USAID_East_Africa_Stocktake_Report_Annexes_2018.pdf

Summary Report - Annex

Taking Stock of USAID’s Past and Ongoing Activities under the

East Africa Feed the Future Multi-Year Strategy (2011-2015) and

Work Completed from 2016 to 2018

This publication was produced on November 2018.

This publication was produced by the Institute for People, Innovation and Change in Organizations – Eastern Africa (PICO-Eastern Africa), now known as Emerge Centre for Innovations – Africa (ECI-Africa)

Cover photo credit: Africa Lead

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 2

Contents

Acronyms

Introduction

Annex 1 - Survey Instruments

Annex 1a: Analytical Framework for the Literature Review

Annex 1b: Semi-Structured Questionnaire for key Informant Interviews

Annex 1c: Semi-Structured Questionnaire to Guide Focused Group Discussions

Annex 1d: Semi-Structured Questionnaire for the Online Survey

Annex 2 - Analysis and Findings

Annex 2A: Resilience

1. Background and Context Analysis

2. Interventions

3. Achievements

4. Challenges and Gaps

5. Opportunities Going Forward

Annex 2B: Nutrition

1. Background and Context Analysis

2. Interventions

3. Achievements

4. Challenges and Gaps

5. Opportunities Going Forward

Annex 2C: Technology Development and Deployment

1. Background and Context Analysis

2. Interventions

3. Achievements

4. Challenges and Gaps

5. Opportunities Going Forward

Annex 2D: Cross-Cutting Issues

Cross Cutting Issues Underpinning Programming

1. Summary of perspectives by Regional stakeholders – What Worked Well and What Did Not

2. Identified Critical Cross-Cutting issues

3. Opportunities Going Forward

Annex 3 - Summary of USAID’S Key Implementing Partners

1. Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)

2. East African Community (EAC)

3. Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)

4. Trade Mark East Africa (TMEA)

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 3

5. Agricultural Cooperative Development International/Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance (ACDI/VOCA)

6. East Africa Trade and Investment Hub (EATIH)

7. East Africa Grain Council (EAGC)

8. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT)

9. Africa Lead II

10. Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System (RESAKSS)

11. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA)

12. Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA) 58

13. The African Union – Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR)

References

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 4

Acronyms ACDI/VOCA Agricultural Cooperative Development International/Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance

ACTESA Alliance for Commodity Trade in East and Southern Africa

AfDP African Development Bank

AGOA African Growth and Opportunity Act

AIIM African Institution Innovation Mechanism

AMU Arab Maghreb Union

APPOs Administrative Personnel Processing Office

AR4D Agricultural Research for Development

ARIS Animal Resource Information System

ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa

ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations

ATTC Aflasafe Technology Transfer and Commercialization

AUC African Union Commission

AU-IBAR African Union Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources

BDS Business Development Services

BFFS Belgian Fund for Food Security

BFS Bureau for Food Security

BR Biennial Review

CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme

CBC COMESA Business Council

CCPP Contagious Caprine Pleuropneumonia

CCRP Collaborative Crop Research Program

CEMAC Economic and Monetary Community of Central Africa

CEWARN Conflict Early Warning and Response Mechanism

CFAs Customs Clearing and Forwarding Agents

CFTA Continental Free Trade Area

CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research

CIAT International Center for Tropical Agriculture

CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center

C-MRF COMESA Mutual Recognition Framework

COMBIP COMESA Biotechnology Initiative Program

COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa

COMPETE Competitiveness and Trade Expansion

COMSHIP COMESA Seed Harmonization Implementation Plan

CPPs Country Programming Paper

DRC Democratic Republic of Congo

EABC East African Business Council

EAC East Africa Community

EAFF Eastern Africa Farmers Federation

EAGC Eastern Africa Grain Council

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 5

EAPIC East African Phytosanitary Information Committee

EATIH East Africa Trade Investment Hub

EBA World Bank’s Enabling the Business of Agriculture

ECCAS Economic Community of Central African States

ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States

ECRABREN Eastern and Central Africa Bean Research Network

ECSA- HC East, Central and Southern Africa Health Community

EDRASAIA Early Detection Reporting and Surveillance-Avian Influenza in Africa

EU European Union

FAW Fall Army Worm

FEWs Famine Early Warning Systems Network

FGDs Focused Group Discussions

FSVC Financial Service Volunteer Corp

FTF Feed the Future

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GFSS Global Food Security Strategy

GIS Geographic Information System

GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

GM Genetic Modification

HoRN Horn of Africa Resilience Network

ICIPE International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology

ICPAC IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre

ICPALD IGAD Centre for Pastoral Areas Development and Livestock Development

ICT Information, Communication and Technology

IDDRSI Drought Disaster Resilience and Sustainability Initiative

IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute

IGAD Intergovernmental Authority on Development

IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture

IPM Integrated Pest Management

ISO International Organization for Standardization

JSR Joint Stakeholders Review

KALRO Kenya Agricultural & Livestock Research Organization

KEPSA Kenya Private Sector Alliance

KEVEVAPI Kenya Veterinary Vaccine Production Institute

KFW German Development Bank

KIIs Key Informant Interviews

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MA Mutual Accountability

MCMV Maize Chlorotic Mottle Virus

MDMV Maize Dwarf Mosaic Virus

MERCOSUR Southern Common Market (South America)

MLN Maize Lethal Necrosis

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 6

NARIs National Agricultural Research Institutes

NASECO Nalweyo Seed Company Ltd.

