Sol_72062019R00005_Amendment_1.pdf

Solicitation Number: 72062019R00005 Agricultural Extension and Advisory Services Activity

INSERT SF 33 FORM

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AfDB African Development Bank AFD Agence Française de Développement ADP Agricultural Development Program AESON Agricultural Extension Society of Nigeria ADWG Agriculture Donors Working Group APP Agriculture Promotion Policy ADS Automated Directive System BS Branding Strategy COP Chief of Party CSOs Civil Society Organizations CFR Code of Federal Regulations CLA Collaboration, Learning and Adaptation CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program CO Contracting Officer COR Contracting Officer Representative CDCS Country Development Cooperation Strategy DFID Department for International Development DCOP Deputy Chief of Party GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit DCA Development Credit Authority DOs Development Objectives EU European Union FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation FCT Federal Capital Territory FMARD Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development FTF Feed the Future FAO Food & Agriculture Organization GNDR-2 Gender Indicator-2 GIS Geographic Information Systems GFSA Global Food Security Act GFSS Global Food Security Strategy GON Government of Nigeria GDP Gross Domestic Product ICT Information and Communication Technology IEE Initial Environmental Examination IR Intermediate Result IFAD International Fund for Agriculture Development JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau LOE Level of Effort MP Marking Plan M&E Monitoring & Evaluation NARS National Agricultural Research System NAIP Nigeria Agricultural Investment Plan

Solicitation Number: 72062018R00005 Agricultural Extension and Advisory Services

NAERLS Nigerian Agricultural Extension Research and Liaison Services NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations PIND Foundation for Partnership Initiatives in the Niger Delta PMELP Performance Monitoring Evaluation and Learning Plan PWS Performance Work Statement QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan RFP Request for Proposal R&D Research and Development SMEs Small and Medium Enterprises SF Standard Form SOO Statement of Objectives TEC Technical Evaluation Committee UNDP United Nation Development Programme UNIDO United Nation Industrial Development Organization U.S United States USAID United States Agency for International Development USG United States Government

PART I - THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

1. PURPOSE

The purpose of this contract is to provide technical services that fall within work specified in Section C for the Agricultural Extension and Advisory Services Activity.

2. CONTRACT TYPE AND SERVICES

This is a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) Completion-Type Contract in accordance with FAR 16.306(d). The Contractor must provide the deliverables described in Section C and the additional requirements of Section F and H in accordance with the performance standards specified herein.

3. ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE, AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

In accordance with FAR Part 52.232-22 - Limitation of Funds:

(a) The parties estimate that performance of this contract will not cost the Government more than the estimated cost(s) specified below. Consistent with FAR 16.306 (d) – Cost-Plus-Fixed- Fee Contracts, contractor is required to complete and deliver the services/reports within the estimated cost, to received payment of the entire fixed fee. However, in the event the work cannot be completed within the estimated cost, the Government may require more effort without increase in the fee, provided the Government increases the estimated cost.

(b) BUDGET

BUDGET LINE ITEM YEAR 1

COSTS

YEAR 2

COSTS

YEAR 3

COSTS

YEAR 4

COSTS

YEAR 5

COSTS

TOTAL

COSTS

YEARS 1-5

Personnel Fringe Benefits Allowances Consultants Travel, Transportation and Per-diem

Equipment/Supplies Subcontract Security Cost Other Direct Cost Total Direct Costs Indirect Costs Total Estimated Cost

Fixed Fee Total Estimated Costs Plus Fixed Fee

(c) The amount currently obligated and available for reimbursement of costs allocable/allowable by the Contractor (and payment of fee, if any) in the performance of services/deliverables hereunder is TBD. The Contractor is not to exceed the obligated amount.

(d) The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing whenever it has reason to believe that the cost it expects to incur under this contract in the next 60 days, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed 75% of the total amount so far obligated to the contract by the Government.

4. MULTI-YEAR CONTRACT

This contract is considered non-severable, and is therefore a multi-year contract as defined in FAR

17.103. Therefore, this contract is subject to the requirements of FAR 17.106.

Cancellation Dates and Ceilings:

Contract Year 2: Date TBD Amount: 7% of total estimated cost Contract Year 3: Date TBD Amount: 4% of total estimated cost Contract Year 4: Date TBD Amount: 2% of total estimated cost Contract Year 5: Date TBD Amount: 1% of total estimated cost

As per FAR 17.106, cancellation ceilings are applicable to nonrecurring costs to be incurred by an “average” prime contractor or subcontractor, which would be applicable to, and which normally would be amortized over, the services to be furnished under the multi-year requirements.

Nonrecurring costs include such costs, where applicable, as plant or equipment relocation or rearrangement, special tooling and special test equipment, pre-production engineering, initial rework, initial spoilage, pilot runs, allocable portion of the costs of facilities to be acquired or established for the conduct of the work, costs incurred for the assembly, training, and transportation to and from the job site of a specialized workforce, and unrealized labor learning.

They shall not include any costs of labor or materials, or other expenses (except as indicated above), which might be incurred for performance of subsequent program year requirements.

