"programme_id","programme_title","programme_language","programme_type","other_program","iso3code","country_name","program_location","area","status","start_date","end_date","brief_description","references","related_policy","new_policy","partner_gov","partner_government_details","partner_un","partner_un_details","partner_ngo","partner_ngo_details","partner_donors","partner_donors_details","partner_intergov","partner_intgov_details","partner_national_ngo","partner_nat_ngo_details","partner_research","partner_research_details","partner_private","partner_private_details","partner_other","partner_other_details","cost","fsector_0","fpartner_0","fdetails_0","fsector_1","fpartner_1","fdetails_1","fsector_2","fpartner_2","fdetails_2","fsector_3","fpartner_3","fdetails_3","fsector_4","fpartner_4","fdetails_4","fsector_5","fpartner_5","fdetails_5","fsector_6","fpartner_6","fdetails_6","fsector_7","fpartner_7","fdetails_7","fsector_8","fpartner_8","fdetails_8","fsector_9","fpartner_9","fdetails_9","fsector_10","fpartner_10","fdetails_10","fsector_11","fpartner_11","fdetails_11","fsector_12","fpartner_12","fdetails_12","fsector_13","fpartner_13","fdetails_13","fsector_14","fpartner_14","fdetails_14","fsector_15","fpartner_15","fdetails_15","fsector_16","fpartner_16","fdetails_16","fsector_17","fpartner_17","fdetails_17","fsector_18","fpartner_18","fdetails_18","fsector_19","fpartner_19","fdetails_19","fsector_20","fpartner_20","fdetails_20","fsector_21","fpartner_21","fdetails_21","fsector_22","fpartner_22","fdetails_22","fsector_23","fpartner_23","fdetails_23","fsector_24","fpartner_24","fdetails_24","fsector_25","fpartner_25","fdetails_25","fsector_26","fpartner_26","fdetails_26","fsector_27","fpartner_27","fdetails_27","fsector_28","fpartner_28","fdetails_28","fsector_29","fpartner_29","fdetails_29","fsector_30","fpartner_30","fdetails_30","fsector_31","fpartner_31","fdetails_31","fsector_32","fpartner_32","fdetails_32","fsector_33","fpartner_33","fdetails_33","fsector_34","fpartner_34","fdetails_34","fsector_35","fpartner_35","fdetails_35","fsector_36","fpartner_36","fdetails_36","fsector_37","fpartner_37","fdetails_37","fsector_38","fpartner_38","fdetails_38","fsector_39","fpartner_39","fdetails_39","fsector_40","fpartner_40","fdetails_40","fsector_41","fpartner_41","fdetails_41","fsector_42","fpartner_42","fdetails_42","fsector_43","fpartner_43","fdetails_43","fsector_44","fpartner_44","fdetails_44","fsector_45","fpartner_45","fdetails_45","fsector_46","fpartner_46","fdetails_46","fsector_47","fpartner_47","fdetails_47","fsector_48","fpartner_48","fdetails_48","fsector_49","fpartner_49","fdetails_49","action_id","theme","topic","new_topic","micronutrient","micronutrient_compound","target_group","age_group","place","delivery","other_delivery","dose_frequency","impact_indicators","me_system","target_pop","coverage_percent","coverage_type","baseline","post_intervention","social_det","social_other","elena_link","problem_0","solution_0","problem_1","solution_1","problem_2","solution_2","problem_3","solution_3","problem_4","solution_4","problem_5","solution_5","problem_6","solution_6","problem_7","solution_7","problem_8","solution_8","problem_9","solution_9","other_problems","other_lessons","personal_story","language" "11536","Feed the Future: The U.S. Government’s Global Hunger and Food Security Initiative","English","Multi-national","","TZA","United Republic of Tanzania"," Tanzania |Morogoro, Tanzania|Zanzibar, Tanzania|Dodoma, Tanzania|Manyara, Tanzania|Arusha, Tanzania|Kilimanjaro, Tanzania|Tanga, Tanzania|Coast, Tanzania|Dodoma, Tanzani|Iringa, Tanzania|Mbeya, Tanzani","Rural|Peri-urban","on-going","01-2011","01-2015","
Feed the Future, the U.S. Government’s global hunger and food security initiative, is establishing a foundation for lasting progress against global hunger. With a focus on smallholder farmers, particularly women, Feed the Future supports partner countries in developing their agriculture sectors to spur economic growth that increases incomes and reduces hunger, poverty, and undernutrition. Feed the Future efforts are driven by country-led priorities and rooted in partnership with governments, donor organizations, the private sector, and civil society to enable long-term success. Feed the Future aims to assist millions of vulnerable women, children, and family members to escape hunger and poverty, while reaching significant numbers of children with highly effective nutrition interventions to prevent stunting and child mortality.
Over the next five years in Tanzania, Feed the Future aims to help an estimated 834,000 vulnerable Tanzanian women, children and family members—mostly smallholder farmers—escape hunger and poverty. More than 430,000 children will be reached with services to improve their nutrition and prevent stunting and child mortality. Significant numbers of additional rural populations will achieve improved income and nutritional status from strategic policy engagement and institutional investments.
Feed the Future Tanzania also aims to:
To help meet its objectives Feed the Future Tanzania is making core investments in four key areas:
CORE INVESTMENT AREA 1A: SYSTEMS TRANSFORMATION THROUGH AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND PROCESSING
The first set of core investments contribute to IRs 1-3, 5, 6, 7, and 8. These core investments play a role in systems transformation, with a primary focus on rice and targeted interventions in maize and horticulture as secondary value chains. The main objective is inclusive agriculture sector growth, which will be accomplished through increased agricultural productivity, expanded markets and trade, increased private sector investment in agriculture- and nutrition-related activities, and increased agricultural value chain on- and off-farm jobs. Investment in these value chains will improve availability and access to staple foods and improve nutrition. USG investments will facilitate the competitiveness of smallholders in rice, maize and horticulture.
NAFAKA – Staples Value Chain Development (Rice and Maize)
Description: This program will facilitate the competitiveness of the smallholder-based rice value chain, and balance these impacts on growth with broader efforts to reduce poverty through investments aimed at improving the competitiveness and productivity of the maize value chain. This includes support to the Morogoro and Arusha-based Agricultural Research Station and National Seed Laboratory. Specific activities will:
Market-Based Solutions to Reduce Poverty and Improve Nutrition
The purpose of this project is to strengthen the capabilities of the agro-processors operating in the FTF targeted geographic areas for the staple grains of rice and maize and a range of horticultural products to build sustainable enterprises and expand and diversify the production and marketing of nutritious processed foods. This will include an array of support to processors of different scales of operations, farmers, public sector institutions involved in food technology and safety, agribusinesses, and traders.
Sustainable Horticulture for Income and Food Security in Tanzania (SHIFT)
This sustainable agriculture program aims to increase demand by expanding market opportunities for smallholder horticultural producers and processors in domestic, regional and international markets, and will work with farmers to build supply by introducing sustainable agricultural practices, increasing productivity, and reducing postharvest losses. Activities will include farmer association capacity building, nutrition education, and developing market hubs. The geographic focus is in the southern regions, and falls within the SAGCOT.
Tanzania Agriculture Productivity Program (TAPP)
This program aims to increase smallholder farmer incomes through enhanced productivity and improved domestic and export marketing of agricultural products. This program provides business services to farmers and associations in six target zones in the northern regions (Arusha, Moshi/Hai, Lushoto, Morogoro, Coast and Zanzibar). The activities include management training, marketing tools, business lobbying skills, and technical assistance for developing and marketing policy reforms. In implementing these activities, the program focuses on strengthening producer associations and preparing them to graduate from TAPP support and sustain their activities. The program strengthens market linkages by expanding domestic and export market outgrower schemes.
NAFAKA – Staples Value Chain Development (Rice and Maize)
Market-Based Solutions to Reduce Poverty and Improve Nutrition
Sustainable Horticulture for Income and Food Security in Tanzania (SHIFT)
Tanzania Agriculture Productivity Program (TAPP)
Overview
A participatory approach, which calls for active participation of all stakeholders, will be used to monitor and evaluate (M&E) FTF Tanzania. The design of the M&E system will be based on the usefulness of the data and information which is collected and processed at the different levels and intervals of program implementation and operationalization. M&E for FTF will involve on-going monitoring of program activities in the participating districts, annual evaluations, annual review workshops, beneficiary assessments, mid-term review and terminal evaluation.
Evaluations will be carried out using an independent entity to assess annual program performance. In addition, FTF Tanzania will organize annual review workshops for the duration of the program to enable implementing partners to share information on program implementation performance. FTF will also draw lessons and experiences from these workshops that can be taken into account when planning activities for subsequent years of implementation.