NEALCO North Eastern Africa Livestock council

NEPAD New Partnership for Africa's Development

NEPDP North Eastern Pastoral Development Programme

NPCA NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency

NPPOs National Plant Protection Organizations

OEGI Office of Economic Growth and Integration

OFSP Orange-fleshed Sweet Potato

OFSP Orange Fleshed Sweet Potato

OIE World Organization for Animal Health

PACA Partnership for Aflatoxin Control in Africa

PCU Project Coordination Unit

PICO- EA People, Innovation and Change in Organizations in Eastern Africa

PRA Pest Risk Assessment

PREG Partnership for Resilience and Economic Growth

PREPARED Planning for Resilience in East Africa through Policy, Adaptation, Research, and Economic Development

RATIN the Regional Agricultural Trade Information Network

RAU Resilience Analysis Unit

RCMRD Regional Center for Mapping Resources for Development

RECs Regional Economic Communities

RELPA Regional Enhanced Livelihoods in Pastoral

ReSAKSS. Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System

RFP Request for Proposals

RIGOs Regional Intergovernmental Organizations

RPG Regionally Public Good

RPP Regional Programming Paper

SADC Southern African Development Community

SCMV Sugarcane Mosaic Virus

SFP Supplementary Feeding Program

SMEs Small and Medium-sized Enterprises

SMP Standard Methods and Procedures

SMP-AH Standard Methods and Procedures in Animal Health

SMP-AH Standard Methods and Procedures in Animal Health

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary

SSA Sub-Saharan Africa

SWIFT Single Window Information System

TADs Transboundary Animal Diseases

TBT Technical Barriers to Trade

TIMPs Technologies, Innovations and Management Practices

TMEA Trade Mark East Africa

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 7

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

US United States

USAID United States Agency for International Development

USAID/KEA USAID Kenya and East Africa

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

VCs Value Chains

VSLA Village Saving and Loaning Associations

WAEMU West African Economic and Monetary Union

WCO World Customs Organization

WDI World Development Indicators

WTO World Trade Organization

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 8

Introduction

The USAID Kenya/East Africa Office of Economic Growth and Integration (USAID/KEA OEGI) is in the process of developing the East Africa Regional GFSS Plan, implemented through Feed the Future, to guide its programs for the next five years. To inform the development of the East Africa Regional GFSS Plan, USAID/KEA commissioned a stock-take to review the progress of previous and ongoing activities in the region, with a focus on the status of investments, achievements to date (including the period 2016 to 2018), challenges and gaps, and opportunities for investments going forward. The major thematic areas covered were: Trade and Markets, Resilience, Nutrition, and Technology development and deployment. The assessment also reviewed the cross-cutting issues which underpin performance and impacts – quality and appropriateness of partnerships, inclusivity, regionality content of the portfolio, sustainability, stakeholder capacity strengthening, and resourcing and reporting cycles. The stock-take was primarily informed by in-depth desk reviews, stakeholder consultations (with a heavy focus on USAID implementing partners and regional as well as national beneficiaries) conducted through questionnaire surveys, key informant interviews

(KII), focus group discussions (FGD) and a validation workshop following the preparation of an initial draft report.

Key Components of the Annex

The results of the stock-take are presented in two parts: 1) A SUMMARY REPORT of the stock-take (a separate document) which presents a synopsis of each of the thematic areas – Trade and Markets, Resilience, Nutrition, and Technology Development & Deployment – covering, for each, Interventions undertaken, Achievements, Challenges and Gaps, and investment Opportunities going forward; and 2) A comprehensive ANNEX to the stock-take report (this document, an important companion document to the SUMMARY REPORT) which presents detailed stock-take process and results: Survey instruments used, major stakeholder categories (implementing partners) interviewed, analysis and findings for the thematic areas (except Trade and Markets which is presented in detail in the Summary Report).

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 9

Annex 1 - Survey Instruments

The survey tools were used to guide the data collection process. They were used to capture the views of the various actors who had been or are still involved in the implementation of specific USAID/KEA OEGI funded projects such as managers of beneficiary institutions, members of USAID funded projects Steering

Committees, consultants who worked on USAID funded projects among others.