This is a CPFF completion type contract where the contractor is authorized to be reimbursed for all costs that are allowable in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, “Allowable Costs and Payment”.

Therefore, the contractor is expected not to incur any costs which would have been amortized over the life of the contract.

Pursuant to FAR 52.217-2 – Cancellation Under Multi-Year Contracts, except for cancellation under this clause or termination under the Default clause, any reduction by the Contracting Officer in the requirements of this contract shall be considered a termination under the Termination for Convenience of the Government clause. Costs associated with termination of contract will be subject to FAR Clause 52.249-6 and 52.249-14.

5. INDIRECT COSTS

Pending establishment of revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, allowable indirect costs will be reimbursed on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases for prime contractors and their subcontractors.

For Prime Contractor:

Description Rate Base Type Period 1/ 1/ 1/ 2/ 2/ 2/ 3/ 3/ 3/

1/Base of Application: Type of Rate: Period:

2/Base of Application: Type of Rate: Period:

3/Base of Application: Type of Rate: Period:

Source:

For Major Subcontractors*

Description Rate Base Type Period 1/ 1/ 1/ 2/ 2/ 2/ 3/ 3/ 3/

1/Base of Application: Type of Rate: Period:

2/Base of Application: Type of Rate: Period:

3/Base of Application: Type of Rate: Period:

Source:

Note:

a. Contractors are allowed to recoup indirect costs (OH, G&A, etc.) as other direct costs if it is part of the contractor’s usual accounting procedures, consistent with FAR 31 and the contractor’s NICRA.

b. The Contractor will make no change in its established method of classifying or allocating indirect costs without the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer.

c. Reimbursement for indirect costs shall be at final negotiated rates, but not in excess of ceiling rates specified above.

d. The Government will not be obligated to pay any additional amount associated with indirect costs above the ceiling rates established in the Contract. This advance understanding shall not change any monetary ceiling, cost limitation, or obligation established in the Contract.

e. *“major subcontractors” are subcontractors whose proposed costs exceed 20% of the Offeror’s proposed total cost or perform a key element of the scope of work.

6. ADVANCE UNDERSTANDING ON CEILING INDIRECT COST RATES AND

FINAL REIMBURSEMENT FOR INDIRECT COSTS

(To be filled in at award)

Reimbursement for indirect costs will be at the lower of the negotiated final or predetermined rates, or the following ceiling rates:

For Prime Contractor:

Description Rate Base Type Period 1/ 1

2/ 2

3/ 3

1/Base of Application:

Type of Rate:

Period:

2/Base of Application:

3/Base of Application:

Period:

Source:

For Major Subcontractors*

Description Rate Base Type Period

1/ 1/ 1/ 2/ 2/ 2/ 3/ 3/ 3/

1/Base of Application:

2/Base of Application:

3/Base of Application:

Source:

a. *“major subcontractors” are subcontractors whose proposed costs exceed 20% of the Offeror’s proposed total cost or perform a key element of the scope of work.

b. The Government will not be obligated to pay any additional amount should the final indirect cost rates exceed the negotiated ceiling rates. If the final indirect cost rates are less than the negotiated ceiling rates, the negotiated rates will be reduced to conform to the lower rates.

c. This understanding will not change any monetary ceiling, obligation, or specific cost allowance or disallowance. Any changes in classifying or allocating indirect costs require the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer.

7. COST REIMBURSABLE

Allowable costs will be limited to reasonable, allocable and necessary costs determined in accordance with; FAR 31 (Contract Cost Principles), 2 CFR, Part 220 (Cost Principles for Educational Institutions), 2 CFR, Part 230 (Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations), FAR 52.216- 7 (Allowable Cost and Payment), FAR 52.216-8 (Fixed Fee) if applicable, and AIDAR

752.7003 (Documentation for Payment). Only these costs may be reimbursable under this contract.

8. PAYMENT OF FIXED FEE – FAR 52.216-8 (JUN 2011)

a. The Government will pay the Contractor for performing this contract, the fixed fee specified in the Schedule. The fixed fee payable under this contract will be tied to the completion of deliverables specified in the fixed fee payment schedule below which will be incorporated into the contract. Actual percentages under the Fee percentage column must be suggested by offerors in their proposals and this will be negotiated with the successful offeror.

Report Deliverables Serial Numbering

Year of Performance

Fee Amount

Frequency

Conflict Assessment Report 1 Year 1, Quarter 1

One time

Security Plan 2 Year 1, Quarter 1

One time

An Integration Plan for Gender, Youth and other Vulnerable Groups

3 Year 1, Quarter 2

One time

Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP)

4 Year 1, Quarter 2

One time

Conduct of a value chain mapping assessment

5 Year 1 To be completed by Year 1, quarter 3

Enhance business networks, institutions, and firms as outlined in the approved annual work plan.

6 Years 1-5 Quarterly (X % each quarter from Year 1, quarter 2).

Collaborating and coordinating with other FTF Nigeria activities to expand availability of private equity, venture capital funds, impact investing, and other non-bank financing for businesses including agri- SMEs as outlined in the approved annual work plan.