A matrix for the selected FTF indicators is attached as Annex A. FTF Tanzania has received assistance from USAID‘s Bureau for Food Security to provide M&E technical assistance. A preliminary M&E plan has been developed for FTF Tanzania which will be completed in September 2011 once the FTF M&E implementing partner, The Mitchell Group (TMG), has arrived in Tanzania and is fully operational.
Performance Evaluations
Performance evaluations will be carried out for selected FTF Tanzania projects to ascertain the trends in achieving project results of the FTF interventions, to document the overall progress toward objectives, and to assess what is working and what is not and why. One evaluation will be done in project year one (PY 1), another in PY 3 and the last one in PY 5. A mid-term review is planned for the end of PY 2 to assess overall progress and impact of FTF implementation, to provide for corrective actions to enhance performance of FTF, and to provide recommendations for future program designs. These recommendations will be confirmed in the terminal evaluation to be carried out in PY 5.
Qualitative and participatory methods will be utilized for the performance evaluations. Evaluators will utilize methods such as observation, focus groups, key informant interviews, stakeholder interviews and rapid survey techniques to assess progress. These techniques often provide critical insights into beneficiaries‘ perspectives on the value of programs to them, the processes that may have affected outcomes, and a deeper interpretation of results observed. Specific targets for the indicators at the outcome and output levels will be developed once FTF Tanzania has carried out the baseline survey in the FTF target areas along with the preparation of Performance Monitoring Plans.
Impact Evaluation
In addition to performance evaluations, FTF Tanzania will design an impact evaluation to test a selected development hypothesis for FTF. Ideally the impact evaluation will utilize Experimental Methodology to design and conduct the impact evaluation. This methodology will incorporate a rigorously defined counterfactual and will utilize experimental design to test the development hypothesis. At a minimum, quasi-experimental methods will be utilized to test the selected hypothesis and to determine the attribution of FTF project impacts. The Impact Evaluation will be carried out under the guidance of TMG.
Program Monitoring
All programs receiving resources under FTF Tanzania will be expected to use rigorous M&E systems that will feed into the broader FTF and GOT M&E frameworks. To the extent possible, examples of participatory methodologies built into program implementation to engage program beneficiaries in knowledge sharing, learning, and potential behavior change opportunities will be encouraged. In addition to the standard reporting requirements, the M&E program will develop and undertake baseline and other survey/assessment work (e.g. household, facility, market) to contribute to the larger M&E framework under FTF. Selected programs will designate a full-time M&E Specialist to appropriately monitor progress and engage in reporting systems for FTF as they are developed. These M&E Specialists will work to ensure that program results are jointly monitored with the ASDP and contribute to their reporting systems. The M&E Specialists will participate in annual meetings that include all implementing partners for FTF Tanzania, the FTF working group, and GOT representatives from relevant ministries.
Baselines
Baseline surveys will be required for several of the indicators listed in the annex. During 2011, a comprehensive baseline survey will be carried out by the Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics under the guidance of TMG. This baseline data will assist FTF Tanzania to set targets, monitor progress toward those targets and to initiate mid-course corrections for its programs and activities. The baseline will inform FTF Tanzania with data to determine whether or not selected activities are likely to achieve their targets.
Links to Government Monitoring Systems
The GOT will conduct rigorous M&E of their CAADP plan and supporting strategies such as the ASDP. To the extent possible, the FTF M&E framework is intended to utilize information that GOT already collects, especially at the national level. The M&E program will provide direct support to the GOT‘s National Bureau of Statistics. FTF investments in M&E will also be linked with the GOT monitoring mechanisms to build host country capacity and ability to analyze and report on results. A monitoring conceptual framework will set the stage for ensuring progress against targets, provide opportunities for learning, and employ participatory methods. Monitoring activities will support GOT analytical capacity building.
Feed the Future, the U.S. Government’s global hunger and food security initiative, is establishing a foundation for lasting progress against global hunger. With a focus on smallholder farmers, particularly women, Feed the Future supports partner countries in developing their agriculture sectors to spur economic growth that increases incomes and reduces hunger, poverty, and undernutrition. Feed the Future efforts are driven by country-led priorities and rooted in partnership with governments, donor organizations, the private sector, and civil society to enable long-term success. Feed the Future aims to assist millions of vulnerable women, children, and family members to escape hunger and poverty, while reaching significant numbers of children with highly effective nutrition interventions to prevent stunting and child mortality.
Over the next five years in Tanzania, Feed the Future aims to help an estimated 834,000 vulnerable Tanzanian women, children and family members—mostly smallholder farmers—escape hunger and poverty. More than 430,000 children will be reached with services to improve their nutrition and prevent stunting and child mortality. Significant numbers of additional rural populations will achieve improved income and nutritional status from strategic policy engagement and institutional investments.
Feed the Future Tanzania also aims to:
To help meet its objectives Feed the Future Tanzania is making core investments in four key areas:
CORE INVESTMENT AREA 2: IMPROVING NUTRITION
Contributes to IR 4: Increased resilience of vulnerable communities and households, IR 5: Improved access to diverse and quality foods, IR 6: Improved nutrition-related behaviors and IR 7: Improved utilization of maternal and child health and nutrition services.
The second set of core investments will focus on scaling up the delivery of a comprehensive package of nutrition interventions in regions of the country with the highest rates of chronic undernutrition among children under five (also referred to as stunting) and maternal anemia. It will also focus on raising the problem of undernutrition as a key development challenge and policy issue for Tanzania to address in order to meet the objectives set forth in the CAADP and the MKUKUTA II/ MKUZA II.
Another key priority area for nutrition under FTF Tanzania will be to maximize opportunities for ―smart integration‖ with other USG investments under the Global Health Initiative. This will mean strengthening and building nutrition components into new and existing safety net, maternal and child health, HIV/AIDS, malaria and water/sanitation/hygiene programs in order to maximize synergies and leverages additional nutrition results in programs that may or may not have nutrition of children or pregnant women as a main focus of their work.
Flagship Nutrition Program
The USG has developed a new program under FTF and the Global Health Initiative designed to reduce rates of chronic undernutrition (stunting) among children under-five and maternal anemia among women of reproductive age. The program will cover the following:
Overview
A participatory approach, which calls for active participation of all stakeholders, will be used to monitor and evaluate (M&E) FTF Tanzania. The design of the M&E system will be based on the usefulness of the data and information which is collected and processed at the different levels and intervals of program implementation and operationalization. M&E for FTF will involve on-going monitoring of program activities in the participating districts, annual evaluations, annual review workshops, beneficiary assessments, mid-term review and terminal evaluation.
Evaluations will be carried out using an independent entity to assess annual program performance. In addition, FTF Tanzania will organize annual review workshops for the duration of the program to enable implementing partners to share information on program implementation performance. FTF will also draw lessons and experiences from these workshops that can be taken into account when planning activities for subsequent years of implementation.
A matrix for the selected FTF indicators is attached as Annex A. FTF Tanzania has received assistance from USAID‘s Bureau for Food Security to provide M&E technical assistance. A preliminary M&E plan has been developed for FTF Tanzania which will be completed in September 2011 once the FTF M&E implementing partner, The Mitchell Group (TMG), has arrived in Tanzania and is fully operational.
Performance Evaluations
Performance evaluations will be carried out for selected FTF Tanzania projects to ascertain the trends in achieving project results of the FTF interventions, to document the overall progress toward objectives, and to assess what is working and what is not and why. One evaluation will be done in project year one (PY 1), another in PY 3 and the last one in PY 5. A mid-term review is planned for the end of PY 2 to assess overall progress and impact of FTF implementation, to provide for corrective actions to enhance performance of FTF, and to provide recommendations for future program designs. These recommendations will be confirmed in the terminal evaluation to be carried out in PY 5.
Qualitative and participatory methods will be utilized for the performance evaluations. Evaluators will utilize methods such as observation, focus groups, key informant interviews, stakeholder interviews and rapid survey techniques to assess progress. These techniques often provide critical insights into beneficiaries‘ perspectives on the value of programs to them, the processes that may have affected outcomes, and a deeper interpretation of results observed. Specific targets for the indicators at the outcome and output levels will be developed once FTF Tanzania has carried out the baseline survey in the FTF target areas along with the preparation of Performance Monitoring Plans.