The specific tools used were:

An analytical framework for the literature review

Semi-structured questionnaire for the Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)

Semi- structure questionnaire for the Focused Group Discussions (FGDs)

Semi- structured questionnaire for the online survey

Annex 1A: Analytical Framework for the Literature Review

Topic Issues to Cover

Thematic Areas

Trade and Markets Focused commodities/VCs

Policies affecting trade (trade facilitation)

Customs/border efficiency

SPS

VC/trade financing

Quality testing capacity issues

Quantitative data on trade (trade flows), informal trade

Access to requisite Technologies e.g. ICT

Access to

Technologies, Knowledge and

Inputs

Technology (e.g. cop variety or animal breed) development

Movement of agricultural commodities (e.g. grain and seeds) (Harmonization of policies, certification)

Technology transfer and scaling

Research/Innovation prioritization

(Aflatoxin-Aflasafe, Fowl Army Worm, Maize Necrosis Virus)

Private Sector and

Nutrition Commodities (with nutrition focus) + AR4D

Dissemination and scaling

Food safety e.g. Aflatoxin, SPS issues

Nutrition programs e.g. SFPs

Commercialization (including processing) of nutritionally enhanced foods

(NEFs) -e.g. QPM - i.e. structure trading systems.

Private Sector: e.g. Support to COMESA Business Council; others?

Resilience Early warning systems and seasonal forecasting e.g. FEWS

Insurance products (Index Based livestock insurance)

Crisis response (drought, floods etc.)

Building response capacity

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 10

Topic Issues to Cover

Food and cash aid

Partnerships coordination interventions e.g. “regional PREG”?

Food reserves

Regionality Definition vs. actual practice with specific thematic areas

Subsidiarity principle

Efficiency

Effectiveness

Sustainability

Regional analysis (of country lessons) and collective (regional) learning

Inclusivity Wealth categories – rich vs poor

Youth and women

Big (e.g. MNCs) vs emerging (small businesses)

Country and local ownership

Coverage of “all” target countries) or just a “subset”.

Elite capture- Are issues relevant for the majority receiving the bulk of investment – or is the focus on the ‘influential elite’?

Partnerships Appropriate collaborations (with governments, other development partners, implementing partners, private sector)

Comparative advantage

Leveraging of resources

Synergy/competition

Choice of partners, partnership arrangements & implications

Portfolio Mix/Balance To what extent is the portfolio balance reflecting needs on the ground and comparative advantage

Sequencing of project focus towards self-reliance

Sustainability To what extent is this built into program design and execution – and are we seeing signs of it in (some) mature projects/programs?

Conclusion and Recommendations

Optimizing Portfolio and Implementation

Arrangements

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 11

Annex 1B: Semi-Structured Questionnaire for Key Informant Interviews

Area of Study Interview Questions

Project(s)

Characteristics

1. Which project(s) funded by USAID under the framework of USAID/EA Feed the Future 2011-2015 Strategy have you been involved in or are familiar with?

2. When was/were the project(s) implemented?

3. What was/is the geographical coverage in terms of countries?

Achievements of the

Collaborative Project

1. What were/are the objectives of the projects(s) and to what extent has each of these objectives been achieved?

2. What example(s) of behavioural change constitute “impacts” of the intervention, and how can these/this be attributed to the USAID intervention?

3. What were/are the planned intermediate results for each project and to what extent has each of the results been achieved?

4. What were/are the activities designed for achieving the results and objective(s)?

5. In your opinion were the activities and implementation arrangements appropriate for achieving the project(s) objective(s)?

Partnership

Arrangements and

Effectiveness of the

Process of

Collaboration

1. What were the agreed arrangements for partnerships during the project(s) development and implementation?

2. In the course of the project development and implementation, what may have gone well and should be strengthened /scaled in the future?

3. What could have been better and should be dropped or improved?

4. In working with USAID, what has been the strengths and opportunities of your collaboration?

5. What has/have been the challenge(s) in the collaboration and what could have been better and should be improved?

6. To what extent have /are the institutional arrangements and partnerships led to successful implementation of the project? How could the efficiency be improved?

7. What are/were the major gaps in the project implementation and how should they be addressed?

8. What are the key lessons learnt during the project(s) implementation?

Relevance and

Responsiveness of the

Intervention to the

Needs of

Stakeholders

1. To what extent are USAID’s intervention focus and activities specifically addressing the challenges and opportunities relevant and responding to the needs of its stakeholders?

2. Are there specific project content, arrangements, management and governance elements that have influenced the results?

3. In general, what is USAID doing well in terms of program(s) content, focus and implementation processes?

4. What aspects of project content should have been dropped and what desirable content(s) should have been added?

USAID’s Roles and

Approaches in

Regional Integration

1. What should USAID do to deepen regional integration? What has been/should be USAID Regional Role?

2. How can USAID enhance partnership with the RECs (COMESA, EAC, IGAD) to deepen regional integration?

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 12

Area of Study Interview Questions

3. How can USAID strengthen partnership with other regional organisations/institutions to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation of its projects and programmes?

4. How can USAID Regional Programme facilitate access to food, quality seed etc. and how can they do it better?

5. How can USAID facilitate the improvement and harmonization of standards to enhance regional integration?

6. Is there any evidence to show that harmonisation of policies facilitates integration of trade?

USAID’s Achievement in Regional

Integration

1. To what extent has USAID integrated the use of technologies and innovations in ensuring efficiency of its delivery?

2. To what extent are sustainability mechanisms built into the design and activities of USAID funded projects?

3. To what extent does USAID coordinate its interventions with other donors and relevant institutions to build synergies and complementarity and leverage funding to improve efficiency?

