 |
||||
|
Produce for sale at the Kalali Women Dairy Cooperative - IFAD | |||
Managing for Impact is a specific development approach centred on people, empowerment, learning and responsiveness. Empowerment becomes real when people are asked to define their own goals, to develop their own decisions and to take action. This implies constant learning, adapting to new circumstances and embracing experiences along the way. The annual Regional Implementation Workshop held in Arusha, Tanzania from 14-18 November 2011 focused on the various aspects of Managing for Impact, giving project managers, officers and coordinators the opportunity to share experiences and to think about and discuss the issue more in depth.
Many interesting points came out of the discussions, as well as encouraging solutions to solve management problems. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E), knowledge sharing and acknowledging mistakes in particular remain high on the agenda as crucial elements of Managing for Impact. As an institution with a high stake in the development sector, we are keen to show the results of our efforts. However, this is not always easy due to the complexity of the environment we work in. How can we make good management decisions if we don't always know what works and what doesn't or if we don't receive all the information we need to help us in our decision making? M&E for instance is more complex than just processing data into a system. It also requires the ability to analyse the data, share the information with the people who will most benefit from it, and use it to take rectifying actions where needed to increase the positive impact of a project.
Projects in the region are increasingly making good progress in Managing for Impact. This newsletter offers some good examples, and we hope that they will inspire others to follow suit in further increasing the impact of our activities and efforts to reduce rural poverty in the region.
This is my last message as director. As you might know, after 26 years working in East and Southern Africa, I am moving to the IFAD West and Central Africa division, where I hope to seek out new opportunities for learning and creating linkages between the two regions. I would like to wish all of you continued learning and success in the work you are doing, and I look forward to meeting with you again as your supportive neighbour as we share our experiences, learn from them, and manage and improve our impact on the ground.
Ides de Willebois
General feature on Managing for Impact
In the last decade, a number of approaches have come to the fore to increase the impact that development projects have on rural areas and livelihoods, and to manage projects with a view to maximizing their impact. They are important as they heighten awareness of the importance of keeping a strong focus on the objectives and results of a project.
In its own reform process following an external evaluation in 2005 to determine its contribution to rural poverty reduction, and in its subsequent Action Plan, IFAD adopted the concept of Managing for Development Results. The concept is focused around improving the results of its development projects and programmes, and making them more sustainable.
The Regional Implementation Workshop held in Arusha, Tanzania in November 2011 put into practice the very concept of managing for development results. Participants were requested to determine what Managing for Impact meant, and the priorities to focus on. For the first time, no set agenda was prepared and no specific methodology was followed. The participants had to set their own agenda. A framework for discussion and a number of themes were suggested, but the project and programme stakeholders themselves had to define what in their view were the core principles of Managing for Impact. They agreed that a successful Managing for Impact approach meant:
- always keeping an eye on results
- having an effective beneficiary intervention
- being able to analyse the situation and come up with the right solution
- being able to learn from mistakes and growing stronger each time
- constantly readjusting and adapting a solution to the situation.
Evolution of the approach
Managing for Impact is not new as a development approach. The concept was first developed in 2002 when IFAD commissioned a review of its monitoring practices that led to the publication of "Managing for Impact: a Guide for Project Monitoring and Evaluation" (Guijt &Woodhill, 2002). The guide provided project managers and implementers with sensitive management and monitoring tools and skills that would enable them to adjust their approaches as they went along, to work with rather than for the target group and other stakeholders, and to have a real and positive impact on their lives and livelihoods.
In 2005, a study in East and Southern Africa found little evidence of "managing for impact" or of improved monitoring practices on the ground in IFAD projects. The study concluded that a more systematic approach to capacity development was needed in the region. This led to the launching in 2006 of the three-year Strengthening Managing for Impact Programme (SMIP), which aimed to develop capacity for Managing for Impact, through regional training workshops, action learning sites, managing knowledge and influencing policy. At the same time, the Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation developed its own methodology on Managing for Impact.
