Action - Feed the Future: The U.S. Government’s Global Hunger and Food Security Initiative - Promotion of food security and agriculture - Adult men and women

Programme: Feed the Future: The U.S. Government’s Global Hunger and Food Security Initiative

Programme description

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:

  • Increase yields of target crops by at least 50 percent
  • Increase area under irrigation in Tanzania by 15.5 percent through the development of seven smallholder irrigation schemes in Morogoro and Zanzibar
  • Increase market access by rehabilitating at least 3,000 kilometers of rural roads, thus reducing post-harvest losses for maize and rice from 20 percent to 10 percent
  • Increase trade in the target value chain by at least 25 percent through improved rural infrastructure and improved value chain efficiency 

To help meet its objectives Feed the Future Tanzania is making core investments in four key areas:

  1. Systems transformation for the rice, maize and horticulture value chains through agricultural production and processing, and market access and natural resource management 
  2. Nutrition, with major interventions targeting children under five and pregnant women
  3. Agricultural support services and capacity building including research and development and financial services
  4. Addressing major constraints to an enabling policy environment

Programme type

Multi-national

References

Status: 
On-going

Start date:

January
2011

End date:

January
2015
Area: 
Rural
Peri-urban
Place: 
Morogoro and Arusha-based Agricultural Research Station and National Seed Laboratory; Arusha, Moshi/Hai, Lushoto, Morogoro, Coast and Zanzibar
Target group: 
Adult men and women
Delivery: 
Commercial
Community-based
Implementation details : 

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:

  •  Improve the competitiveness and productivity of maize and rice value chains;
  • Facilitate improved domestic and regional trade; Expand the warehouse receipts program in Tanzania;
  • Expand the depth and breadth of benefits from the growth of the maize and rice subsectors, including increased benefits to women and youth;
  • Enhance rural household nutrition by promoting consumption of a nutritious basket of fortified foods that include but are not limited to staple crops.

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.

Target population size : 
Feed the Future aims to help an estimated 834,000 vulnerable Tanzanian women, children and family members—mostly smallholder farmers—escape hunger and poverty
Coverage level (%): 
The geographic focus is in the southern regions, and falls within the SAGCOT; Six target zones in the northern regions (Arusha, Moshi/Hai, Lushoto, Morogoro, Coast and Zanzibar)
Outcome indicator(s): 

NAFAKA – Staples Value Chain Development (Rice and Maize)

  • Improved competitiveness and trade of the maize and rice value chains
  • Improved value chain productivity

Market-Based Solutions to Reduce Poverty and Improve Nutrition

  • Increased competitiveness of the agro-processing sector to take advantage of marketing and trade opportunities
  • Improved agro-processor access to information and training on improved processing technologies, finance, food safety standards, and business management practices Enhanced commercial linkages and partnerships between processors and small farmers for supplies of commodities
  • Increased access to and consumption of high quality nutritious food by people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHA) and pregnant/lactating mothers and fortified weaning food for babies
  • Strengthened institutions and industry groups supporting the agro-processing sector

Sustainable Horticulture for Income and Food Security in Tanzania (SHIFT)

  • Increase in farmers‘ incomes Increase in farmer capacity to operate commercially through two farmer-owned
  • Market Service Centers built to achieve economies of scale in postharvest handling, marketing and distribution
  • Increase in demand for smallholder production Increase in saleable volume

Tanzania Agriculture Productivity Program (TAPP)

  • Increase in household income for participants of targeted intervention, thereby contributing to the MDG goal of halving the number of people below the poverty line
  • Increase in number of men and women farmers engaged in environmentally sustainable horticulture Increase in export revenue from direct agricultural trade in horticulture products in target areas
  • Improved access and control of income and decision-making power of women in the production and marketing process
  • Promotion of the strengthening of local institutions and their participation in the production and marketing processes as well as strengthened collaboration with Local Government Authorities for sustainability
M&E system: 

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.

Baseline: 
IR 1: Improved Agricultural Productivity Gross margin per unit of land of selected crops (rice, maize and horticulture)Percent increase in farm incomes of participating smallholder farmers as a result of USG assistance; Percent increase in staples production (rice and maize)of participating smallholder farmers as a result of USG assistance; Number of individuals who have received USG supported long-term agricultural sector productivity or food security training; Number of individuals who have received USG supported short-term agricultural sector productivity or food security training; Number of national agricultural research institutions supported under USG assistance; Number of additional hectares under improved technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance; Number of new research programs developed by national agricultural research institutions under USG assistance; Number of farmers who have applied new technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance; Number of new technologies or management practices made available for transfer as a result of USG assistance; Number of new technologies or management practices under field testing as a result of USG assistance; Number of private enterprises, producers organizations, water users associations, trade and business associations, and community-based organizations (CBOs) receiving USG assistance; Number of institutions/organizations undertaking capacity/competency strengthening as a result of USG assistance; Number of producers organizations, water users associations, trade and business associations, and community-based organizations (CBOs) receiving USG assistance; Number of members of producer organizations and community based organizations receiving USG assistance; Training and capacity building programs for producers and processors developed; Number of rural households benefiting directly from USG interventions; Number of hectares under improved irrigation(Change in actual irrigable area); Number of irrigation schemes developed; IR 2: Expanding Markets and Trade Percentage change in volume and value of traded agricultural commodities; Percent change of value of intra-regional trade in targeted agricultural commodities; Value of incremental sales (collected at farm- level) attributed to FTF implementation; Value of exports of targeted agricultural commodities as a result of USG assistance; Increased availability of agricultural specific goods and services to the farming communities as a result of USG assistance; Number of rural hectares formalized; Number of rural hectares mapped and adjudicated; Postharvest losses as a percent of overall harvest; Kilometers of roads improved or constructed; Value of agricultural and rural financing loans; Number of MSMEs receiving USG assistance to access bank loans; Number of MSMEs receiving business development services from USG assisted sources; Value of new private sector investment in the agriculture sector or food chain leveraged by FTF implementation; Number of farmers receiving credit and value of the credit; Number of public-private partnerships formed as a result of FTF assistance.IR 5: Increased resilience of vulnerable communities and householdsPrevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger (Average score of household hunger index); Percentage of households with adequate food consumption; Number of vulnerable households benefiting directly from USG interventions; Number of USG social assistance beneficiaries participating in productive safety nets; Number of vulnerable households benefiting directly from USG assistance.IR 6: Improved access to diverse and quality foods Prevalence of children 6-23 months receiving a minimum acceptable diet; Dietary Diversity: Mean number of food groups consumed by women of reproductive age; Number of households with access to a home, community, school garden; Percent households adopting improved food preservation and processing technologies.IR 7: Improved nutrition-related behaviors Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding of children under six months; Increase prevalence of appropriate infant and young child feeding practices from 6-23 months; Number of community workers trained on nutrition behavior change.IR 8: Improved utilization of maternal and child health and nutrition servicesPrevalence of maternal anemia among women of reproductive age; Proportion of mothers who take iron supplementation for more than 90 days during pregnancy and the post-partum period; Number of people trained in child health and nutrition through USG-supported health area programs; Number of children under five years of age who received vitamin A from USG-supported programs
Post-intervention: 