4. To what extent are USAID interventions at regional level harmonised with its interventions at national level? What is the process for that harmonisation?

5. To what extent is the USAID approach to enhance food security through facilitating regional trade is efficient? Is there any evidence of success?

Going Forward 1. Considering the current USAID portfolio, what should be the priorities for future collaboration in the following areas:

2. Markets and trade

3. Technology development and dissemination

4. Enhancing partnership with the private sector to improve nutrition

5. Strengthening resilience and livelihoods

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 13

Annex 1C: Semi-Structured Questionnaire to Guide Focused Group Discussions

This guide was intended for discussions with groups of actors from the same institution who have had experience implementing or overseeing implementation of all or various USAID Strategic Results Areas such as USAID Kenya and East Africa Mission staff, staff of Regional Economic Communities (RECs), and those from other agricultural research and development institutions.

1. Considering the Strategic Results areas of the East Africa Feed the Future Multi Year Strategy 2011-

2015 namely, increasing trade of staple foods in the region, improving access to inputs and technologies, ensuring food security and nutrition, improving resilience, supporting strategic partnerships with African regional institutions and promoting regional services to achieve trade flow coordination, what can be considered as major successes in the course of the implementation?

2. What are the major gaps in the Strategy implementation and how should they be addressed?

3. In the course of projects development and implementation, what has gone well that should be strengthened and scaled in the future?

4. What could have been better and should be improved or dropped altogether?

5. In working with USAID/partner institutions, what has been the strength of the collaboration?

6. What has/have been the challenges in building partnership with other institutions and could those challenges be addressed?

7. Considering your experience, are there specific examples of project content, arrangements, management and governance elements that enhanced the success of USAID-funded projects?

8. What are the key lessons learnt in the course of development, implementation and coordination of

USAID-funded projects?

9. What should be USAID’s role in regional integration?

10. What should USAID do to deepen regional integration?

11. How can USAID enhance partnership with the RECs (COMESA, EAC, IGAD ) to deepen regional integration?

12. How can USAID strengthen partnership with other regional organisations/institutions to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of implementation of its projects and programmes?

13. How can USAID Regional Programme facilitate access to food, quality seed etc. and how can they do it better?

14. How can USAID facilitate the improvement of standards to enhance regional integration?

15. Is there any evidence to show that harmonisation of policies facilitates integration of trade?

16. To what extent has USAID integrated the use of technologies and innovations in ensuring efficiency of its delivery?

17. To what extent are sustainability mechanisms built into the design and activities of USAID funded projects?

18. To what extent does USAID coordinate its interventions with other donors and relevant institutions to build synergies and complementarity and leverage funding to improve efficiency?

19. To what extent are USAID interventions at regional level harmonised with its interventions at national level? What is the process for that harmonisation?

20. To what extent is the USAID approach to enhance food security through facilitating regional trade efficient? Is there any evidence of success?

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 14

21. Considering the current USAID portfolio, what should be the priorities for future collaboration in the following areas: Markets and trade, technology development and dissemination, enhancing partnership with the private sector to improve nutrition and strengthening livelihoods resilience?

Annex 1D: Semi-Structured Questionnaire for the Online Survey

This instrument was administered online to capture the views of the various stakeholders whom we were not able to have a conversation with.

A. Respondent Information and General Perceptions on Performance

1. Identifying information – contact info (anonymity by choice)

i. Optional contact information (name, organization, email, country etc.)

ii. In what capacity have you or your organization been involved in USAID regional projects?

a) Implementing Partner (grantee/sub-grantee)

b) Evaluator of past or current project

c) National target institution

d) Former mission staff

e) Current mission staff

f) Others? Specify…

2. Please select the stakeholder category option that best describes your organization

a) Farmer organization

b) National Agricultural Research Institute (NARI)

c) Civil Society Organization (CSO)

d) Government ministry

e) University or other tertiary education institution

f) CGIAR and other International Agricultural Research Centre (IARC)

g) Regional Agricultural Research Institution

h) Private Sector (e.g. trade and business organizations)

i) Development Partner (Donor Institution)

j) Regional Economic Community (REC)/Regional Inter-Governmental Organization (RIGO))

k) Continental organization/agency (e.g. AUC, NEPAD, etc.)

l) Other (please specify)

3. Have you been involved in a USAID Feed the Future project? YES/NO

4. If YES to QUESTION 3, please list the USAID programs you have been involved in or participated?

5. Of the USAID projects you are familiar with, please comment on their overall performance in terms of efficiency and effectiveness in achieving desired goals and outcomes?

6. USAID work in the region attempts to improve trade, develop markets, enhance food security and nutrition, develop & disseminate technology, build resilience among other things. Based on the

USAID regional activities and projects that you are familiar with; please share your perspectives on the general effectiveness of the regional program in addressing these priorities of the region.