7 Years 1-5 Quarterly (X % each quarter from Year 1, quarter 2).

Equip a minimum of two million agricultural value chain stakeholders, particularly smallholder farmers with innovative extension services and agricultural technologies

8 Years 1-5 Quarterly (X % each quarter from Year 1, quarter 3).

Collaborating and coordinating with other FTF Nigeria activities on multiple stages of R&D to increase smallholder productivity Research and Development (R&D) as outlined in the approved annual work plan.

9 Years 1-5 Quarterly (X % each quarter from Year 1, quarter 3).

Total fee amount/payment 100%

For all deliverables, payment of fee is authorized following approval/acceptance of the deliverable by USAID/Nigeria COR, not simply submission of the deliverable by the Contractor to USAID.

b. Payment of the fixed fee shall be made as specified in the Schedule, provided that the Contracting Officer withholds a reserve not to exceed 15 percent of the total fixed fee or $100,000, whichever is less, to protect the Government’s interest. The Contracting Officer shall release 75 percent of all fee withholds under this contract after receipt of an adequate certified final indirect cost rate proposal covering the year of physical completion of this contract, provided the Contractor has satisfied all other contract terms and conditions, including the submission of the final patent and royalty reports, and is not delinquent in submitting final vouchers on prior years’ settlements. The Contracting Officer may release up to 90 percent of the fee withholds under this contract based on the Contractor’s past performance related to the submission and settlement of final indirect cost rate proposals.

- END OF SECTION B –

SECTION C – STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

C.1 PURPOSE

C.1.1. The Activity comprises three main performance components:

(i) Building the capacity of private extension service providers to capably and sustainably deliver extension and advisory services to agricultural value chain stakeholders, particularly smallholder farmers;

(ii) Strengthening linkages between agricultural research institutions and agriculture value chain stakeholders; and

(iii) Leveraging resources from private sector to enhance the scalability and sustainability of extension and advisory services in Nigeria.

C.2 SCOPE

C.2.1. The Offerors are required to submit a Performance Work Statement (PWS), in response to this Statement of Objectives (SOO), which is to include methods to equip at least a minimum of two million agricultural value chain stakeholders, particularly smallholder farmers with innovative extension services and agricultural technologies to achieve the performance objectives. Offerors have the flexibility and responsibility to propose cost-effective, innovative approaches to increase access to extension and advisory services for agricultural value chain stakeholders, particularly smallholder farmers, hereafter referred to value chain stakeholders, as detailed in the objectives in Section C.5. Activity set-up is to be efficient and cost-effective in order to devote as high a percentage of the budget as possible to programmatic interventions. After the start-up phase, the Contractor’s operations are to be self-sufficient and able to respond directly and in English to inquiries of various types from USAID/Nigeria and the GON.

C.2.2. The PWS must:

a) Include a business model that will facilitate and help develop the capacity of value chain stakeholders as they evolve into commercially viable and sustainable extension services providers by improving farm productivity, incomes, and household nutrition status;

b) Describe the approach to increase access to agricultural extension and advisory services to meet the objectives of the Activity; and

c) Enable USAID to assess the performance of the work against specific, clear, and measurable performance standards (i.e., quality, quantity, timeliness)

C.2.3. The scope consists of increasing the productivity, incomes, and household nutrition status of smallholder farmers in seven FTF focus states: Benue, Cross River, Delta, Ebonyi, Kaduna, Kebbi and Niger. The PWS is to encompass technical assistance that:

a) Stimulates inclusive, innovative agricultural extension services;

b) Develops the capacity of agro-input suppliers and service providers who will provide value chain stakeholders with skills and knowledge about modern agricultural practices;

c) Facilitates the adoption of new technologies and improved production practices by value chain stakeholders;

d) Promotes greater access to finance and market solutions;

e) Facilitates information and communication technology (ICT)-enabled extension services to ensure sustainable reach to millions of value chain stakeholders; and

f) Coordinates, collaborates, and leverages resources with a variety of agriculture sector stakeholders, financial and insurance institutions, and Government of Nigeria (GON) agencies to ensure the timely delivery of high-quality inputs (including but not limited to seeds, fertilizer, agro-chemicals, and machinery services) to value chain stakeholders.

C.2.4. The scope of Agricultural Extension and Advisory Services includes:

C.2.4.1. Services that contribute to achieving increased agricultural competitiveness and an improved business environment.

C.2.4.2. Provide services to relevant GON Ministries, Departments and Agencies to implement interventions that will complement and align with the CAADP framework, emphasizing long-term partnership among key actors in the agriculture sector. The Activity must help the GON achieve its goal of agricultural-led development that eliminates hunger, reduces poverty and alleviates food insecurity.

C.2.4.3. Collaboration and coordination with the activities and programs of other donors working in the agriculture sector to leverage resources for maximum impact, avoid duplication, share lessons learned, and build a body of knowledge for mutually beneficial development outcomes.

Contractor is to also leverage resources and coordinate approaches with other USAID activities to promote ICT-enabled extension and advisory services in the Northeast. The Activity may also engage with Nigerian diaspora (see attachments J.13 and J.14).