Impact Evaluation
In addition to performance evaluations, FTF Tanzania will design an impact evaluation to test a selected development hypothesis for FTF. Ideally the impact evaluation will utilize Experimental Methodology to design and conduct the impact evaluation. This methodology will incorporate a rigorously defined counterfactual and will utilize experimental design to test the development hypothesis. At a minimum, quasi-experimental methods will be utilized to test the selected hypothesis and to determine the attribution of FTF project impacts. The Impact Evaluation will be carried out under the guidance of TMG.
Program Monitoring
All programs receiving resources under FTF Tanzania will be expected to use rigorous M&E systems that will feed into the broader FTF and GOT M&E frameworks. To the extent possible, examples of participatory methodologies built into program implementation to engage program beneficiaries in knowledge sharing, learning, and potential behavior change opportunities will be encouraged. In addition to the standard reporting requirements, the M&E program will develop and undertake baseline and other survey/assessment work (e.g. household, facility, market) to contribute to the larger M&E framework under FTF. Selected programs will designate a full-time M&E Specialist to appropriately monitor progress and engage in reporting systems for FTF as they are developed. These M&E Specialists will work to ensure that program results are jointly monitored with the ASDP and contribute to their reporting systems. The M&E Specialists will participate in annual meetings that include all implementing partners for FTF Tanzania, the FTF working group, and GOT representatives from relevant ministries.
Baselines
Baseline surveys will be required for several of the indicators listed in the annex. During 2011, a comprehensive baseline survey will be carried out by the Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics under the guidance of TMG. This baseline data will assist FTF Tanzania to set targets, monitor progress toward those targets and to initiate mid-course corrections for its programs and activities. The baseline will inform FTF Tanzania with data to determine whether or not selected activities are likely to achieve their targets.
Links to Government Monitoring Systems
The GOT will conduct rigorous M&E of their CAADP plan and supporting strategies such as the ASDP. To the extent possible, the FTF M&E framework is intended to utilize information that GOT already collects, especially at the national level. The M&E program will provide direct support to the GOT‘s National Bureau of Statistics. FTF investments in M&E will also be linked with the GOT monitoring mechanisms to build host country capacity and ability to analyze and report on results. A monitoring conceptual framework will set the stage for ensuring progress against targets, provide opportunities for learning, and employ participatory methods. Monitoring activities will support GOT analytical capacity building.
Feed the Future, the U.S. Government’s global hunger and food security initiative, is establishing a foundation for lasting progress against global hunger. With a focus on smallholder farmers, particularly women, Feed the Future supports partner countries in developing their agriculture sectors to spur economic growth that increases incomes and reduces hunger, poverty, and undernutrition. Feed the Future efforts are driven by country-led priorities and rooted in partnership with governments, donor organizations, the private sector, and civil society to enable long-term success. Feed the Future aims to assist millions of vulnerable women, children, and family members to escape hunger and poverty, while reaching significant numbers of children with highly effective nutrition interventions to prevent stunting and child mortality.
Over the next five years in Tanzania, Feed the Future aims to help an estimated 834,000 vulnerable Tanzanian women, children and family members—mostly smallholder farmers—escape hunger and poverty. More than 430,000 children will be reached with services to improve their nutrition and prevent stunting and child mortality. Significant numbers of additional rural populations will achieve improved income and nutritional status from strategic policy engagement and institutional investments.
Feed the Future Tanzania also aims to:
To help meet its objectives Feed the Future Tanzania is making core investments in four key areas:
Overview
A participatory approach, which calls for active participation of all stakeholders, will be used to monitor and evaluate (M&E) FTF Tanzania. The design of the M&E system will be based on the usefulness of the data and information which is collected and processed at the different levels and intervals of program implementation and operationalization. M&E for FTF will involve on-going monitoring of program activities in the participating districts, annual evaluations, annual review workshops, beneficiary assessments, mid-term review and terminal evaluation.
Evaluations will be carried out using an independent entity to assess annual program performance. In addition, FTF Tanzania will organize annual review workshops for the duration of the program to enable implementing partners to share information on program implementation performance. FTF will also draw lessons and experiences from these workshops that can be taken into account when planning activities for subsequent years of implementation.
A matrix for the selected FTF indicators is attached as Annex A. FTF Tanzania has received assistance from USAID‘s Bureau for Food Security to provide M&E technical assistance. A preliminary M&E plan has been developed for FTF Tanzania which will be completed in September 2011 once the FTF M&E implementing partner, The Mitchell Group (TMG), has arrived in Tanzania and is fully operational.
Performance Evaluations
Performance evaluations will be carried out for selected FTF Tanzania projects to ascertain the trends in achieving project results of the FTF interventions, to document the overall progress toward objectives, and to assess what is working and what is not and why. One evaluation will be done in project year one (PY 1), another in PY 3 and the last one in PY 5. A mid-term review is planned for the end of PY 2 to assess overall progress and impact of FTF implementation, to provide for corrective actions to enhance performance of FTF, and to provide recommendations for future program designs. These recommendations will be confirmed in the terminal evaluation to be carried out in PY 5.
Qualitative and participatory methods will be utilized for the performance evaluations. Evaluators will utilize methods such as observation, focus groups, key informant interviews, stakeholder interviews and rapid survey techniques to assess progress. These techniques often provide critical insights into beneficiaries‘ perspectives on the value of programs to them, the processes that may have affected outcomes, and a deeper interpretation of results observed. Specific targets for the indicators at the outcome and output levels will be developed once FTF Tanzania has carried out the baseline survey in the FTF target areas along with the preparation of Performance Monitoring Plans.
Impact Evaluation
In addition to performance evaluations, FTF Tanzania will design an impact evaluation to test a selected development hypothesis for FTF. Ideally the impact evaluation will utilize Experimental Methodology to design and conduct the impact evaluation. This methodology will incorporate a rigorously defined counterfactual and will utilize experimental design to test the development hypothesis. At a minimum, quasi-experimental methods will be utilized to test the selected hypothesis and to determine the attribution of FTF project impacts. The Impact Evaluation will be carried out under the guidance of TMG.
Program Monitoring
All programs receiving resources under FTF Tanzania will be expected to use rigorous M&E systems that will feed into the broader FTF and GOT M&E frameworks. To the extent possible, examples of participatory methodologies built into program implementation to engage program beneficiaries in knowledge sharing, learning, and potential behavior change opportunities will be encouraged. In addition to the standard reporting requirements, the M&E program will develop and undertake baseline and other survey/assessment work (e.g. household, facility, market) to contribute to the larger M&E framework under FTF. Selected programs will designate a full-time M&E Specialist to appropriately monitor progress and engage in reporting systems for FTF as they are developed. These M&E Specialists will work to ensure that program results are jointly monitored with the ASDP and contribute to their reporting systems. The M&E Specialists will participate in annual meetings that include all implementing partners for FTF Tanzania, the FTF working group, and GOT representatives from relevant ministries.
Baselines
Baseline surveys will be required for several of the indicators listed in the annex. During 2011, a comprehensive baseline survey will be carried out by the Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics under the guidance of TMG. This baseline data will assist FTF Tanzania to set targets, monitor progress toward those targets and to initiate mid-course corrections for its programs and activities. The baseline will inform FTF Tanzania with data to determine whether or not selected activities are likely to achieve their targets.
Links to Government Monitoring Systems
The GOT will conduct rigorous M&E of their CAADP plan and supporting strategies such as the ASDP. To the extent possible, the FTF M&E framework is intended to utilize information that GOT already collects, especially at the national level. The M&E program will provide direct support to the GOT‘s National Bureau of Statistics. FTF investments in M&E will also be linked with the GOT monitoring mechanisms to build host country capacity and ability to analyze and report on results. A monitoring conceptual framework will set the stage for ensuring progress against targets, provide opportunities for learning, and employ participatory methods. Monitoring activities will support GOT analytical capacity building.
Feed the Future, the U.S. Government’s global hunger and food security initiative, is establishing a foundation for lasting progress against global hunger. With a focus on smallholder farmers, particularly women, Feed the Future supports partner countries in developing their agriculture sectors to spur economic growth that increases incomes and reduces hunger, poverty, and undernutrition. Feed the Future efforts are driven by country-led priorities and rooted in partnership with governments, donor organizations, the private sector, and civil society to enable long-term success. Feed the Future aims to assist millions of vulnerable women, children, and family members to escape hunger and poverty, while reaching significant numbers of children with highly effective nutrition interventions to prevent stunting and child mortality.
Over the next five years in Tanzania, Feed the Future aims to help an estimated 834,000 vulnerable Tanzanian women, children and family members—mostly smallholder farmers—escape hunger and poverty. More than 430,000 children will be reached with services to improve their nutrition and prevent stunting and child mortality. Significant numbers of additional rural populations will achieve improved income and nutritional status from strategic policy engagement and institutional investments.