(Strongly agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree Strongly disagree, N/A). What is the reason for your answer?

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 15

a) USAID regional projects are generally well designed and implemented.

b) USAID regional programming is not entirely cohesive, the individual projects and activities that make up the program are disjointed and disparate

c) USAID regional projects are well integrated and harmonized with projects developed at national level by USAID country offices (i.e. bilateral missions)

7. Of the projects you are familiar with, what implementation strategies and approaches influenced achievement of results or lack thereof?

8. In your opinion – based on what you know and projects you have interacted with - what are the

THREE BIGGEST achievements of USAID regional work?

9. In your opinion – based on what you know and projects you have interacted with - what are the

THREE BIGGEST challenges that constrain these interventions from being more effective?

10. Based on your experience working with USAID regional projects to date, what should USAID change/stop doing to improve partnerships?

11. Based on your experience working with USAID regional projects to date, what should USAID continue doing to strengthen PARTNERSHIPS?

12. Based on your experience working with USAID regional projects to date, what NEW PRACTICE

OR APPROACH should USAID INTRODUCE to strengthen PARTNERSHIPS?

13. USAID work in the region focuses on the following thematic areas: Trade and markets; Access to technologies and inputs; Food Security, Nutrition; and Resilience. In your opinion, what other areas should USAID programs focus on?

14. In your opinion, what aspect of USAID regional work should be STOPPED or phased out and why?

15. In general, is USAID/KEA OEGI work in the region (through its programs, projects and activities) relevant to the needs and priorities of the region (Very relevant, Neutral, Very irrelevant, Somewhat relevant, Somewhat irrelevant, I don't know)

16. What can USAID do to improve the relevance of its programmes? Please share any advice or comments

17. Please indicate which of the following USAID/KEA OEGI thematic areas you have interacted with or are most familiar with (Trade and markets , Resilience, Access to technologies and inputs, Nutrition, None of the above). If you've chosen none of the above, please describe in brief the area you have been involved in and your experiences.

B. Trade and Markets

18. USAID has invested in several regional (and bilateral) projects focused on market development, trade facilitation and related areas. In your view what are the main constraints to regional markets and trade development? (Highly constraining, Moderately constraining, Not Constraining at all, N/A)

a) A constant clash between regional free trade and national protectionism

b) Weak capacity of national institutions to facilitate trade

c) Lack of information

d) Limited finance

e) Other specify….1

19. Please rate the level of importance USAID should place in each of the following areas in regional trade and market development (very important, somewhat important, not important, don’t know/no answer)

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 16

a) Border and customs efficiency

b) Trade finance

c) Trade information management

d) Business development support for companies

e) SME development

f) ICT and other automated systems

g) Standards, SPS and related

h) Others specify

20. In your opinion, what have been the THREE most effective USAID Regional Program interventions in trade and markets over the last 8 years (since 2011)

21. Please explain your choice for the THREE projects above?

22. Please rate the effectiveness of RECs/RIGO’s as partners in regional trade development work

(Extremely effective, Not so effective, Very effective, Not at all effective, Somewhat effective)

23. How can the regional trade work with RIGO's be made more effective? Please offer a comment.

24. Are local companies/ institutions appropriately involved in USAID Regional programs on trade and markets? YES/NO – please explain your answer

25. Please suggest HOW local companies might be more effectively involved in USAID programs

26. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions to help improve USAID work in the region?

YES/NO (if YES - please add your comment)

C. Access to Technologies and Inputs

27. USAID has invested in several regional (and bilateral) projects focused on Agricultural R&D, input supply systems and the dissemination and scaling of technologies. In your view what are the most important areas agricultural R&D efforts? (Very important, Somewhat important, Not important, I don't know)

a) Building capacity of RARI’s (research facilities)

b) Supporting scaling/diffusion/dissemination of ready Technologies, Innovations and

Management Practices

c) Supporting research prioritization efforts

d) Investing in better coordination of technology development

e) Supporting increased availability of seeds and other inputs

f) Financing for research

g) Other specify….

28. In your opinion, what have been the THREE most effective USAID Regional Program interventions in research and development over the last 8 years (since 2011).

29. Who would be the most effective partners for USAID regional programming in delivering technological solutions and inputs to farmers? (Highly appropriate, Moderately appropriate, Not appropriate,N/A)

a) Regional Agricultural research institutions (ASARECA etc)

b) RIGO’s (EAC, COMESA)

c) National Governments

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 17

d) Private Sector

e) Please explain your answers above (optional)

30. In your opinion, what should be the research priorities for USAID regional funding? Rank in terms of broad research areas: (Highest priority, Moderate priority, Low priority, Not important, N/A). Explain your choice (optional)

a) Policy research

b) Crop and livestock breeding and genetics

c) Market and delivery systems research

d) Regional resilience including climate change adaptation

e) Food safety including aflatoxin management

f) Management of diseases and pests: FAW, MLN etc

g) Other specify

31. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions to help improve USAID work in the region?