C.2.5. The Offeror must conduct a value chain mapping assessment spanning the seven focus states of this activity. This assessment is to provide USAID/Nigeria with critical information such as the number and location of key value chain actors, including input dealers, producers, processors, aggregators, off takers, service providers, etc. for FTF selected value chains across the focus states. Specifically, the information generated from the assessment, including the GPS coordinates of the location, will be used to answer the following questions:

● Who and where are the key upstream value chain actors for each targeted value chain commodity within each focus state?

● Who and where are the primary producers for each targeted value chain commodity within each focus state?

● Who and where are the key downstream value chain actors for each targeted value chain commodity within each focus state?

C.2.6. The use of satellite imagery and remote sensing applications will require the Offeror to work very closely and coordinate with established experts in the topic area. At a minimum, USAID/Nigeria expects the implementer to work with FEWSNET, SERVIR, and the USAID/Washington GeoCenter. Other organizations to be consulted and/or subcontracted under this assignment should be identified by the Offeror in the protocol.

C.2.7. Additionally, should the offeror identify data collection needs that extend beyond existing available information, priority should be given to local data collection firms with geo-referencing experience, such as Hard Amenities Limited, Ercas Integrated Solutions Limited etc.

The Activity performance will be measured at various levels. Offerors must propose an overall strategy with corresponding interventions for achieving all objectives.

C.3. DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS

If the Agricultural Extension and Advisory Services Activity partners with a broad-based group of private sector firms along the agricultural value chain to build the capacity of private extension service providers so that they can rapidly, effectively, and sustainably provide access to agro-inputs and services, and disseminate extension messages to smallholder farmers; then, farm productivity, household incomes, and nutritional status of smallholder farmers will be significantly increased.

C.4. PERIOD AND PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

C.4.1. The period of performance is five years from the date of award.

C.4.2. The place of performance will be in the seven FTF focus states in Nigeria. The exact locations within these states will be determined by the Contractor, based on the value chain mapping assessment that they will conduct after award, and in coordination with USAID, GON, state counterparts, and other stakeholders during the first year of implementation of the contract.

C.5 BACKGROUND

C.5.1. USAID/Nigeria Country Development Cooperation Strategy

The USAID/Nigeria Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) 2015-2020 supports the goal of “Reduced Extreme Poverty in a More Stable, Democratic Nigeria” through three Development Objectives (DOs): 1) Broadened and inclusive growth; 2) A healthier, more educated population in targeted states; and 3) Strengthened good governance.

C.5.2. GON Intervention in Agriculture Sector

The Activity aligns with the GON Agriculture Promotion Policy (APP) 2016 – 2020, which seeks to boost productivity and intensify the role of private sector investments in agricultural production. Positioning agriculture as a business, the APP aims to improve agricultural productivity, increase domestic food production, and expand the export of key commodities.

Building off the GON’s Agricultural Transformation Agenda that was initiated in 2012, the APP is intended to address timely delivery of quality agricultural inputs, financing, storage, transport, and market access in the targeted value chains. Despite these aspirations, with approximately 2.0 percent of the 2018 national budget allocated to agriculture, GON support for the sector remains underfunded and inadequate to support agricultural development.

The GON has undertaken additional efforts to promote long-term economic and social development through participation in the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP), and through implementation of the Nigeria Agricultural Investment Plan (NAIP). The NAIP, a framework through which CAADP is implemented, focuses on five strategic areas: 1) developing agricultural policy and regulatory systems; 2) strengthening an agricultural commodity exchange market; 3) increasing agricultural income through sustainable extension and advisory services; 4) maximizing agricultural revenue in key enterprises; and 5) water, aquaculture, and environmental resource management. Agricultural development reform represents a major plank of CAADP implementation in Nigeria. Input-related problems (such as limited access to land, fertilizer, and credit) plague the Nigerian agriculture sector and require urgent solutions. Likewise, output-related problems, such as post-harvest losses, have significantly reduced the availability and accessibility of food in the country.

C.5.3. Feed the Future Initiative in Nigeria

Nigeria has been a FTF “aligned” country since 2011. In July 2016, the U.S. Congress passed the Global Food Security Act (GFSA), and in June 2017, Nigeria was selected as one of 12 Global Food Security Strategy (GFSS) target countries. The GFSA expands the prior FTF framework, authorizing a comprehensive, strategic approach for U.S. foreign assistance to sustainably reduce global hunger, malnutrition, and poverty in developing countries. The USG, through GFSS, will partner with stakeholders in the food security and nutrition space, including governments, donors, private sector, and civil society in target countries to achieve its goal.

The USAID/Nigeria Mission’s agriculture strategy will continue to implement a demand-driven, private-sector led, value chain approach – facilitating forward and backward linkages among stakeholders such as agro-processors, off-takers/aggregators, input suppliers and smallholder producers. To sustain economic growth and broaden its benefits, USAID/Nigeria focuses on smallholder farmers and small and medium enterprises (SMEs) that have the capacity to link to high-value commodities markets. Recognizing that agriculture in Nigeria is labor-intensive, USAID/Nigeria will focus on the introduction and adoption of small-scale mechanization to increase agricultural productivity, facilitate value chain integration, and agribusiness investment.