Feed the Future Tanzania also aims to:
To help meet its objectives Feed the Future Tanzania is making core investments in four key areas:
CORE INVESTMENT AREA 3: CAPACITY BUILDING AND SUPPORT SERVICES
Contributes to IR 1: Improved agricultural productivity, IR 2: Expanding markets and trade, IR 3: Increased private investment in agriculture- and nutrition-related activities, IR 4: Increased resilience of vulnerable communities and households, IR 5: Improved access to diverse and quality foods, IR 6: Improved nutrition-related behaviors, IR 7: Improved utilization of maternal and child health and nutrition services, and IR 8: Improved enabling policy environment for both agriculture and nutrition.
Tanzania‘s food security and overall agricultural performance into the medium-term will be predicated upon the CAADP process and the accompanying Country Investment Plan (CIP). FTF investments will help support the drafting of the CAADP investment plan and also assist with its successful implementation in collaboration with all partners. FTF Tanzania will invest in building government capacity for policy-making, analysis, and interpretation and delivering on Tanzania‘s CAADP investment plan.
The investments will support host-country leadership and strategy planning to develop sustainability through a new generation of leadership. The USG will provide short- and long-term high-level policymaking support to GOT to develop and deliver on a robust, comprehensive CAADP investment plan and to build a formal mechanism for public-private sector dialogue. Investments will increase the capacity of Tanzanians to act as change agents for transforming the sector.
In addition, FTF will invest in research and development to build Tanzania‘s capacity to respond to challenges through innovations. FTF supports collaborative research to enhance Tanzania‘s ability to improve productivity, especially in light of climate change impacts and other constraints, both agronomic and economic.
Finally, one of the important parts of strengthening the capacity of Tanzanian agriculture is through supporting market-based financial services, including through a variety of loan programs. FTF Tanzania is utilizing innovative methods to increasing rural financing opportunities, especially through microfinance.
FTF staff and partners involved in this component will ensure that gender equitable policies are included in the TAFSIP and in its implementation, that women participate in leadership and training programs, and that women are involved in program activities with Sokoine University of Agriculture and the National Agricultural Research System.
Sokoine University of Agriculture Capacity Building
This program will expand and improve the quality of training in agricultural fields and research in support of FTF Tanzania. By supporting Sokoine University of Agriculture through a direct mechanism, FTF Tanzania will build the capacity of this Tanzanian institution to respond to agricultural issues.
This program will strengthen the training and research capacities of Sokoine University of Agriculture and the Tanzanian National Agricultural Research System. The program will support collaborative research, foster leadership in training and research through long-term training in agriculture, strengthen the capacity of Sokoine University of Agriculture, and promote tripartite Sokoine University if Agriculture - U.S. University - South-South University Cooperation.
","Overview
A participatory approach, which calls for active participation of all stakeholders, will be used to monitor and evaluate (M&E) FTF Tanzania. The design of the M&E system will be based on the usefulness of the data and information which is collected and processed at the different levels and intervals of program implementation and operationalization. M&E for FTF will involve on-going monitoring of program activities in the participating districts, annual evaluations, annual review workshops, beneficiary assessments, mid-term review and terminal evaluation.
Evaluations will be carried out using an independent entity to assess annual program performance. In addition, FTF Tanzania will organize annual review workshops for the duration of the program to enable implementing partners to share information on program implementation performance. FTF will also draw lessons and experiences from these workshops that can be taken into account when planning activities for subsequent years of implementation.
A matrix for the selected FTF indicators is attached as Annex A. FTF Tanzania has received assistance from USAID‘s Bureau for Food Security to provide M&E technical assistance. A preliminary M&E plan has been developed for FTF Tanzania which will be completed in September 2011 once the FTF M&E implementing partner, The Mitchell Group (TMG), has arrived in Tanzania and is fully operational.
Performance Evaluations
Performance evaluations will be carried out for selected FTF Tanzania projects to ascertain the trends in achieving project results of the FTF interventions, to document the overall progress toward objectives, and to assess what is working and what is not and why. One evaluation will be done in project year one (PY 1), another in PY 3 and the last one in PY 5. A mid-term review is planned for the end of PY 2 to assess overall progress and impact of FTF implementation, to provide for corrective actions to enhance performance of FTF, and to provide recommendations for future program designs. These recommendations will be confirmed in the terminal evaluation to be carried out in PY 5.
Qualitative and participatory methods will be utilized for the performance evaluations. Evaluators will utilize methods such as observation, focus groups, key informant interviews, stakeholder interviews and rapid survey techniques to assess progress. These techniques often provide critical insights into beneficiaries‘ perspectives on the value of programs to them, the processes that may have affected outcomes, and a deeper interpretation of results observed. Specific targets for the indicators at the outcome and output levels will be developed once FTF Tanzania has carried out the baseline survey in the FTF target areas along with the preparation of Performance Monitoring Plans.
Impact Evaluation
In addition to performance evaluations, FTF Tanzania will design an impact evaluation to test a selected development hypothesis for FTF. Ideally the impact evaluation will utilize Experimental Methodology to design and conduct the impact evaluation. This methodology will incorporate a rigorously defined counterfactual and will utilize experimental design to test the development hypothesis. At a minimum, quasi-experimental methods will be utilized to test the selected hypothesis and to determine the attribution of FTF project impacts. The Impact Evaluation will be carried out under the guidance of TMG.
Program Monitoring
All programs receiving resources under FTF Tanzania will be expected to use rigorous M&E systems that will feed into the broader FTF and GOT M&E frameworks. To the extent possible, examples of participatory methodologies built into program implementation to engage program beneficiaries in knowledge sharing, learning, and potential behavior change opportunities will be encouraged. In addition to the standard reporting requirements, the M&E program will develop and undertake baseline and other survey/assessment work (e.g. household, facility, market) to contribute to the larger M&E framework under FTF. Selected programs will designate a full-time M&E Specialist to appropriately monitor progress and engage in reporting systems for FTF as they are developed. These M&E Specialists will work to ensure that program results are jointly monitored with the ASDP and contribute to their reporting systems. The M&E Specialists will participate in annual meetings that include all implementing partners for FTF Tanzania, the FTF working group, and GOT representatives from relevant ministries.
Baselines
Baseline surveys will be required for several of the indicators listed in the annex. During 2011, a comprehensive baseline survey will be carried out by the Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics under the guidance of TMG. This baseline data will assist FTF Tanzania to set targets, monitor progress toward those targets and to initiate mid-course corrections for its programs and activities. The baseline will inform FTF Tanzania with data to determine whether or not selected activities are likely to achieve their targets.
Links to Government Monitoring Systems
The GOT will conduct rigorous M&E of their CAADP plan and supporting strategies such as the ASDP. To the extent possible, the FTF M&E framework is intended to utilize information that GOT already collects, especially at the national level. The M&E program will provide direct support to the GOT‘s National Bureau of Statistics. FTF investments in M&E will also be linked with the GOT monitoring mechanisms to build host country capacity and ability to analyze and report on results. A monitoring conceptual framework will set the stage for ensuring progress against targets, provide opportunities for learning, and employ participatory methods. Monitoring activities will support GOT analytical capacity building.
Feed the Future, the U.S. Government’s global hunger and food security initiative, is establishing a foundation for lasting progress against global hunger. With a focus on smallholder farmers, particularly women, Feed the Future supports partner countries in developing their agriculture sectors to spur economic growth that increases incomes and reduces hunger, poverty, and undernutrition. Feed the Future efforts are driven by country-led priorities and rooted in partnership with governments, donor organizations, the private sector, and civil society to enable long-term success. Feed the Future aims to assist millions of vulnerable women, children, and family members to escape hunger and poverty, while reaching significant numbers of children with highly effective nutrition interventions to prevent stunting and child mortality.
Over the next five years in Tanzania, Feed the Future aims to help an estimated 834,000 vulnerable Tanzanian women, children and family members—mostly smallholder farmers—escape hunger and poverty. More than 430,000 children will be reached with services to improve their nutrition and prevent stunting and child mortality. Significant numbers of additional rural populations will achieve improved income and nutritional status from strategic policy engagement and institutional investments.