D. Nutrition

32. Based on your knowledge, in what MAJOR and specific ways is USAID programming in the region impacting on nutrition?

33. Please rate the level of importance USAID should place in each of the following areas (Very important, Somewhat important, Not important, I don't know)

a) Bio-fortification

b) Food safety and quality

c) Dietary diversity (inc. through trade)

d) Nutrition education

e) Other (please specify)

34. In your opinion, what have been the THREE most effective USAID Regional Program interventions in nutrition over the last 8 years (since 2011)?

35. Who would make the most appropriate and effective partners for USAID regional programming on nutrition?

36. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions to help improve USAID work in the region?

YES/NO

37. (if YES - please add your comment)

E. Resilience

38. Is the current understanding of resilience within the regional program robust and relevant? Please comment (Yes, No, Somehow). Please explain your answer

39. In your view, what risks (or shocks) should the USAID regional resilience program seek to address?

40. Please rate the level of importance USAID should place on each of the following areas in regional

Resilience (Very Important, Somewhat Important, Not Important, I don't know)

a) Natural Resource Management (NRM)

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 18

b) Humanitarian assistance (food aid and related)

c) Livelihoods support and basic social services

d) Pastoral disaster risk management, preparedness and response

e) Research, knowledge management and technology transfer

f) Conflict prevention, resolution and peace building

g) Increased sustainable productivity through climate smart approaches

h) Others please specify

41. What recent (since 2011) USAID resilience projects have been most successful in your view (and why)?

42. In your view, does USAID regional programme reflect a wholesome coverage of issues relevant for resilience? YES/NO (If no, what aspects are missing?)

43. Are local institutions appropriately involved in USAID Regional programs on resilience (YES/NO)

Please explain your answer

44. Which institutions/organizations should USAID work with to ensure optimum delivery in this area?

45. What aspects of Resilience should be given investment priority in region going forward?

46. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions to help improve USAID work in the region?

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 19

Annex 2 - Analysis and Findings

Annex 2 contains the analysis and finding from the stock take on nutrition, technology development and deployment, resilience and the cross-cutting issues underpinning programming from the desk review and the validation workshop.

Annex 2A: Resilience

1. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT ANALYSIS

USAID defines “Resilience to recurrent crisis” as the ability of people, households, communities, countries and systems to mitigate, adapt to and recover from shocks and stresses in a manner to reduce chronic vulnerability and facilitate inclusive growth.

Persistent and widespread drought is a recurrent feature in the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs) of East

Africa. More than 90% of Agriculture in ASALs is rain-fed and there is a direct link between drought and food insecurity. In 2010/2011, the Greater Horn of Africa region was hit by a severe drought that affected an estimated 13 million people, causing famine in some parts of the East African region. The huge devastation caused by this 2010/2011, and later by the 2015/2016 drought, are a testimony that traditional coping mechanisms are no longer working and the traditional responses of providing humanitarian assistance and food aid are inefficient in terms of building the capacity of the vulnerable populations to adapt and recover from shocks and stresses. The magnitude of suffering pinpoints to the ineffectiveness of drought response approaches put in place over the last decades and which were predominantly relying on food aid. This underpins the need to find more sustainable solutions. Indeed, it is also clear that worsening climatic variability in drought-prone areas are challenging the traditional survival skills of resident communities in these harsh environments. Over the last decade alone, international donors have spent around 90 billion US

$ in 9 countries of the Greater Horn of Africa, accounting for almost 50 percent of all humanitarian assistance in the world.

The misery resulting from these crises has led to a switch of mind-set in the donor community and by governments in the region. It became evident that interventions to respond to, and recover from, crisis situations should strengthen medium and long-term resilience to disasters, covering multiple dimensions of shocks, while also ensuring that drought does not result into another humanitarian crisis.

USAID’s Response

Contributing to finding lasting solutions to recurrent crises became a major priority for USAID which committed itself to helping build the resilience of vulnerable communities in disaster-prone areas by increasing their ability to manage crises – but without compromising their future well-being. For USAID, improving resilience of people is about creating opportunities and options so that they can make choices about their livelihoods and their lives. It is also about ensuring that communities in disaster-prone areas become less vulnerable through adoption of practices that increase their chances to cope and recover from climatic and other shocks that negatively affect their livelihoods. People are more resilient when they are systems in place that continue to operate despite shocks and stresses, implying that – at that point -communities have acquired the ability to withstand and bounce back from shocks.

USAID's strategy in building resilience helps share and shift the responsibility for managing risk, investing in resilience, and responding to shocks when they do occur from donors to governments, communities, and the private sector. The overriding aim is to reduce costs of recurrent crises, including the unsustainable costs of responding to large-scale humanitarian emergencies in the same places every few years.

It has become clear that, in building resilience, the approach should integrate multiple components such as community involvement, access to finance, market integration, and asset strategies, as well as a long-term commitment to improving the ability to minimize exposure to shocks and, where possible, to recover quickly when exposed. It has also become clear that building resilience involves supporting individuals, households, and communities as they make proactive and informed choices about alternative livelihood

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 20

strategies based on their conditions and strengthening the enabling environment and systems in which households and communities are embedded.