This approach will enhance employment opportunities for unskilled labor, contribute to national food security and stability, and provide a vehicle for moving populations out of extreme poverty.

Under GFSS, USAID/Nigeria is focusing on the aquaculture, cowpea, maize, rice, and soybean value chains. Although it has a lower market value, cowpea is included as a priority value chain because it is an important crop in terms of soil fertility, household nutrition, and women’s empowerment. Geographically, the GFSS Country Plan prioritizes Benue, Cross River, Delta, Ebonyi, Kaduna, Kebbi and Niger States. This geographic prioritization results from extensive analysis and consultations, the commitment of states to prioritize and diversify agriculture production, previous USAID work in the Nigerian agriculture sector, the potential to leverage private sector partnerships, and security considerations.

C.5.4. Problem Statement

For a lower-middle income country, Nigeria experiences high levels of poverty (53.3% of the population) with significant regional and income inequalities along the North-South divide. Rural populations suffer the most (70.0% poor), as compared to those in urban centers (28.1%). The poorest regions are located in the north, particularly in Zamfara (91.9%), Yobe (90.2%), and Jigawa (88.4%) States. The Lagos area maintains the lowest poverty rates (8.5%) in the Southwest. Linked to poverty, malnutrition remains high, with a national stunting rate of 37% for children under five (soaring to 56% in the Northwest).

The agriculture sector remains fundamental to Nigeria’s economic growth and development. As noted earlier, the sector employs almost 70 percent of the country’s labor force and contributes 24 percent of the national GDP. It presents several unique opportunities to improve food security, resilience, and nutrition, particularly in the production and consumption of diverse and animal-source foods, and nutrient-dense crop value chains; however, a range of critical reforms are needed for these opportunities to be realized. Despite the importance of the agriculture sector, farmers struggle to overcome significant obstacles including limited access to quality agricultural inputs, limited access to financial services, poor post-harvest processing technologies, inadequate quarantine services, ineffective and inefficient pest and disease control measures that lead to low yields, post-harvest losses, weak market linkages, poor market infrastructure (including lack of market information to ensure transparency within market systems), poor transportation of agricultural produce and raw materials, sub-standard commodity storage and handling, weak research-extension linkage and the impacts of climate change., New technologies and innovations are not effectively delivered to farmers or commercialized for the benefit of end users. The sector also suffers from poor information exchange and limited extension delivery mechanism for farmers, research, private sector, and policy makers.

The GON is taking a critical look at agriculture as a means to diversify the economy, and as a source of foreign exchange. Under the APP, or the “Green Alternative”, the GON is developing a new strategy for extension services. This strategy is tightly linked to agricultural research, and is promoting demand-driven and all-inclusive extension services, involving those from qualified non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector. The strategy identifies the use of agro dealers as a sustainable way to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing extension delivery system for the benefit of value chain stakeholders. The strategy also identifies the use of technology to enhance reach.

As part of its strategy, the GON has engaged 100,000 qualified young Nigerian graduates as extension agents through the N-Power Agro program. Through this two-year volunteer program, graduates will undertake their primary tasks in extension services within their proximate communities. The N-Power program is the GON’s platform for diversifying the economy and preparing young Nigerians for a knowledge economy where, equipped with world-class skills and certification, they become innovators and change agents in domestic and global markets. N- Power is also linked to the Federal Government’s policies in the economic, employment, and social development arenas. The viability of using the N-Power Agro Volunteers to provide advisory services and disseminate improved agricultural technologies to value chain stakeholders, however, is yet to be determined.

Both GON and private sector efforts to augment extension and advisory services will fill a significant need, and highlight the failure of the existing system. Each of Nigeria’s 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) has networks of Agricultural Development Programs (ADPs) that are funded by each state government and the FCT. These ADPs, which were set up by the World Bank beginning in 1974, are responsible for providing extension services to farmers. By 1989, all of Nigeria's then 19 states had ADPs, with an average ratio of 1 agent to 1,500 farmers.

After World Bank funding ceased in 1995, the entire system rapidly declined as a result of the attrition of the permanent and contract staff, due in part, to the lack of a sustainability plan.

A 2010 study conducted by the Nigerian Agricultural Extension Research and Liaison Services (NAERLS) ranked ADPs, based on funding and the qualification of staff. Of the 22 state ADPs surveyed, NAERLS rated 68 percent as receiving weak or very weak funding from their respective state governments. Because of limited budget allocations to the program, some states have gone 30 years without training their ADP extension agents and at least 25 years without new recruitment. Many extension workers are unmotivated, as they are paid their salaries, but do not have operational funds to do their jobs properly, nor do they receive consistent training on modern extension methodologies.