Six years later, the understanding and appreciation of Managing for Impact have increased noticeably. Project coordinators, managers and beneficiaries realize that the new approach is bringing long-term improvements. Project coordinators and beneficiaries are open to the new participatory learning approach, and are now able to acknowledge shortfalls of previous projects and learn from them, which is an important aspect of Managing for Impact. Of course, there are still obstacles to overcome and areas to improve, but gradually the new approach is becoming more widespread.
Participation and flexibility
One of the key concepts of any Managing for Impact approach is the full involvement of the communities who are benefitting from a project, and flexibility in project design. Most project stakeholders agree that the objectives must be clear to all participants, and enough flexibility should be provided to allow for changes along the way.
The Lower Usuthu Smallholder Irrigation Project in Swaziland provides a good example of participation and flexibility, because the communities themselves were able to fully determine their development needs and objectives, and all segments of society came on board, including youth. The implementing institution, the Swaziland Water and Agricultural Development Enterprise, also brought an innovative approach based on the strong participation of the project's beneficiaries from the start (see story below on Swaziland).
Learning
Beside participation and flexibility, learning is an important aspect of Managing for Impact. In this regard, one successful initiative is the farmer field schools (FFS), which was introduced in Zanzibar under the Agriculture Service Support Programme and the Agriculture Sector Development Programme-Livestock (ASSP/ASDP-L) to train farmers about new techniques and improved management directly in the field. In this particular example, the Managing for Impact approach as developed under the SMIP programme was put in place. Farmers engaged in FFS were asked to participate in monitoring the school and give their view on a range of issues related to FFS, as well as share information with other farmers. FFS facilitators were responsible for facilitating M&E activities performed in groups and summarizing the information coming from farmers. Consequently, a more organized approach to generating and using information was introduced in the programme. At district level, programme officers from ASSP/ASDP-L coordinated the information-gathering process to ensure that M&E was implemented as planned, compiling and summarizing information coming from FFS facilitators.
Knowledge sharing
It often happens that projects are unable to maximize results because valuable knowledge is lost due to inadequate communication channels. In addition, in many cases the importance of sharing information with other stakeholders is undervalued. To improve the situation in Uganda, a team of project coordinators and knowledge management officers undertook an extensive documentation process to better capture results and engage farmers and field officers in systematically sharing their knowledge. "One of the problems we faced was that the documentation process usually started when a project came to an end, so other people benefited from it rather than the project itself. That's why we need to learn to document better," explained Ann Turinayo, Knowledge Management Officer for IFAD in Uganda. Their case is a good example of how to better manage for impact through improved communications and knowledge sharing and management, but without strictly following a set methodology (see story below).
In Madagascar, the use of online tools such as websites and multimedia documents has become a common standard in IFAD-supported projects and programmes on the island. Study visits and exchanges between farmers from different projects have also had a positive impact, as farmers learned new skills that they took back home.
Facing the unexpected
Even when a project is on track and the knowledge is being shared adequately, other challenges can unexpectedly arise. This is something the Kalali Women Dairy Cooperative, part of the Agricultural Sector Development Programme in Tanzania, learned the hard way. The cooperative, set up in 1988 in the Hai district of the Kilimanjaro region, had a flourishing business producing milk, which was sold to a distributor in the nearest town of Arusha. However, the distributor never paid for the milk.
“We failed to ask for the money up front, and the company failed to pay us 12,000,000 schillings (USD 7200),” explained Nancy Manasseh Kidin, director of the Kalali cooperative. The venture could have stopped there, as the cooperative was unable to fill the huge financial hole left by the failing customer.
Eventually, it got back on its feet with the help of an Italian NGO, and its members learned to never accept an “IOU” in their business transactions. Today, they produce milk and dairy products such as cheese, butter and yogurt, which they sell throughout the country. They keep track of their daily production on a handwritten graph and have sound bookkeeping practices. With their income from the dairy business, the cooperative bought a sunflower oil pressing machine and started a savings credit cooperative. "What we find more difficult now is the lack of skilled people to help us when we have a problem, whether it is a technical problem or an accountancy issue," Kidin added.