2. INTERVENTIONS

Under Feed the Future, USAID East Africa has developed strategic partnerships with the Regional Economic

Communities (RECs) including the East African Community (EAC), the Common Market for Eastern and

Southern Africa (COMESA) and the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD) to strengthen

East Africa’s Economic and Food Security. Programs to build resilience of communities to adverse effects of climate change and climate variability and to improve the region’s ability to respond to shocks and counter extremist groups that seek to destabilize global markets and undermine security were mainly implemented in the framework of the partnerships with IGAD. The largest part of USAID supported resilience building programs and activities are implemented under the USAID-IGAD Regional Development Objective

Agreement Grant (RDOAG) because IGAD accounts more than 60% of its land mass under Arid and Semi-

Arid Lands (ASALs) which are exposed to frequent droughts and other climatic and conflict related shocks.

These investments have been informed by the past experiences (summarized in section 1 above).

Besides activities carried out through partnerships with the RECs, USAID EA is also coordinating other resilience-building activities planned at regional level under the Horn of Africa Resilience Network (HoRN) and implemented by specialised agencies mainly in IGAD member countries under the USAID bilateral missions.

2.1. USAID EA Activities under IGAD

USAID partnership started in 2006 focusing on supporting IGAD to strengthen regional security, improve climate prediction and analysis, and promote resilience and economic development. The current agreement under the RDOAG was signed in 2016. Programs and projects funded under Feed the Future to build resilience in the framework of the new RDOAG include:

1. Direct support to IGAD’s Secretariat to help the institution manage regional resilience building programs, improve its procurement procedures, financial accountability and governance;

2. Funding projects implemented by the IGAD Centre for Pastoral Areas and Livestock Development

(ICPALD) including:

The “Developing standard methods and Procedures in Animal Health (SMP-AH) project implemented by AU-IBAR and completed in 2017.

The Strengthening Sanitary and Phytosanitary capacity of IGAD Member States to promote livestock trade project. This is a second phase of the SMP-AH project focusing also on harmonising sanitary standards related to livestock diseases. The project started in April 2018.

The Improving Food Security in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands: Strengthening Feed and Fodder availability focusing on livestock corridors project which also started in April 2018.

3. Supporting the IGAD Climate Prediction and Application Centre (ICPAC) for the implementation of the project on “Developing decision support tools for early warning and building resilience” in support of the PREPARED project as well as in support of current IGAD and EAC activities to strengthen food security through an informed planning of crop and livestock production.

4. Support the development and implementation of the “IGAD Disaster Resilience and Sustainability

Initiative -IDDRSI” (Box 1).

5. Supporting the “IGAD Conflict Early Warning and Response Mechanism – CEWARN) activities for conflicts prevention and mitigation.

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 21

Box 1: IGAD Drought Disaster Resilience and Sustainability Initiative (IDDRSI) Strategy

Following the severe drought that devastated the region in 2010/2011, the decision to end drought emergences was taken by IGAD and East African Community (EAC) Heads of State and Government at a

Summit convened in September 2011 in Nairobi. The Summit made a commitment to address the effects of recurring droughts on vulnerable communities in the IGAD region and called for increased commitment by affected countries and Development Partners to support investments in sustainable development especially in the Arid and Semiarid Lands (ASALs). The Nairobi Summit urged all countries to work together as a region and all concerned to do things differently, working concertedly and holistically, combining relief and development interventions, aimed at building resilience to future shocks. This culminated into the

IDDRSI as the strategy aimed at addressing the effects of drought and related shocks in the IGAD region in a sustainable and holistic manner. The preparation of the IDDRSI Strategy was an inclusive and participatory process that involved IGAD Secretariat and IGAD specialized institutions as well as public and non-state actors in member states. The Strategy was further informed by consultations with other stakeholders commonly affected by drought or involved in responding to its effects, including the CGIAR and UN agencies and development partners. The process of developing the Strategy was guided by the IGAD

Strategy 2011 – 2015 which envisions a region with communities free from vulnerabilities to drought emergencies. The strategy proposes operational and institutional implementation arrangements and a result-based monitoring and evaluation system to track the progress of projects activities in the implementation of the initiative. The Strategy identifies 7 priority intervention areas:

a. Ensuring equitable access and sustainable use of natural resources, while improving environmental management;

b. Enhancing market access, facilitating trade and availing versatile financial services;

c. Providing equitable access to livelihood support and basic social services;

d. Improving disaster risk management capabilities and preparedness for effective response;

e. Enhancing the generation and use of research, knowledge, technology and innovations in the

IGAD region;

f. Promoting conflict prevention and resolution, and peace building;

g. Strengthening coordination mechanisms and institutional arrangements for more organized, collaborative and synergistic action.

The strategy, by design, recognizes that while drought-prone communities face common challenges and are often interconnected through shared natural resources and regional trade and trans-boundary human and animal movements, individual IGAD member states may have their own specificities and areas of emphasis.