Feed the Future Tanzania also aims to:
To help meet its objectives Feed the Future Tanzania is making core investments in four key areas:
CORE INVESTMENT AREA 4: ENABLING POLICY ENVIRONMENT
Contributes to IR 8: Improved enabling policy environment and good governance for both agriculture and nutrition
FTF Tanzania will support policy reform and address major agricultural policy and governance issues by building the capacity of the government and private sector to conduct analyses and take action to identify and address the binding constraints to agricultural development. The USG will promote policies that provide an enabling environment for private sector investment in agriculture, create more certain and consistent trade policies, develop and assist in the implementation of more gender equitable policies and focus on policies that enable the implementation of key nutritional interventions. These will include policies and legal issues related to agricultural inputs, credit, markets, and land and trade policy. In order for any of the investments in food security to have the intended impact, a supportive policy environment is foundational.
Tanzania has overarching policy challenges that can seriously impact its performance with food security and its possible role as a regional provider into the future. The recent AgCLIR assessment for Tanzania identified several key policy issues that currently inhibit transformational agricultural growth, including: policy instability, multiplicity of local taxes, and a weak legal framework to protect property rights.
FTF will actively work to develop the GOT‘s capacity to analyze and implement policy instruments that address both short and long-term food security needs. Possible interventions include:
To ensure that policies that cause market distortion are avoided, FTF will create a robust monitoring system for policy reforms and will promote mutual accountability based on a consultative process rather than imposing conditionality.
One of the main challenges to promoting good governance in Tanzania is access to information by the public and by pressure groups, which is necessary for holding the government accountable in use of resources for provision of public services such as rural roads or extension. FTF will establish a communications strategy that will enhance access to information on food security and agriculture so as to foster public awareness on the program, and on state and private sector performance in the sector. The program will build upon the existing processes for ―Agricultural Sector Review‖ and ―Public Expenditure Review‖ which are held annually.
The participation of civil society, media and NGOs in shaping an agricultural development program is essential to ensuring that a program articulates the needs of the majority, including vulnerable segments of the population such as women and children. Civil society and NGOs can also assist in holding the government accountable for its performance. FTF Tanzania will support some local NGOs and civil society organizations to champion policy reforms. USG has started, and will continue, to engage civil society in the shaping of FTF, and encourage them to participate in the implementation process. The U.S. Government advocated for more engagement of civil society in the CAADP process, resulting in the engagement of the Agriculture Non-State Actors Forum (ANSAF) in the CAADP Task Force and the Drafting Team for TAFSIP. As the U.S. Government assumes the leadership of the donors‘ group for agriculture in July 2011, it will engage more NGOs and civil society organizations in the Agricultural Sector and Public Expenditure Reviews.
FTF Tanzania will advocate for policies that will address gender disparities in access to resources. For instance, the ―Secured Transactions Reforms‖ would create a legal framework to support the use of movable assets as collateral for accessing credit by small and medium enterprises. Such a system would enhance equitable access to credit, as the current system relies on the use of fixed assets such as land, and thereby often excludes women, who under traditional cultural practices have limited opportunity to land titling.
Enabling Policy Environment for Agricultural Sector Growth
The project‘s primary goal is to advance policy reform efforts in key areas identified as the critical barriers to transformation of the agriculture sector. The purpose of this project is to develop a policy partnership between government, private sector organizations, and research institutions to achieve key policy reforms in the agriculture sector and related business environment that will ensure successful implementation of the GOT‘s agriculture investment plan and FTF. The project will: strengthen the capacities of GOT institutions, the private sector, and other stakeholders for policy research and implementation of policy change that informs the CAADP process and FTF on constraints to growth; promotes dialogue among all stakeholders and partners; identifies and develops consensus on specific policies that need to be analyzed and changed; and monitors the implementation and impact of reforms intended to enable increased private investments in agriculture and trade.
Overview
A participatory approach, which calls for active participation of all stakeholders, will be used to monitor and evaluate (M&E) FTF Tanzania. The design of the M&E system will be based on the usefulness of the data and information which is collected and processed at the different levels and intervals of program implementation and operationalization. M&E for FTF will involve on-going monitoring of program activities in the participating districts, annual evaluations, annual review workshops, beneficiary assessments, mid-term review and terminal evaluation.
Evaluations will be carried out using an independent entity to assess annual program performance. In addition, FTF Tanzania will organize annual review workshops for the duration of the program to enable implementing partners to share information on program implementation performance. FTF will also draw lessons and experiences from these workshops that can be taken into account when planning activities for subsequent years of implementation.
A matrix for the selected FTF indicators is attached as Annex A. FTF Tanzania has received assistance from USAID‘s Bureau for Food Security to provide M&E technical assistance. A preliminary M&E plan has been developed for FTF Tanzania which will be completed in September 2011 once the FTF M&E implementing partner, The Mitchell Group (TMG), has arrived in Tanzania and is fully operational.
Performance Evaluations
Performance evaluations will be carried out for selected FTF Tanzania projects to ascertain the trends in achieving project results of the FTF interventions, to document the overall progress toward objectives, and to assess what is working and what is not and why. One evaluation will be done in project year one (PY 1), another in PY 3 and the last one in PY 5. A mid-term review is planned for the end of PY 2 to assess overall progress and impact of FTF implementation, to provide for corrective actions to enhance performance of FTF, and to provide recommendations for future program designs. These recommendations will be confirmed in the terminal evaluation to be carried out in PY 5.
Qualitative and participatory methods will be utilized for the performance evaluations. Evaluators will utilize methods such as observation, focus groups, key informant interviews, stakeholder interviews and rapid survey techniques to assess progress. These techniques often provide critical insights into beneficiaries‘ perspectives on the value of programs to them, the processes that may have affected outcomes, and a deeper interpretation of results observed. Specific targets for the indicators at the outcome and output levels will be developed once FTF Tanzania has carried out the baseline survey in the FTF target areas along with the preparation of Performance Monitoring Plans.
Impact Evaluation
In addition to performance evaluations, FTF Tanzania will design an impact evaluation to test a selected development hypothesis for FTF. Ideally the impact evaluation will utilize Experimental Methodology to design and conduct the impact evaluation. This methodology will incorporate a rigorously defined counterfactual and will utilize experimental design to test the development hypothesis. At a minimum, quasi-experimental methods will be utilized to test the selected hypothesis and to determine the attribution of FTF project impacts. The Impact Evaluation will be carried out under the guidance of TMG.
Program Monitoring
All programs receiving resources under FTF Tanzania will be expected to use rigorous M&E systems that will feed into the broader FTF and GOT M&E frameworks. To the extent possible, examples of participatory methodologies built into program implementation to engage program beneficiaries in knowledge sharing, learning, and potential behavior change opportunities will be encouraged. In addition to the standard reporting requirements, the M&E program will develop and undertake baseline and other survey/assessment work (e.g. household, facility, market) to contribute to the larger M&E framework under FTF. Selected programs will designate a full-time M&E Specialist to appropriately monitor progress and engage in reporting systems for FTF as they are developed. These M&E Specialists will work to ensure that program results are jointly monitored with the ASDP and contribute to their reporting systems. The M&E Specialists will participate in annual meetings that include all implementing partners for FTF Tanzania, the FTF working group, and GOT representatives from relevant ministries.
Baselines
Baseline surveys will be required for several of the indicators listed in the annex. During 2011, a comprehensive baseline survey will be carried out by the Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics under the guidance of TMG. This baseline data will assist FTF Tanzania to set targets, monitor progress toward those targets and to initiate mid-course corrections for its programs and activities. The baseline will inform FTF Tanzania with data to determine whether or not selected activities are likely to achieve their targets.
Links to Government Monitoring Systems
The GOT will conduct rigorous M&E of their CAADP plan and supporting strategies such as the ASDP. To the extent possible, the FTF M&E framework is intended to utilize information that GOT already collects, especially at the national level. The M&E program will provide direct support to the GOT‘s National Bureau of Statistics. FTF investments in M&E will also be linked with the GOT monitoring mechanisms to build host country capacity and ability to analyze and report on results. A monitoring conceptual framework will set the stage for ensuring progress against targets, provide opportunities for learning, and employ participatory methods. Monitoring activities will support GOT analytical capacity building.
As the world’s largest humanitarian agency, WFP is a major staple food buyer. In 2012, WFP bought US$1.1 billion worth of food – more than 75 percent of this in developing countries WFP buys locally in developing countries when its criteria of price, quality and quantity can be met. P4P is a logical continuation of this local procurement with the intent to achieve a higher developmental gain with WFP’s procurement footprint by buying increasingly in a smallholder-friendly way.
Through P4P, WFP’s demand provides smallholder farmers in 20 pilot countries with a greater incentive to invest in their production, as they have the possibility to sell to a reliable buyer and receive a fair price for their crops. It is envisioned that in the wake of WFP purchasing in a more smallholder-friendly way, other buyers of staple commodities including Governments and the private sector will also increasingly be able to buy from smallholders.
