migrate to AR though this may be a challenge as we are using different platforms
  • FtF reporting – indicators are clear. IITA is grantee and we are expected to report to USAID and now to NAFAKA. We have to see how to deal with this to avoid double reporting
  • AR success stories – there are guidelines to follow.
  • Rice team – there was an appeal to the team to stick to the project proposal and it’s about scaling and not researching technologies
  • Improve communication between AR and NAFAKA – it was pointed out Haroon is now based in Morogoro and he should attend NAFAKA meetings (quarterly and annual).
  • Remind partners there are opportunities to do research on scaling up. This is of interest to Africa RISING mother project.
  • Sites where project is active and NAFAKA is absent in Kilosa and Babati - Teams to budget for agronomists on in each district to fill in this gap.
  • Involvement of local governments and how we should do this – there was no final conclusion but we continue invite them to meetings and get them interested.
  • In Babati community empowerment has been weak due to NAFAKA absence. We should look at what NAFAKA has done. So exchange visit to Babati for advice and also contract national institutions to help.
  • Collaborate with other institutions - . Tom Carr recommended we find initiatives with scaling up and partner with them.

Closing remarks by Mateete:

  • Latest deadline for receiving proposals developed at workshop (rice, post-harvest and maize) deadline is Friday (17 July, 2015) next week
  • Teams with field days during this election years to be careful to avoid politics. We do not want to be accused of giving politicians money.
  • Last quarter report – get some of you to help in writing a final year report.
  • We have learned a lot from NAFAKA and we hope to these tools can be used in the mother AR. This partnership is very good.
  • Overall we had a successful meeting. Very good facilitation by Jonathan and Communications team. Thank you everyone for your active participation.

Organizers Page-