2.2. Activities Coordinated by the USAID East Africa Regional Office

These activities are coordinated by “The Horn of Africa Resilience Network (HoRN)” which was established in 2012 to support the USAID EA Mission in its commitment to building resilient communities and economies in East Africa. The Network includes national governments and regional institutions such as

IGAD and development partners. Its objective is to strengthen regional and cross-border collaboration to improve evidence-based learning to promote resilient and democratic societies.

From 2012 to 2016, the HoRN developed the Regional Resilience Framework to guide resilience investments and to serve as a common reference for resilience programming throughout the region. Building on 4 years of experience, the HoRN developed in 2016 a new regional framework (see Box 2), the

‘Regional Resilience Framework 2.0’ which identified three objectives to achieve the above outcome – that is: (i) Expanded and Viable Economic Opportunities; (ii) Strengthened Institutions, Systems and

Governance; and (iii) Improved and Sustained Human Capital.

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 22

Box 2: The Horn of Africa Resilience Network Vision, Outcome and Focus

The HoRN vision is “People, households and communities in the Horn of Africa drylands escape poverty and chronic vulnerability and are resilient in the face of recurrent shocks and stresses”. The outcome is “increased resilience of chronically vulnerable individuals, households, communities and systems”.

The HoRN Regional Resilience Framework is used for the development and implementation of resilience building programs and projects by the USAID missions in Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia Somalia and South

Sudan.

A regional coordination unit located at the USAID EA offices has the responsibility of documenting the knowledge accumulated from projects implemented in participating countries for sharing with all stakeholders. Annual meetings are organized to share the experiences.

Building on the recognition that building resilience needs to be addressed through a multi-sectoral approach, the Regional Resilience Framework 2.0 established a model of multi-sectoral, integrated and inclusive systems strengthening approach including improving access to finance, enhancing market access, livelihoods diversification, smart crop and livestock production and environmental management, developing social capital including education and health and enhancing access to water and sanitation for human consumption and crop (irrigation) and livestock production. The approach is that systems should be merged and strengthened simultaneously as they act in synergy, not in isolation.

3. ACHIEVEMENTS

3.1. USAID-RECs Partnership

Significant achievements from the USAID partnership with IGAD are summarized below:

a) Achievement from the ICPALD led project:

Eleven Standard Methods and Procedures (SMPs) for control of cross-border livestock diseases; 16

Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for diagnosis of livestock diseases and 26 epidemiological diseases investigation SOPs developed and disseminated from the AU-IBAR implemented

SMP-AH project. The SMP outlined for each of nine priority diseases the surveillance, controlling and diagnostic steps to manage/control the disease. National policies to prevent and control outbreaks of livestock diseases harmonized in nine East African Countries including Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda. Staff of laboratories and vaccines institutes of IGAD member countries trained on laboratory SOPs and laboratory equipment and consumables provided by the project. One thousand doses of the Contagious Caprine Pleuropneumonia (CCPP) produced by the

Kenya Veterinary Vaccine Production Institute (KEVEVAPI) through the project support and a reginal network for quarantines where technicians screen live animals for diseases prior to traders moving them to the export markets established. Livestock trade related policies between IGAD member countries developed and implemented. Live animals export from Berbera and Bosaso to the Middle East increased, reaching 2 to 3.5 million head of cattle per annum. Three bilateral (Ethiopia and Kenya; Ethiopia and

Somalia; Ethiopia and Djibouti) and one multilateral (Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda and South Sudan) agreements for control of livestock diseased across borders signed.

b) Achievements from IDDRSI implementation:

A Regional Strategy, a Regional Programming Paper (RPP) and all IGAD Countries Country Programming

Papers (CPPs) for the implementation of the IGAD Disaster Resilience and Sustainability Project

(IDDRSI) developed and one billion US $ dollar mobilised from other donors for the implementation of the CPPS during the first phase (2013-2017) of IDDRSI. An interlinked coordination mechanism at regional and national levels established, operationalised and tools for sharing information developed. They include (i) the IGAD Info based on country information and (ii) the Di-Monitoring, a web-based tool to monitor project implementation. IGAD Member States experts trained by the Project Coordination Unit

(PCU) to collect data and information from the different resilience interventions and upload them into their respective country portals. A consensus established between the Governments and the donor

ANNEX - USAID EAST AFRICA FEED THE FUTURE STOCK-TAKE REPORT | 23

community on the implementation of IDDRSI. Establishment of the Resilience Analysis Unit (RAU) under the PCU focusing at understanding vulnerability, resilience analysis and measurement. RAU assesses the impact of resilience investment, determining whether or not the intended objectives of the investment are achieved.

Achievements from the IDDRSI country programs indicate in Kenya that the country is making significant progress towards ending droughts emergencies. This is reflected by the fact that since 2013, the country managed all drought episodes without international appeal except in 2017 where an exceptionally severe drought affected the entire East Africa region. The dependency on humanitarian assistance was significantly reduced from US $ 459.4 million in 2014 to US $ 379.8 million in 2016.