P4P at the same time invests in capacity building at country level in areas such as post-harvest handling or storage, which will yield sustainable results in boosting national food security over the long term. The five year pilot P4P (2009 - 2013)[1] rests on three pillars:
WFP usually buys food through large competitive tenders. Through P4P, WFP is testing new procurement approaches more suited to smallholder farmers and:
Country approaches to P4P are tailored to suit the opportunities and constraints within each country. Generally, however, each programme has applied one or more of the general approaches:
Approach #1: Farmers’ organisations and capacity building partnerships:
Approach #2: Support to emerging structured trading systems
Approach #3: Small and medium traders
Approach #4: Developing local food processing capacity
.
","M&E system specifies data collection and analysis methods designed to track a number of indicators of programme performance.
The M&E system collects data from a number of sources including:
The M&E system also incorporates peer review to identify and validate best practices. At the country level, these include stakeholder meetings, workshops, and annual reviews. At the regional level, WFP is using writeshops and regional workshops to consolidate and validate learning. At the global/programme level, a Technical Review Panel meets annually to review and help interpret results and to guide implementation. Peer review meetings, annual reviews, internal (to WFP) stakeholder groups, and external evaluations also serve to validate results.
Managing the learning process for a programme with the scope and scale of P4P has been challenging and the design and evolution of the M&E system reflect these challenges. In particular:
Economic Research Consortium (AERC) to manage collection and analysis of the quantitative data.
Since P4P's launch in September 2008,
Stories From the Field: Ethiopi
Women farmers face many obstacles that they need to overcome to become successful business women. But the example of Mashuu, from Chefo Umbera, southern Ethiopia, shows that with the right support, female farmers can become independent market players.
When she left school, Mashuu noticed her peers marrying early, sometimes to men who took more than one wife. Mashuu saw her future differently, and together with two sisters and a sister-in-law, formed a women’s group, hoping to empower women through family planning education and HIV/AIDS awareness. They started with four members – today, there are 165.
“As the group started to grow, I realized we needed to become strong and independent economically,” said Mashuu. And that was how Jalela Primary Cooperative was born. Women bring their cereal harvests to Jalela, and the cooperative then sells it to Mira, their local cooperative union. The union sells the aggregated commodities to buyers such as WFP.
The 2011 drought-induced crop failure led to high market prices and a shortage of marketable produce in Ethiopia. This caused most cooperatives to default on their contracts with WFP. But Jalela still sold 30 metric tons of maize to WFP. The net profit of about US$170 was in part kept for the cooperative and in part distributed to the co-op members. Mashuu still has high hopes for the future despite the difficulties with the 2011 drought. She has plans to build a grain mill, start dairy production, and even bring electricity to the Jalela co-op. “We are going to change our lives,” she concludes.
The Experience in Guatemala
In Guatemala, P4P focuses on sales beyond WFP for two reasons: to promote long-term sustainability and to provide alternative outlets for farmers’ surplus production. Since WFP in Guatemala distributes only a few thousand metric tons (mt) of food every year, the quantities it can purchase from smallholder farmers’ organizations is relatively small, as illustrated in the table below.
P4P assisted Farmers’ Organizations (FOs) are located in northern and eastern regions of Guatemala as well as on the Pacific Coastal plain. A market study examined potential alternative buyers for both bulked and processed grain, including regional and national buyers such as the food industry, private traders, exporters, NGOs and the Government of Guatemala. According to information collected between 2008 through 2012, approximately a third of the P4P supported FOs have sold maize or beans to buyers beyond WFP. Of the total of 6,800 mt sold, 70% was maize (4,800 mt) and the rest beans (2,000 mt).
A maize processor in Guatemala that produces tortilla flour purchased 59% of the total tonnage. The second biggest buyer was Wal-Mart, which purchased 918 mt of beans. Sales to other national supermarkets, large traders and exporters represent 11% of the total (750 mt). Some 739 mt of maize and beans were sold on local markets (local grocery stores, municipal markets and traders). Small amounts were also purchased by NGOs, FAO and other P4P supported FOs.
With support from FAO, some FOs have developed the capacity to produce seed as well as grain. This represents 1.3% of the tonnage sold, but 4.2% of the income generated through collective sales beyond WFP. Such a successful focus on higherincome options has motivated the FOs to explore other markets such as retail packaging of beans, production of red beans specific to the El Salvador market, and fresh corn on the cob.
The P4P team works with the FOs to encourage sales beyond WFP. Commercialization committees are formed in the FOs and a roster of identified potential buyers in the market is shared with all. Training on effective negotiation t e c h n i q u e s a n d t h e development of business plans also begins this year.
Potential buyers are invited to the field to see the production of the grains, post-harvest management and quality control. This also allows them to become familiar with the maturity of the organization, increasing the confidence of buyers in the capacity of the FOs to establish commercial relations. This is complemented by demonstrating tools such as the “Blue Box”1, which is both a training tool and a field laboratory, which separates produce that does not meet specifications. Through partnering with P4P, FOs gained the trust of the commercial sector and confidence in their own abilities to reach a broad range of markets.
Farmers organizations’ experience steady progression in Mozambique
In Mozambique, farmers’ organizations (FOs) were created by both national government and nongovernmental organizations to facilitate technical assistance in agricultural production and marketing. This was especially important in the recovery period that followed the 1992 General Peace Agreement.
Most FOs gradually evolved from the village level to linking with other FOs at a district level. The district level is often represented by an ‘umbrella’ association of FOs, the tier with which P4P in Mozambique works directly. There are currently 10 such “umbrella” FOs in Mozambique participating in P4P. As of 2012, WFP has bought almost 10,000 metric tons (mt) of maize, beans and pulses from these FOs, valued at $5.8 million.
Apart from selling to WFP, P4P is helping FOs to identify sustainable and fair markets for sales beyond WFP. Prior to participating in the P4P initiative, many farmers had limited or no experience in selling collectively to markets. In 2009, sales beyond WFP were only 644 mt, tripling by 2012 to 1,800 mt. The table below summarizes crops sold by all 10 FOs under P4P in Mozambique and the income generated from sales per year.
P4P’s support to smallholder farmers in accessing markets for crops such as maize, beans and pulses has had a positive impact. When P4P began in 2009, soybean was the mostsold commodity by P4P supported FOs (2,480 mt). Maize was second at 926 mt, sesame third with 699 mt, followed by pigeon peas at 538 mt of sales. The possible profit margin for growing and selling maize is beginning to compete with the profits available in the soy and sesame trade, although commercial maize value remains low compared to other commodities. Buyers that are purchasing commodities from these FOs are:
The volume of products marketed in relation to the number of buyers demonstrates that the market in Mozambique is neither structured nor stable. There are often a high number of buyers intervening at the same time in more than one crop. Quality issues are often secondary for many buyers, as product availability is often considered more important.
While marketing platforms still have a long way to go in Mozambique, participating in P4P has helped with sales to markets beyond WFP. The relative consistency of having WFP as a buyer and the training provided by P4P and partners has helped many FOs meet the demands needed for selling to other buyers of quality.
Malawi – How a farmers’ organization is progressing
Kafulu Smallholder Farmers Organization (FO) was established in 2003. At the time of its establishment, Kafulu had two clear objectives: to achieve food security in the area and to find markets for their surplus. Currently the FO has 1,400 members (of which 500 are women) and with assistance from the National Agricultural Smallholder Farmers Association of Malawi (NASFAM), they have been able to build a warehouse. Kafulu had experience of selling maize collectively before P4P started in Malawi, however, since joining P4P they have been given the opportunity to learn the skills needed to achieve better deals with buyers.
A Challenging Beginning
Though Kafulu has progressed in their ability to connect to markets, the process has not been without difficulty. When the FO decided to participate in P4P it obtained credit in the 2008/2009 season, allowing them to expand their inputs loan scheme. In the 2009/2010 season, the organization again had access to credit, but faced severe problems in repayment. Loans were given to individuals and not directly to the FO and as a result, some individuals were unable to meet repayment obligations causing tensions among members. In addition, Kafulu signed a contract with WFP for the sale of 526 metric tons (mt) of maize, but was not able to deliver anything at all due to quality problems. The FO then had to sell the maize to other buyers who were not looking for high quality and they received a lower price.
In spite of these difficulties, Kafulu persevered. They managed to retain most of the membership despite the credit repayment issue, and tried to sell to WFP once again. In the 2010/2011 season, Kafulu delivered 100 mt of maize to WFP, this time with no quality issues.