Improving Managing for Impact
Many projects regularly experience difficulties in their daily management activities, including: contract management issues, such as monitoring and checking the contractor's activities; and knowledge management issues, such as sharing lessons learned from project results and reporting on project outcomes, impact and sustainability.
In this respect, participants in the Regional Implementation Workshop almost unanimously agreed that the 2012 workshop should focus on sustaining the impact of projects – once a project has achieved the desired results, it is just as important to ensure long-term sustainability.
The workshop participants concluded that the most important aspect of project development is to create a common vision with common goals at the outset and to make sure they are attainable and sustainable. In their view, the successful path is not to follow plans rigidly but to always refocus on IFAD's mandate to empower poor rural people to lift themselves out of poverty, and to try to achieve the project's objectives bearing this in mind.
For further information:
Stories from the field
Swaziland: communities manage their project
 |
||||
|
Gugulethu Hophe, Acting CEO of SWADE explaining how the LUSIP programme managed for impact - IFAD | |||
The Lower Usuthu Basin is one of the poorest regions of Swaziland. The climate is semi-arid, droughts are frequent and crop yields are unreliable. Most households in the area have access to less than two hectares of land and can barely grow enough to feed themselves. Households rely heavily on remittances. For people in the area, security of land tenure and access to water for irrigation are key means to improving their livelihoods and reducing poverty.
The IFAD-supported Lower Usuthu Smallholder Irrigation Project (LUSIP) was set up to improve livelihoods in the area by transforming the local economy from subsistence farming into sustainable commercial agriculture. The Swaziland Water and Agricultural Development Enterprise (SWADE), a government-owned enterprise, was involved in implementing the project and encouraged the local communities to directly manage their own project.
"SWADE believes that one cannot have sustainable development without empowering the people to do things for themselves," explained Gugulethu Hophe, acting CEO of SWADE. The organization's philosophy is based on helping people in the project areas to develop agricultural businesses using water as a catalyst. "At the core is investing in people, through a number of interventions, the principal being training," she said.
In keeping with its philosophy, SWADE played the role of facilitator rather than manager of projects, to ensure that the communities involved controlled their own development. "Our multi-disciplinary team spent a lot of time training the communities at household level from the onset of the project, so they could decide what kind of project they wanted," explained Gugulethu.
SWADE representatives held meetings with the local communities to ask them what kind of crop they were planning to develop. They chose sugar cane, because of the proximity of a sugar mill, which already had in place the set-up for processing and marketing sugar.
In order to grow sugar cane successfully, a minimum of 60 hectares of contiguous fields were needed, so farmers put their fields together to develop the crop. "That is something they decided themselves, and today they have a production of 145 tonnes per hectare, which is unheard of...it's a great success," she added.
Another factor leading to the success of the project was the active participation of the existing industrial sugar growers and the local mill group, which shared knowledge with small growers in the project area. The sugar miller has a representative on the SWADE board. "The mill group provides the mills to process the crop and helps with marketing. Farmers are paid for their crop and receive technical expertise," explained Gugulethu.
In addition, sugar prices are fixed at industry level for a 12-month period, which means that if the crop is well managed, farmers can calculate their future income based on their actual production.
One of the difficulties in the area was the lack of water, so an irrigation system was put in place with the help of a European Union (EU) grant which provided 70 per cent of the cost, while the government contributed the remainder.
The irrigation system is a sophisticated electronically operated system that requires good management. To this end, SWADE and the local community involved the youth. "The business side is managed by the youth, who are more aware of technology, while elders manage agriculture. We wanted to ensure that everyone was on board", said Gugulethu, who added that a strong focus was also put on strengthening the environmental aspects of the project and managing the land in a sustainable way.
However, the local farmers are now facing a new challenge: the EU has lowered its quotas for preferential treatment on sugar prices. This has affected smallholders, as the EU was a guaranteed market at a good price. "It's a new challenge. However, Swaziland is one of the top producers. It has good soil for sugar, so farmers have to make sure they can compete in world markets and continue to invest," concluded Gugulethu.