Available evidence indicates that the majority of farmers in Nigeria (95.1%) are willing to pay for improved extension services irrespective of their poor income status as long as the extension services remains relevant to their felt needs. A previous study found that one of the most effective strategies through which farmers could pay for the cost of private extension services was through the farmers’ cooperative societies. A study by Farinde and Atteh (2009) showed that about 60% of farmers were willing to embrace and pay for extension services, provided their farm income increased and the extension services were relevant and meet their perceived needs. The study concluded that arable crop farmers’ participation in private extension services initiatives depends on economic values derived by farmers and the services' relevance to the farmer's situation.

Evidence from India also shows how commodity firms or input suppliers may be motivated to provide extension services (e.g., crop management advice, weather reports) to their clients.

Extension service provision may be strictly linked (so that farmers who are not clients of the firm are excluded from the service), or may be provided as an inducement (e.g., to encourage farmers to have easy access to production inputs and sell their harvest to a particular buyer).

The private sector in Nigeria has recently started to provide extension services to farmers to improve production for offtake and to generate demand for agricultural inputs. Extension system http://www.tandfonline.com/author/Farinde%2C+A+J http://www.tandfonline.com/author/Atteh%2C+A+P sustainability beyond donor funding has always been an issue due to a lack of coordination and lack of capacity by the private sector. Private sector-led efforts are a promising development, but must be further strengthened by integrating modern communication networks, efficient marketing outlets, well-informed farmers, a functional extension policy, sustainable research programs, and sound credit facilities. This Activity will support this capacity development, and the evolution towards commercially viable cost-efficient and large-scale services that are needed to transform the sector.

C.5.5. Relationship to Other Donor Activities

USAID/Nigeria coordinates its Feed the Future interventions in Nigeria with other stakeholders through the Agriculture Donor Working Group (ADWG), which meets every two months and is currently co-Chaired by USAID and the Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO). Other notable members include the African Development Bank (AfDB), Agence Française de Développement (AFD), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Department for International Development (DFID), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), European Union (EU), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD), Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW), Rockefeller Foundation, UN Development Programme (UNDP), the UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), and the World Bank.

C.5.6. USAID Assistance in Support of Food Security

As one of several implementing mechanisms, the Agricultural Extension and Advisory Services activity will directly contribute to USAID’s IR1.1, agricultural competitiveness of smallholder farmers increased, and IR1.2, business environment improved, within the context of the Mission’s CDCS and DO1: Broadened and inclusive growth (See attachment J.12). Highlights of current, major activities are below.

Foundation for Partnership Initiatives in the Niger Delta (PIND)

USAID partners with the Foundation for Partnership Initiatives in the Niger Delta (PIND) to support agricultural interventions. Targeting the very poor, PIND activities aim to increase agricultural incomes by expanding linkages between agro-enterprises and farmers, and by increasing participation in commercial agricultural markets. PIND aspires to achieve a legacy of sustainable peace and development among communities in the Niger Delta. There are ample opportunities for the Offeror to work in the Delta region with a variety of beneficiary groups that USAID/Nigeria has trained under PIND, including in aquaculture and other targeted value chains.

Feed the Future Nigeria Agricultural Policy Activity (June 2015 – May 2019)

The Agricultural Policy Activity promotes inclusive agricultural productivity growth, improved nutritional outcomes, and enhanced livelihood resilience for men and women through an improved policy enabling environment. The Activity focuses on: (1) Strengthening national capacity for evidence-based policy analysis in agriculture; (2) Promoting and fostering informed policy dialogues; and (3) Supporting federal and state government capacity to

1. Plan and implement effective policy analysis; and

2. Incorporate research into decision making.

Development Credit Authority (DCA) (2014 – 2022)

In emerging markets, eight out of ten small businesses cannot access the loans they need to grow.

USAID’s Development Credit Authority (DCA) uses risk-sharing agreements to mobilize local private capital to fill this financing gap. The DCA partial credit guarantee is designed to:

1. Reduce risks of generating additional lending by local banking institutions to underserved markets and sectors, and;

2. Demonstrate the long-term commercial viability of lending in developing markets.

While agriculture accounts for some 22% of Nigeria’s GDP, the agriculture sector utilizes less than 4% of the value of all loans from commercial banks. USAID manages the DCA, which is a loan portfolio guarantee with local financial institutions to catalyze access to agricultural finance.

An additional DCA supports renewable energy and energy efficiency lending that can also be applied to the agriculture sector. Areas of priority lending include: inputs (seeds, fertilizer, water/irrigation); capital investments (tractors, tools); production; aggregation, storage;

processing; handling; transportation; and on-lending to microfinance institutions. The DCA program can support agricultural activities in all 36 states, plus the Federal Capital Territory, across seven value chains (aquaculture, cassava, cocoa, maize, rice, sorghum, and soybean).

C.7. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE INDICATORS

NOTE: Performance objective indicators are to be incorporated into the QASP with associated performance standards.