Towards Graduation
By then, Kafulu farmers saw a clear way ahead: “We want to sell to people like WFP, because they are able to get a lot of money at one time and they offer fair prices for quality produce”,
stated one of the members of the Executive Committee. Although Kafulu farmers did not know then, they were completing the first step towards graduation - they had learnt how to condition their crop for higher quality standards and they had managed to aggregate at least twice. This placed them in a better position to compete with other FOs.
In the 2011/2012 season, Kafulu managed to aggregate 460 mt of maize, which they deposited into the warehouse receipt system (WRS) at the beginning of the season. From this deposit, they managed to get 70 percent of the receipt value as credit, which allowed them to wait until later in the season to sell when better prices were available.
Market Experience Today
In February 2013, Kafulu was awarded a contract for almost 230 mt of maize from WFP. They competed directly with medium and big traders in the Malawi market. By that time, they had already sold half of their maize to other buyers, at prevailing prices of around 90 MWK/kg (USD 0.27), making a good profit and enabling them to repay the credit and fees for the warehouse.
Kafulu FO still has problems with its membership stemming from past individual loan defaults and it is now dealing with the challenges of managing a WRS on its own. However, the FO has more knowledge of markets and is now prepared to engage competitively in them.
","English" "12875","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","COL","Colombia","Colombia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Monitoring and informing parents on children's growth was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Secretarías de Salud - sistema de vigilancia epidemiológica alimentaria y nutricional","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12875","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","COL","Colombia","Colombia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Hygienic cooking facilities and clean eating environment was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","","","National coverage","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12875","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","COL","Colombia","Colombia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Referral health system for children who require nutrition interventions was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Secretarías de Salud - sistema de vigilancia epidemiológica alimentaria y nutricional","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12875","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","COL","Colombia","Colombia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Safe drinking-water was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","","","National coverage","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12875","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","COL","Colombia","Colombia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Provision of milk was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12875","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","COL","Colombia","Colombia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","School meals based on national dietary guidelines was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12955","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","GRD","Grenada","Grenada","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools, HEc curriculum; HFLE","","Government","","Marketing of high-fat, energy dense, and/or micronutrient-poor foods and beverages not allowed on school premises was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: MOE","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12955","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","GRD","Grenada","Grenada","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools, HEc curriculum; HFLE","","Government","","Hygienic cooking facilities and clean eating environment was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: SSSU","","National coverage","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12955","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","GRD","Grenada","Grenada","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools, HEc curriculum; HFLE","","Government","","Referral health system for children who require nutrition interventions was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: MOH; GFNC","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12955","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","GRD","Grenada","Grenada","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools, HEc curriculum; HFLE","","Government","","Provision of milk was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12955","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","GRD","Grenada","Grenada","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools, HEc curriculum; HFLE","","Government","","School meals based on national dietary guidelines was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12902","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","LVA","Latvia","Latvia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Monitoring and informing parents on children's growth was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12902","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","LVA","Latvia","Latvia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Marketing of high-fat, energy dense, and/or micronutrient-poor foods and beverages not allowed on school premises was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Food and Veterinary Service","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12902","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","LVA","Latvia","Latvia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Hygienic cooking facilities and clean eating environment was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Food and Veterinary Service","","National coverage","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12902","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","LVA","Latvia","Latvia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Safe drinking-water was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Food and Veterinary Service","","National coverage","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12902","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","LVA","Latvia","Latvia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Provision of milk was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Rural Support Service","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12902","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","LVA","Latvia","Latvia","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","School meals based on national dietary guidelines was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Food and Veterinary Service ","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12919","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","OMN","Oman","Oman","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools and Regional Muncipalities, Schools' adminstrators, School health teams","","Government","","Private sector","Private sector","Private sector","community","UN","Other","Monitoring and informing parents on children's growth was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: School health section","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12919","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","OMN","Oman","Oman","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools and Regional Muncipalities, Schools' adminstrators, School health teams","","Government","","Private sector","Private sector","Private sector","community","UN","Other","Marketing of high-fat, energy dense, and/or micronutrient-poor foods and beverages not allowed on school premises was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Department of school health ,dept. of nutrition ( MOH) & department of activities (MOE) and muncipalities","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12919","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","OMN","Oman","Oman","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools and Regional Muncipalities, Schools' adminstrators, School health teams","","Government","","Private sector","Private sector","Private sector","community","UN","Other","Vending machines not allowed on school premises was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Department of school health, Dept of nutrion & dept.of activities and muncipalities","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12919","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","OMN","Oman","Oman","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools and Regional Muncipalities, Schools' adminstrators, School health teams","","Government","","Private sector","Private sector","Private sector","community","UN","Other","Hygienic cooking facilities and clean eating environment was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: a committee in each region consist of school health section ,nutrition section ( health ) section of students care ( education) and municipality in each region","","National coverage","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12919","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","OMN","Oman","Oman","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools and Regional Muncipalities, Schools' adminstrators, School health teams","","Government","","Private sector","Private sector","Private sector","community","UN","Other","Referral health system for children who require nutrition interventions was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: School health section","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12919","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","OMN","Oman","Oman","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools and Regional Muncipalities, Schools' adminstrators, School health teams","","Government","","Private sector","Private sector","Private sector","community","UN","Other","Safe drinking-water was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: School health dept.(MOH)& dept of activities (MOE) & Muncipalities on national level and school health section , section of students care ( eduction) and regional muncipality in each region ","","National coverage","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12919","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","OMN","Oman","Oman","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools and Regional Muncipalities, Schools' adminstrators, School health teams","","Government","","Private sector","Private sector","Private sector","community","UN","Other","Provision of fruit and vegetables was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: a committee in each region consists of school health section ,nutrition section ( health ) section of health education ( education) and municipality in each region ","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12919","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","OMN","Oman","Oman","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools and Regional Muncipalities, Schools' adminstrators, School health teams","","Government","","Private sector","Private sector","Private sector","community","UN","Other","Provision of milk was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: a regional committee in each region consist of school health section ,nutrition section ( health ) section of health education ( education) and municipality in each region ","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12919","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","OMN","Oman","Oman","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools and Regional Muncipalities, Schools' adminstrators, School health teams","","Government","","Private sector","Private sector","Private sector","community","UN","Other","School meals based on national dietary guidelines was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: School health dept. & dept. of nutrition (MOH)& dept of activities (MOE)and muncipalities on national level and a committe in each region consists of school health section, section of students care ( education) and muncipality","","National coverage","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12488","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","UGA","Uganda","Uganda","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Deworming was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Ministry of Health","","National coverage","","","","","","Deworming to combat the health and nutritional impact of soil-transmitted helminths>>>Deworming to combat the health and nutritional impact of soil-transmitted helminths>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/deworming","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12488","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","UGA","Uganda","Uganda","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Hygienic cooking facilities and clean eating environment was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Ministry of Health","","National coverage","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12488","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","UGA","Uganda","Uganda","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Safe drinking-water was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Ministry of Eductaion and Sports","","National coverage","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "12488","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","National","","UGA","Uganda","Uganda","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Government","","Vitamin A supplements distributed was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","M&E implemented by: Ministry of Health","","National coverage","","","","","","Vitamin A supplementation in infants and children 6–59 months of age>>>Vitamin A supplementation in infants and children 6–59 months of age>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/vitamina_children","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "14028","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","Community/sub-national","","GRD","Grenada","Grenada","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools, HEc curriculum; HFLE","","Government","","Safe drinking-water was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","","","","","","","","","Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>>Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions to prevent diarrhoea>>http://www.who.int/elena/titles/wsh_diarrhoea","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "14028","GNPR 2009-2010: School-based nutrition","English","Community/sub-national","","GRD","Grenada","Grenada","","","","","These programmes and actions were reported by countries for the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review 2009-2010, Module 4 on School-based nutrition programmes. Please note that for simplicity, all interventions in a thematic module have been combined under the same programme for GINA, while they may not be implemented as a package and may have different partners. These data are currently being updated and completed through the GINA verification process. If you think you can help update and complete any of these data, please sign up to GINA and edit.
","WHO (2013) Global Nutrition Policy Review. What does it take to scale up nutrition action?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/policies/global_nut_policyrevi...
The Global nutrition policy review is based on a questionnaire survey conducted during 2009–2010, in which 119 WHO Member States and 4 territories participated.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Schools, HEc curriculum; HFLE","","Government","","Provision of fruit and vegetables was reported during the WHO Global Nutrition Policy Review (GNPR) 2009-2010.