For further information:
Louise McDonald, Country Programme Manager, IFAD
Uganda: Facilitating the documentation process
 |
||||
|
Participants of the training collating information during the documentation process. J. Chavez-Tafur/ILEIA | |||
As part of the knowledge management activities of IFAD’s East and Southern Africa Division, the ILEIA Centre for Learning on Sustainable Agriculture, an environment and agriculture information organization which benefitted from an IFAD grant, facilitated a workshop on creating a successful project documentation process. The workshop took place in Kampala and involved representatives of four IFAD-supported projects. In the words of Associate Country Programme Manager, Carole Idriss-Kanago, the workshop “helped us to identify those points which make us special and to value the importance of sharing them with others.”
A team made of representatives from ILEIA and IFAD were the facilitators of a four-day workshop that took place in Kampala in January. Its purpose was to explain the basic concepts, principles and conditions needed for a successful documentation process, by going through the process itself. The group stressed the difference between a documentation process, whereby valuable information is gathered to be used by others, and the more common description process, which merely lists a project's activities. It also stressed the need to include different opinions and perspectives to have a broader view. After a short presentation of the methodology to use to successfully document something, the group asked the participants to select aspects of their project that they wanted to document and share, including a description of the main activities and results, followed by an analysis of these results, as well as a selection of indicators to measure results and impact, and the reasons (or causes) for the various results and impacts.
The four project teams continued with the description and analysis of their work, and prepared for a second meeting by identifying the main issues that emerged as they were working through the process: the importance of “narrowing” or further defining the case to be documented; how to select and use the appropriate criteria when analysing the information; the need to capture additional or supplementary information to better support the documentation; and how to present the results.
Learning by doing
 |
||||
|
Learning to collect valuable information from the field - A.Turinayo/IFAD | |||
Going through the documentation process as a group showed that, contrary to what participants thought at the outset, documenting one’s experience is not necessarily difficult, nor something that has to be left to external consultants. Yet, although the process “helped us find a way to tell the untold story”, participants identified some issues that need special attention:
- Ensuring broad participation. The documentation process cannot be performed quickly or without the involvement of many people. It is essential to get data and opinions from all those who have been involved in a project. It is also important to distribute roles and responsibilities for information sharing within a team and to allow for sufficient time and resources for team members to carry them out.
- Selecting participants in documentation workshops. When organizing a documentation workshop, it is important to consider whom to invite, and how many people to invite. There are pros and cons of inviting too many people, and of inviting project beneficiaries. However, it is important to be clear on the issue and to know why some participants are invited and why it may be best to exclude others. It is also important to make sure that all team members can be present for the entire workshop.
- Selecting what to write about. Projects are broad, and there are many things that can be written about. Selecting topics is not always easy. Determining a project’s “unique selling points” is key to making project documentation particularly interesting and useful to others.
- Gathering more information. It is not possible for the teams to come up with all details of a project during one workshop. Existing reports and other sources of information are valuable to the documentation process – in particular, visits to the field to conduct interviews, and using video cameras to record them.
- Getting the analysis right. Trying to explain why things were the way they were is not always easy, particularly when something negative (e.g. a result or outcome) needs to be explained. In addition, it can be difficult to determine the appropriate criteria and indicators in which to frame the analysis.
- Selecting the appropriate format for the documentation being presented. Presenting the information and opinions gathered is an essential part of the process, and a key issue is to select a format (for example, an article, a book, a brochure, a poster) that is suitable for the intended audience.
Holding a workshop on creating a successful documentation process is an extremely valuable initiative. However, it does require a budget, time and support, and carries the challenge of how to “make this all part of our daily activities”. In terms of the workshop itself, facilitators should have a solid amount of information about the projects and the participants before the workshop takes place, including documents that have already been produced. In addition, workshops should include a session dedicated to briefing project directors and other key IFAD staff. This will help ensure and strengthen their support.