At a minimum, the following performance objectives must be accomplished in the focus areas and/or with the target populations:

● Increased yield per hectare of selected value chains;

● Increased gross margin per hectare of smallholder farmers;

● Increased capacity of private services providers to provide extension services to value chain stakeholders;

● Increased number of jobs, especially for youth and women, resulting from technical supports to private services providers;

● Increase in the average value of agricultural and rural loans;

● A minimum of two million value chain stakeholders reached with improved agricultural extension and advisory services;

● Increased market linkages and participation of value chain stakeholders; and

● Sustainable low-cost ICT-enabled extension and advisory services platforms successfully leveraged for disseminating improved farming practices and new technologies to value chain stakeholders.

In addition to the specific outputs above, the Offeror must propose standard indicators demonstrating achievement of the above-mentioned objectives and outcomes. The Offeror must propose targets (annual and life of Activity) for all the indicators required by USAID.

These targets shall be incorporated in the successful Offeror’s contract.

At a minimum, this PWS supports the following objectives:

C.7.1. Build the capacity of private extension service providers to deliver extension and advisory services to value chain stakeholders

Objective 7.1.1: Increased farm production and productivity of smallholder farmers due to the increased availability and accessibility of private extension services providers.

Under this task, private extension service providers may include input companies and distributors, service providers such as agro-input dealers and aggregators, and GON trained N-Power extension agents who can be motivated, at their expense, to provide extension and advisory services to their predominantly smallholder farmer customers for increased on-farm productivity. Increased production of nutrient-rich value chain commodities can also provide households and communities improved access to the nutrients they need, either through production for consumption, or purchase at the local market.

At a minimum, this objective must accomplish the following:

● Strengthened and expanded capacity of private extension service providers to enable them to increase the quality of extension services that they provide to farmers;

● Improved capacity of service providers such as agro-input dealers, tractor hiring companies, irrigation service providers, and small-scale processors so that they can sustainably and commercially provide timely and quality services to their customers;

● Strengthened market-driven agricultural production that will facilitate market access as incentives for value chain stakeholders to adopt improved farming practices, new technologies and improved nutrition practices;

● Increased investments of farmers or producer groups in the production of nutrient-rich value chain commodities that will enhance their nutritional status; and

● Improved post-harvest techniques that will significantly reduce post-harvest losses in the selected value chains.

Objective 7.1.2: Increased availability of and accessibility to quality agricultural inputs and services.

For increased farm productivity, farm inputs must be available, affordable, accessible, and of good quality. Seeds, fertilizers, and agro-chemicals are essential for improving the productivity and incomes of smallholder farmers in developing countries. At a minimum, this objective must accomplish the following:

● Timely delivery of quality inputs and services to smallholder farmers by agricultural inputs and agro-allied companies. Potential agricultural inputs and agro-allied companies include, but are not limited to, Olam Nigeria Limited, Corteva Agriscience, Monsanto, Notore Agro Chemical Company, Syngenta, Flour Mills of Nigeria, the Nigerian Agricultural Mechanization & Leasing Company (NAMEL), the Tractors Owners & Hiring Facilities Association of Nigeria (TOHFAN), and Labana Rice Mill; and

● Increased capacity of agro-input dealers and service providers to be able to operate as profit-making businesses in order to ensure sustainability.

Objective 7.1.3: ICT-enabled extension services platforms piloted and scaled up to reach value chain stakeholders.

To rapidly, sustainably, and effectively increase the access of value chain stakeholders to extension and advisory services, at a minimum, this objective must accomplish the following:

● Appropriate low-cost ICT-enabled platforms identified, piloted and scaled up to provide extension and advisory services to value chain stakeholders, taking into consideration the low level of literacy in Nigeria; and

● Adoption of these platforms by private extension service providers, without donor funding, for reaching value chain stakeholders.

Objective 7.1.4: Increased access to financial products and services.

● Improved credit risk profiles of value chain stakeholders

● Increased outreach of financial institutions and agriculture financial service delivery, through introduction of innovative financial services to value chain stakeholders;

● Increased capacity of financial institutions to develop business models that link value chain stakeholders with financial institutions in order to increase their access to credit;

● Increased capacity of value chain stakeholders to be able to manage acquired loans and to make timely payments to their creditors; and

● Increased collaboration and coordination with other donor agencies and organizations towards identifying and adopting lessons learned from previous attempts at increasing accessibility to finance.

C.7.2. Strengthen linkages between agricultural research institutions, agro-allied companies, the public and private extension providers, and agricultural value chain stakeholders.

Objective 7.2.1: Improved coordination and collaboration between agricultural research institutions, agro-allied companies, and public and private extension service providers for increased efficiency and effectiveness.

● Strengthened linkages between extension research institutions, Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (FMARD), state ADPs, private extension service providers, and value chain stakeholders to ensure that new research findings are disseminated and adopted while the feedback from end users are used to guide the course of future research;

● Establish a system to ensure the sustainability of these linkages beyond the cessation of USAID funding;

● Improved capacity of research institutions, universities, agro-allied companies, input dealers, the public and private extension providers to support extension and advisory services interventions;

● Improved capacity of research institutions and universities to develop research proposals, conduct research work and disseminate research findings through domestic mobilization of resources; and

● Increased number of FMARD’s N-Power Agro Program volunteers to become extension providers to value chain stakeholders.