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","" "23287","The Child Pastorate Programme (CPP) ","English","Large scale programmes","","BRA","Brazil","","","on-going","","","The Child Pastorate Programme (CPP) is an ongoing large-scale programme in Brazil. In 2001 CPP coverage by area was about 63% (5140/8159 parishes), providing services to 32 265 communities. Coverage by population for the same year was about 1.6 million children less than 6 years of age (9.8% of total population for age group), in addition to more than 77 000 pregnant women.
The programme also included micronutrient supplementation to lactating women and children below 6 years of age, and referral through at home visits by community worker.
","WHO (2013) Essential Nutrition Actions – Improving maternal, newborn, infant and young child health and nutrition, which provides a compact of WHO guidance on nutrition interventions targeting the first 1000 days of life. Part I presents the interventions currently recommended by WHO, summarizes the rationale and the evidence, and describes the actions require to implement them. Part II provides an analysis of community-based interventions aimed at improving nutrition and indicates how effective interventions can be delivered in an integrated fashion. It shows how the essential nutrition actions described in the first part have been implemented in large-scale programmes in various settings, what the outcomes have been, and to examine the evidence for attribution of changes in nutritional outcomes to programme activities. This summary of CCP is retrieved from the ENA Part II where CCP is one of 32 large-scale community-based programs that has been reviewed in detail and evaluated.
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/essential_nutrit...
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Catholic Church of Brazil","Resource intensity for the CPP is US$ 4/person per year and personnel intensity is 1 community worker: 37 children less than 6 years of age. Total funding for the programme for 1999-2000 was US$ 6.9 million.","Government","Health","Ministry of Health","Government","Education and research","Ministry of Education","Private sector","Private sector","GLOBO TV Network","UN","United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)","At home visits by community worker
","Exclusive breastfeeding
Weight
Increased weight
Malnoursihment
","Internal evaluation were conducted from 1988 - 2001 reported an increase in EBF during the first 4 months (from 60% to 80%), decreases in malnourished children (from 18% to 4%) and pregnant women (from 20% to 4%). External evaluation data are unavalable.
","","In 2001: 77000 pregnant women ","","","Participants' sustained rate of underweight reduction: 1.1 ppt/year
","Vulnerable groups","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","English" "23287","The Child Pastorate Programme (CPP) ","English","Large scale programmes","","BRA","Brazil","","","on-going","","","The Child Pastorate Programme (CPP) is an ongoing large-scale programme in Brazil. In 2001 CPP coverage by area was about 63% (5140/8159 parishes), providing services to 32 265 communities. Coverage by population for the same year was about 1.6 million children less than 6 years of age (9.8% of total population for age group), in addition to more than 77 000 pregnant women.
The programme also included micronutrient supplementation to lactating women and children below 6 years of age, and referral through at home visits by community worker.
","WHO (2013) Essential Nutrition Actions – Improving maternal, newborn, infant and young child health and nutrition, which provides a compact of WHO guidance on nutrition interventions targeting the first 1000 days of life. Part I presents the interventions currently recommended by WHO, summarizes the rationale and the evidence, and describes the actions require to implement them. Part II provides an analysis of community-based interventions aimed at improving nutrition and indicates how effective interventions can be delivered in an integrated fashion. It shows how the essential nutrition actions described in the first part have been implemented in large-scale programmes in various settings, what the outcomes have been, and to examine the evidence for attribution of changes in nutritional outcomes to programme activities. This summary of CCP is retrieved from the ENA Part II where CCP is one of 32 large-scale community-based programs that has been reviewed in detail and evaluated.
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/essential_nutrit...
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Catholic Church of Brazil","Resource intensity for the CPP is US$ 4/person per year and personnel intensity is 1 community worker: 37 children less than 6 years of age. Total funding for the programme for 1999-2000 was US$ 6.9 million.","Government","Health","Ministry of Health","Government","Education and research","Ministry of Education","Private sector","Private sector","GLOBO TV Network","UN","United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)","At home visits by community worker
","Weight
Increased Weight
Malnourishment
","Internal evaluations from 1988 - 2001 reported decreases in malnourished children (from 18% to 4%) and low birth weight (from 14% to 6%). External evaluations are not available.
","","1.6 million children less than 6 years of age (9.8% of total population for age group)","","","Participants' sustained rate of underweight reduction: 1.1 ppt/year
","Vulnerable groups","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","English" "23287","The Child Pastorate Programme (CPP) ","English","Large scale programmes","","BRA","Brazil","","","on-going","","","The Child Pastorate Programme (CPP) is an ongoing large-scale programme in Brazil. In 2001 CPP coverage by area was about 63% (5140/8159 parishes), providing services to 32 265 communities. Coverage by population for the same year was about 1.6 million children less than 6 years of age (9.8% of total population for age group), in addition to more than 77 000 pregnant women.
The programme also included micronutrient supplementation to lactating women and children below 6 years of age, and referral through at home visits by community worker.
","WHO (2013) Essential Nutrition Actions – Improving maternal, newborn, infant and young child health and nutrition, which provides a compact of WHO guidance on nutrition interventions targeting the first 1000 days of life. Part I presents the interventions currently recommended by WHO, summarizes the rationale and the evidence, and describes the actions require to implement them. Part II provides an analysis of community-based interventions aimed at improving nutrition and indicates how effective interventions can be delivered in an integrated fashion. It shows how the essential nutrition actions described in the first part have been implemented in large-scale programmes in various settings, what the outcomes have been, and to examine the evidence for attribution of changes in nutritional outcomes to programme activities. This summary of CCP is retrieved from the ENA Part II where CCP is one of 32 large-scale community-based programs that has been reviewed in detail and evaluated.
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/essential_nutrit...
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Catholic Church of Brazil","Resource intensity for the CPP is US$ 4/person per year and personnel intensity is 1 community worker: 37 children less than 6 years of age. Total funding for the programme for 1999-2000 was US$ 6.9 million.","Government","Health","Ministry of Health","Government","Education and research","Ministry of Education","Private sector","Private sector","GLOBO TV Network","UN","United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)","At home visits by community worker
","Weight
Increased weight
Malnourishment
","Internal evaluations were conducted from 1988–2001 with reported decreases in malnourished children (from 18% to 4%) and pregnant women (from 20% to 4%), as well
as low birth weight (from 14% to 6%). External evaluation data are unavailable.
","","1.6 million children less than 6 years of age (9.8% of total population for age group). More than 77 000 pregnant women.","","","Participants' sustained rate of underweight reduction: 1.1 ppt/year
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","English" "23287","The Child Pastorate Programme (CPP) ","English","Large scale programmes","","BRA","Brazil","","","on-going","","","The Child Pastorate Programme (CPP) is an ongoing large-scale programme in Brazil. In 2001 CPP coverage by area was about 63% (5140/8159 parishes), providing services to 32 265 communities. Coverage by population for the same year was about 1.6 million children less than 6 years of age (9.8% of total population for age group), in addition to more than 77 000 pregnant women.
The programme also included micronutrient supplementation to lactating women and children below 6 years of age, and referral through at home visits by community worker.
","WHO (2013) Essential Nutrition Actions – Improving maternal, newborn, infant and young child health and nutrition, which provides a compact of WHO guidance on nutrition interventions targeting the first 1000 days of life. Part I presents the interventions currently recommended by WHO, summarizes the rationale and the evidence, and describes the actions require to implement them. Part II provides an analysis of community-based interventions aimed at improving nutrition and indicates how effective interventions can be delivered in an integrated fashion. It shows how the essential nutrition actions described in the first part have been implemented in large-scale programmes in various settings, what the outcomes have been, and to examine the evidence for attribution of changes in nutritional outcomes to programme activities. This summary of CCP is retrieved from the ENA Part II where CCP is one of 32 large-scale community-based programs that has been reviewed in detail and evaluated.
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/essential_nutrit...
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","Other","Catholic Church of Brazil","Resource intensity for the CPP is US$ 4/person per year and personnel intensity is 1 community worker: 37 children less than 6 years of age. Total funding for the programme for 1999-2000 was US$ 6.9 million.","Government","Health","Ministry of Health","Government","Education and research","Ministry of Education","Private sector","Private sector","GLOBO TV Network","UN","United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)","At home vists by community worker
","Weight
Increased weight
Malnourishement
","Internal evaluations were conducted from 1988–2001 with reported decreases in malnourished children (from 18% to 4%) and pregnant women (from 20% to 4%), as well as low birth weight (from 14% to 6%). An increase in EBF during the first 4 months was also reported (from 60% to 80%). External evaluation data are unavailable.
","","More than 77 000 pregnant women","","","Participants' sustained rate of underweight reduction: 1.1 ppt/year
","Vulnerable groups","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","English"