IR 1: Improved Agricultural Productivity Gross margin per unit of land of selected crops (rice, maize and horticulture)Percent increase in farm incomes of participating smallholder farmers as a result of USG assistance; Percent increase in staples production (rice and maize)of participating smallholder farmers as a result of USG assistance; Number of individuals who have received USG supported long-term agricultural sector productivity or food security training; Number of individuals who have received USG supported short-term agricultural sector productivity or food security training; Number of national agricultural research institutions supported under USG assistance; Number of additional hectares under improved technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance; Number of new research programs developed by national agricultural research institutions under USG assistance; Number of farmers who have applied new technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance; Number of new technologies or management practices made available for transfer as a result of USG assistance; Number of new technologies or management practices under field testing as a result of USG assistance; Number of private enterprises, producers organizations, water users associations, trade and business associations, and community-based organizations (CBOs) receiving USG assistance; Number of institutions/organizations undertaking capacity/competency strengthening as a result of USG assistance; Number of producers organizations, water users associations, trade and business associations, and community-based organizations (CBOs) receiving USG assistance; Number of members of producer organizations and community based organizations receiving USG assistance; Training and capacity building programs for producers and processors developed; Number of rural households benefiting directly from USG interventions; Number of hectares under improved irrigation(Change in actual irrigable area); Number of irrigation schemes developed; IR 2: Expanding Markets and Trade Percentage change in volume and value of traded agricultural commodities; Percent change of value of intra-regional trade in targeted agricultural commodities; Value of incremental sales (collected at farm- level) attributed to FTF implementation; Value of exports of targeted agricultural commodities as a result of USG assistance; Increased availability of agricultural specific goods and services to the farming communities as a result of USG assistance; Number of rural hectares formalized; Number of rural hectares mapped and adjudicated; Postharvest losses as a percent of overall harvest; Kilometers of roads improved or constructed; Value of agricultural and rural financing loans; Number of MSMEs receiving USG assistance to access bank loans; Number of MSMEs receiving business development services from USG assisted sources; Value of new private sector investment in the agriculture sector or food chain leveraged by FTF implementation; Number of farmers receiving credit and value of the credit; Number of public-private partnerships formed as a result of FTF assistance.IR 5: Increased resilience of vulnerable communities and householdsPrevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger (Average score of household hunger index); Percentage of households with adequate food consumption; Number of vulnerable households benefiting directly from USG interventions; Number of USG social assistance beneficiaries participating in productive safety nets; Number of vulnerable households benefiting directly from USG assistance.IR 6: Improved access to diverse and quality foods Prevalence of children 6-23 months receiving a minimum acceptable diet; Dietary Diversity: Mean number of food groups consumed by women of reproductive age; Number of households with access to a home, community, school garden; Percent households adopting improved food preservation and processing technologies.IR 7: Improved nutrition-related behaviors Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding of children under six months; Increase prevalence of appropriate infant and young child feeding practices from 6-23 months; Number of community workers trained on nutrition behavior change.IR 8: Improved utilization of maternal and child health and nutrition servicesPrevalence of maternal anemia among women of reproductive age; Proportion of mothers who take iron supplementation for more than 90 days during pregnancy and the post-partum period; Number of people trained in child health and nutrition through USG-supported health area programs; Number of children under five years of age who received vitamin A from USG-supported programs

Outcome reported by social determinants: 
Vulnerable groups
Sex
Socio-economic status

Revision log

DateUserLogState
Tue, 03/11/2014 - 16:06engesveenkEdited by william_nkoom.published
Wed, 02/26/2014 - 14:59engesveenkEdited by william_nkoom.published
Wed, 02/26/2014 - 14:26engesveenkEdited by william_nkoom.published
Wed, 02/26/2014 - 13:53engesveenkEdited by william_nkoom.published
Wed, 03/27/2013 - 16:16bloessnermEdited by william_nkoom.published
Mon, 03/18/2013 - 13:43william_nkoomEdited by william_nkoom.draft
Mon, 03/18/2013 - 13:42AnnaLarteyEdited by william_nkoom.draft
Sun, 03/17/2013 - 17:34AnnaLarteyCreated by AnnaLartey.draft