Objective 7.2.2: Increase access of value chain stakeholders to research updates through private extension services providers.

At a minimum, this objective must accomplish the following:

● Improve the capacity of NARS, including NAERLS, the Agricultural Extension Society of Nigeria, the Nigerian Forum for Agricultural Advisory Services, and Federal Department of Agricultural Extension, to provide timely research updates to value chain stakeholders, through public and private extension service providers.

These interventions align with GON priorities as outlined in Lever 3 of the GON APP: Access to agricultural information and knowledge. These interventions must also align with the GON’s Agriculture sector Food Security and Nutrition Strategy (2016 - 2025) of enhanced value chains for improved nutrition.

C.7.3. FTF PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE INDICATORS

Offerors must provide indicators for the areas below as outlined in the FTF Indicator Handbook (March 2018). Indicators indicated under the areas are illustrative. Offeror is to select and or propose other indicators for USAID consideration and concurrence.

C.7.3.1. Purpose Statement Indicators: Strengthened sustainable agricultural extension and advisory services

● Value of new private sector capital investment in the agriculture sector or food chain leveraged by Feed the Future implementation (EG.3.2-22);

● Number of firms (excluding farms) or civil society organizations (CSOs) engaged in agricultural and food security-related manufacturing and services that have increased profits or become financially self-sufficient with USG assistance (EG.3.2-21);

● Percentage of private extension service providers that are women and /or youth (15-29 years);

● Percentage of female participants of USG nutrition-sensitive agriculture activities consuming a diet of minimum diversity (EG.3.3-10);

● Percentage of female participants in USG-assisted programs designed to increase access to productive economic resources (GNDR-2);

● Percentage of participants in USG-assisted programs designed to increase access to productive economic resources who are youth (15-29) [YOUTH-3];

● Number of individuals participating in USG food security programs (EG.3.2);

● Number of ICT-enabled agricultural extension services platforms identified, piloted and scaled up (custom); and

● Value of annual sales of farms and firms receiving USG assistance (EG.3.2-26).

C.7.3.2. Performance Objectives Indicators

1. Increased capacity of private extension service providers to deliver extension and advisory services to value chain stakeholders

● Yield of targeted agricultural commodities among program participants with USG assistance (EG.3-10, -11, -12);

● Number of individuals in the agriculture system who have applied improved management practices or technologies with USG assistance (EG.3.2-24);

● Number of hectares under improved management practices or technologies with USG assistance (EG.3.2-25);

● Value of annual sales of farms and firms receiving USG assistance (EG.3.2-26)

● Value of agriculture-related financing accessed as a result of USG assistance (EG.3.2-27);

● Number of hectares under improved management practices or technologies that promote improved climate risk reduction and/or natural resources management with USG assistance (EG.3.2-28);

● Number of individuals receiving nutrition-related professional training through USG-supported programs (HL.9-4);

● Number of children under five (0-59 months) reached with nutrition-specific interventions through USG-supported programs (HL.9-1);

● Number of public-private partnerships formed as a result of USG assistance (EG 3.2-5);

● Number of individuals participating in USG food security programs (EG.3.2);

● Number of organizations with increased performance improvement with USG assistance

(EG.3.2-29); and

● Value of annual sales of farms and firms receiving USG assistance (EG.3.2-26).

2. Strengthened linkages between agricultural research institutions and agriculture value chain stakeholders

● Number of public-private partnerships formed as a result of USG assistance (EG 3.2-5);

● Number of organizations with increased performance improvement with USG assistance

(EG.3.2-29); and

● Value of agriculture-related financing accessed as a result of USG assistance (EG.3.2-27).

3. Increased resources from private sector to enhance the scalability and sustainability of extension and advisory services in Nigeria

● Value of new private sector capital investment in the agriculture sector or food chain leveraged by Feed the Future implementation (EG.3.2-22); and

● Value of agriculture-related financing accessed as a result of USG assistance (EG.3.2-27).

C.8 OTHER REQUIREMENTS

C.8.1. Sustainability

Sustainability must be considered at every stage of the Activity design and implementation. The Offeror will ensure that all activities are conducted in close cooperation and partnership with an array of private sector actors, including but not limited to large scale processors, aggregators, financial and insurance institutions, ADPs, NARS, NAERLS, GON-led N-Power Agro Program, and input companies to ensure full ownership and sustainability. The Activity will, whenever possible, be designed to favor long-term solutions that could be performed by or later taken over by existing private sector actors in collaboration with Nigerian research institutions. The Offeror will provide an exit strategy plan that describes how it intends to withdraw resources while ensuring that progress towards achieving Activity objectives and results will continue. The plan will also document how learning from the Activity will be captured and widely distributed to inform future USAID activities, and the transitioning of roles and responsibilities within the Activity. Such a plan should not be viewed as an effort to hasten its exit, but rather to improve the chance of sustainable outcomes for the Activity.

C.8.2. Coordination

To the greatest extent possible, the Feed the Future Nigeria Agricultural Extension and Advisory Services activity must be coordinated with similar interventions that are funded by other donors, organizations, and the GON.