For further information:
- Ann Turinayo, Knowledge Management and Communications Officer, IFAD in Uganda
- Jorge Chavez-Tafur, Editor at ILEIA
- Carole Idriss-Kanago, Associate Country Programme Manager, IFAD in Uganda
- Alessandro Marini, Country Programme Manager, IFAD
Useful link:
South Sudan: interview with the new Country Programme Manager
 |
||||
|
Eric Rwabidadi, Country Programme Manager - IFAD | |||
Following the independence of the Republic of South Sudan, IFAD management decided to move the Southern Sudan Portfolio from the Near East North Africa and Europe Division to the East and Southern Africa Division and appointed Mr Eric Rwabidadi as new Country Programme Manager. He is based in Nairobi, Kenya.
What are IFAD’s current operations in South Sudan?
The current portfolio in South Sudan is composed of one on-going project, the Southern Sudan Livelihoods Development Project, which is scheduled to be completed in March 2015. It also includes a grant support to FAO to carry out a resilience and livelihood analysis, scheduled to end by March 2012, as well as a regional grant, presented at the December 2011 Executive Board, to engage the Diaspora of Somalis and South Sudanese in agricultural and rural development investments.
Can you describe the on-going IFAD project?
The Southern Sudan Livelihoods Development Project is a USD 22.5 million project co-financed by the Government, beneficiaries and the Kingdom of Netherlands, one of the key donors in South Sudan. It has two main components: the community development component and the rural infrastructure and market facilities development. The project has had a considerable implementation time lag and is currently encountering implementation challenges. In fact, the project operates in a challenging environment. There is limited capacity to implement the project in the newly formed nation from central to decentralized levels. But this is understandable after 21 years of war. The poor road network, which is worsened by heavy rains, makes the project area difficult to reach for a long period of the year.
What are your plans for improving project performance?
 |
||||
|
Difficult roads in South Sudan - IFAD | |||
We will continue working closely with our government counterpart at all levels and more importantly with the project staff to provide necessary and focused implementation support where needed. During our October 2011 familiarization and implementation mission with the Division Director, there was general understanding that we need to re-examine the design of the project and introduce the necessary changes to improve its performance and, most importantly, refocus the project toward achieving its development objectives. The main actions and related key turn-around actions requiring particular attention include: improving the project supervisory and oversight function by the line ministry as well as other technical implementers; encouraging NGO service providers to embark on a progressive self-reliance process of project participants; giving priority to interest-group capacity building with a graduation mechanism towards strong and cohesive groups prior to any provision of project support; and focusing on feeder road construction/rehabilitations to link production and market centres.
What are IFAD’s priorities in South Sudan?
First of all, we need to focus on improving the performance of our on-going project with close follow-up and regular interaction with the project management in Juba. During missions, we need to get better acquainted with the Government, development partners, NGOs and the private sector, and the rural poverty situation in South Sudan.
Secondly we need to work on the Republic of South Sudan’s membership to IFAD, with a first allocation for the 2013-2015 cycle. Indeed, on 31 October 2011, the Republic of South Sudan applied for IFAD membership. The application was reviewed by the December 2011 Executive Board which recommended formal approval by the February 2012 Governing Council.
Once membership is formally approved, the country would become a “list C” non-original member state of IFAD, which will make it eligible for investment operations. Given that South Sudan is likely to be classified as debt-free, it would therefore be eligible for loans on highly concessional terms, not grant terms.
As next steps, we will be developing a Country Strategy Note to set the stage and guide IFAD towards a systematic country engagement in the near future. The Country Strategy Note will outline the rural development, poverty, policy and institutional issues, and a strategy for IFAD interventions for the next three to five years. The Note will also develop possible options for project financing in line with the Performance-based Allocation System for the 2013-2015 period. We aim to take the first project for the Republic of South Sudan to the April 2013 Executive Board.
About South Sudan South Sudan came into existence on 9 July 2011 following a referendum on independence for the south in January, in which 98.8 per cent of southerners voted for separation. Although South Sudan and Sudan are now two separate countries, a number of keys issues still need to be resolved between the two states, which include sharing of the oil proceeds, border demarcation and citizenship. |
For further information:
Eric Rwabidadi, Country Programme Manager, IFAD [email protected]
Tel: +254 (0)20762 24647
Mob: +254 (0)717 732 079
Grants and loans approved by the December 2011 Executive Board
Comoros
Malawi
- Sustainable Agriculture Productivity, Loan US$ 22.85 million and Grant US$ 22.85 million
Madagascar
- Supplementary grant for the Menaby & Melaky Regions (Add-0n) US$ 5 million
Madagascar
- Vocational Training and Agricultural Productivity Improvement Programme (FORMAPROD) US$ 33 million
Both Madagascar projects will be approved on a “no objection” basis by 15 February 2011
Regional Grants
- Strengthening capacity of East African farmer organizations through knowledge management and institutional development – Eastern Africa Farmers Federation (EAFF) – US$1.5 million
- IFADAfrica Regional Knowledge Network Phase II – PICO Knowledge Net – US$1.8 million
- Rural Finance Knowledge Management Partnership Phase III - AFRACA – US$1.5 million
Loans and grants to be submitted to the April 2012 Executive Board
Kenya
- Upper Tana Catchments Natural Resources Management Project US$ 32 million
South Africa
- South African Market-Led Smallholder Agricultural Development Programme
US$ 16 million
Regional Grants
Alleviating poverty and protecting biodiversity through Bio Trade - Phyto Trade Africa – US$ 1.5 million
Missions and Workshops
Burundi
- A Supervision Mission for the Transitional Programme of Post-Conflict Reconstruction (PTRPC) is scheduled to take place from 26 February to 18 March.
Kenya
- The Director of the Policy and Technical Advisory Division (PTA), Mr. Rodney Cooke, visited Kenya from 7 to 14 January to attend CGIAR meetings and to make field visits to the Mount Kenya East Pilot Project for Natural Resources Management (MKEPP), as part of a growing collaboration between the PTA and ESA divisions in country programme development.
- ESA Nairobi staff participated in a retreat from 16 to 18 January to raise team spirit and bonding among the diverse regional technical, loan administration and country programme units in Nairobi.
Madagascar
- A Supervision Mission for the Support to Farmers’ Professional Organizations and Agricultural Services Project (AROPA) is scheduled to take place from 5 to 20 March.
Malawi
- A Supervision Mission for the Rural Livelihoods Support Programme (RLSP) is scheduled to take place from 19 to 30 March.
- A Supervision Mission for the Rural Livelihoods and Economic Enhancement Programme (RLEEP)
Mozambique
- The Completion Mission for the Artisanal Fisheries Promotion Project is scheduled to take place from 12 to 17 February.
Tanzania
- The COSOP review took place from 14 to 16 December 2011. The theme was “Building linkages within and between country programmes”.
Uganda
- The Implementation Support mission for the District Livelihoods Support Programme (DLSP) is scheduled to take place from 5 to 7 March.
- The Community Agricultural Infrastructure Improvement Programme (CAIIP) Implementation Support Mission is scheduled to take place from 7 to 9 March.
- The Vegetable Oil Development Project - Phase 2 (VODP 2) Start-up Mission is scheduled to take place from 15 to 23 March.
Appointments and staff movements
The following staffed have been transferred from the East and Southern Division (ESA) to the Controller's and Financial Services Division (CFS) as of 1 January 2011.
- Robert Creswell - Financial Management Officer
- Elisabeth Dombori - Loan Administration Assistant
- Rose Heraniah - Regional Loan Administration Officer
- Hellen Kilonzo – Loan Administration Assistant
- Daniel Maina - Financial Management Analyst
- Joseph Okello - Loan Administration Assistant
- Dagim Kassahum has been recruited as the Country Programme Assistant for Ethiopia and is based in Addis Ababa
- Muchina Joseph Nganga has been recruited as the Country Officer for Kenya and is based in Nairobi
Congratulations and welcome to Dagim and Joseph!